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

May 11, 2004

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2004-May-11 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 11 May 2004 Mardi 11 mai 2004

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

WATER QUALITY

GASOLINE PRICES

KIDSABILITY CENTRE

FOR CHILD DEVELOPMENT

TOURISM

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

WIKWEMIKONG ANISHINABE ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY LIVING

SCUGOG CHRISTIAN SCHOOL

CANADIAN MEN'S HOCKEY TEAM

NURSING WEEK

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

GASOLINE CONSUMER

PROTECTION ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

SUR LA PROTECTION

DES CONSOMMATEURS D'ESSENCE

MOTIONS

CONSIDERATION OF BILL 68

EDIBLE OIL PRODUCTS REPEAL DATE

AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

MODIFIANT LA DATE D'ABROGATION

DE LA

LOI SUR LES PRODUITS

OLÉAGINEUX COMESTIBLES

EDIBLE OIL PRODUCTS REPEAL DATE

AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

MODIFIANT LA DATE D'ABROGATION

DE LA

LOI SUR LES PRODUITS

OLÉAGINEUX COMESTIBLES

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

LONG-TERM CARE

ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

ORAL QUESTIONS

TAXATION

ONTARIO BUDGET

HEALTH CARE

TAXATION

SERVICES FOR THE DISABLED

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

IMMIGRANT SERVICES

GASOLINE PRICES

TAXATION

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

EDUCATION PROGRAM

BY-ELECTION IN HAMILTON EAST

LONG-TERM CARE

TFO

PREMIER'S ANNOUNCEMENT

FOREST FIREFIGHTING

WATER QUALITY

ROAD SAFETY

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

PETITIONS

PROPERTY TAXATION

HIGHWAY 407

HOSPITAL FUNDING

GO TRANSIT SERVICE

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

PRIMARY CARE

MOTORCYCLE INSURANCE

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

OPTOMETRISTS

ONTARIO BUDGET

TTC RIGHT-OF-WAY

TAXATION

ONTARIO BUDGET

ORDERS OF THE DAY

GOVERNMENT

ADVERTISING ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR

LA PUBLICITÉ GOUVERNEMENTALE

ADJOURNMENT DEBATE

ROAD SAFETY

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

WATER QUALITY

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): I am pleased to rise this afternoon to discuss the lack of response from the Minister of the Environment on

regulation 170/03. Arenas, community halls, churches and fairgrounds often are the hub of activity and the gathering places for citizens of rural Ontario. In almost all cases, these facilities are

operated solely by volunteers. Although the Minister of the Environment tries to blame the previous government, she has now had seven months to make corrections -- seven months, and no action.

This is an attempt to ignore rural and northern Ontario. We know that the McGuinty Liberal cabinet is dominated by GTA and large urban members. They obviously

care little about the citizens of rural Ontario. The Premier has allowed rural Ontario little or no voice at the cabinet table. Community halls and churches need assistance now. They do not need

another so-called moratorium or so-called expert advisory panel. They need financial assistance.

Minister Dombrowsky was quick to react to David Ramsay's threat, so she and McGuinty drafted the Adams Mine Lake Act, now referred to as the Leona lake act.

The citizens of rural Ontario are taxpayers. They contribute to the economy of our great province. They also deserve clean and fresh water. One of Dalton

McGuinty's platform promises went under the headline of "We will make water in rural communities safer," on page 14 of Growing Strong Rural Communities.

Rural Ontario depends on community halls and churches to sustain a quality of life. The McGuinty Liberals must make an announcement on funding to allow churches

and community halls to have safe and clean water.

GASOLINE PRICES

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): I rise today on a matter very important to the day-to-day lives of many of my constituents and people across Ontario.

Today I will be introducing a bill entitled the Gasoline Consumer Protection Act, 2004. This bill requires gasoline retailers across the province to give at least 72 hours' notice before changing

their price. For far too long, my constituents have expressed to me their outrage and frustration with the volatility of gas prices. This volatility becomes even more pronounced in the peak driving

season of the summer months fast approaching. I think everyone in this House can relate to the stories of glancing at the price of gasoline while driving to work in the morning and then, when

filling up on the way home, the price has gone up 10 cents or more. The people of Ontario are fed up with this sort of volatility. They want more stability and predictability before filling up at

the pump.

Gasoline pricing has long bedevilled governments of all political stripes, and I want to acknowledge that this issue is extremely complex. In many respects, the

hands of government are tied. A number of factors, both international and domestic, go into the price that consumers ultimately pay for gasoline. It must also be noted that, on average, Ontarians

pay among the lowest gas prices in the western world.

Having said that, this bill that I will be introducing attempts to alleviate those frustrations.

KIDSABILITY CENTRE

FOR CHILD DEVELOPMENT

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): Today I'm following up on the recent comments of the member for Kitchener-Waterloo in support of the

KidsAbility Centre for Child Development. Earlier this year I met with staff from KidsAbility, and today I raise their concerns as Conservative advocate for children and youth services.

During the election, the Liberals sold themselves as the compassionate choice. They cared more, they claimed. In the hundreds of promises they made, they

committed to doing a better job of managing provincial finances, setting priorities and allocating resources to funding partners who provide important services. But unless the government acts soon,

underfunding of KidsAbility will be living proof that the Liberals are failing to meet the higher standard of compassion they claimed they would establish.

The House has already been informed that funding for KidsAbility doubled under the Conservative government. However, unless the funding crisis that KidsAbility

is facing is addressed by the government, the number of children on the waiting list who need treatment could increase to 1,335 children, according to a recent report in the K-W Record.

If the government is callous and ignores the legitimate funding needs of KidsAbility and treatment centres like it across the province, then children with

cerebral palsy, spina bifida, muscular dystrophy, Down syndrome and communication disorders will pay the price. This should be unacceptable to all in this House. These kids truly can't wait. If the

coming budget doesn't address their needs, the government will demonstrate not a compassionate heart, but a heart as cold as ice.

TOURISM

Mr Bill Mauro (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): The warming weather and greening grass assure us that summer is on the way. Within my riding of Thunder

Bay-Atikokan, the arrival of summer brings a flurry of events and exhibits for residents and tourists alike.

Soon we will see the opening of the walleye fishing season. Tourist resorts welcome visitors from across Canada and the United States who have waited all winter

to get their boats back into the water to safely enjoy our many lakes and rivers. May 15 is also opening day at Fort William Historical Park, the world's largest fur-trading post. Fort William

serves 100,000 visitors each year through its many activities and special events.

There are many other exciting things to see and do throughout the riding. Kakabeka Falls Provincial Park and Quetico Provincial Park are beautiful locations for

camping. The White Otter Castle is a exceptional day trip by canoe. Ouimet Canyon and Eagle Canyon suspension bridge provide serene hiking trails surrounded by a variety of wildlife and rare

plants. The area is host to many events, including the Dragon Boat Race Festival, Children's Festival, Blues Festival and Fringe Festival in Thunder Bay, and the Bass Classic, Canada Day Canoe

Parade and Lions Spring Carnival in Atikokan.

Tourism is an integral economic activity providing hundreds of jobs and millions of dollars to our communities each year. To the North of Superior Tourism

Association, the chambers of commerce and each and every business and community group that contributes to tourism activity in Thunder Bay-Atikokan, I want to thank you for your efforts and wish you

all a very successful year.

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): At 4 o'clock this morning, the negotiating team of CEP local 87-M, the media workers at the Toronto Sun,

wrapped up some around-the-clock bargaining, striking a deal, hard and tough won, at the bargaining table that the negotiating committee will unanimously recommend to their membership for

ratification this Thursday.

New Democrats here at Queen's Park want to congratulate those media workers. It's been a tough, hard struggle, with a tough boss, but at the end of the day, the

workers and their union will have won. That's how it's done.

The members of CEP local 87-M, the unionized media workers at the Toronto Sun, are setting a standard and demonstrating to other media workers across Ontario --

low paid, understaffed and certainly underappreciated in any number of newspaper chains -- that you can fight back and win. You fight back with the union. You fight back with union solidarity. You

fight back by standing shoulder-to-shoulder, arm-in-arm with your sisters and brothers in your local and across the labour movement.

That's how you win these struggles for fairness in the workplace, for justice in the workplace, for better wages, better salaries, better pensions and more job

security. It's never wrong to fight for any of those things. It's a fight not only for these workers, but by them for their children as well.

WIKWEMIKONG ANISHINABE ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY LIVING

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): As we approach Community Living Day, which we all know is tomorrow, May 12, I would like to acknowledge

the important and valuable contribution that the Wikwemikong Anishinabe Association for Community Living makes to northern Ontario, in our First Nation community on Manitoulin Island. I want to

emphasize that there is a need for services for individuals with developmental disabilities to not only continue but to be increased and expanded in the north.

The Wikwemikong Anishinabe Association for Community Living is the only one of its kind on Manitoulin that provides unique and vital services and programs that

not only preserve the native language and culture but also address the needs of First Nations people with developmental disabilities in the best possible way.

Jeannette Assinewai, who is the program director at Wikwemikong, and her team have integrated traditional native practices such as smudging ceremonies, which

occur every morning, into their program structure. In addition, the Wikwemikong Anishinabe Association for Community Living bases their program on the teachings of the medicine wheel and provides

services in the native language of Odawa.

However, not all First Nations communities are able to access a traditional approach to community living. It is not only on Manitoulin that the need exists for

an increase in community living services that acknowledge traditional native culture and incorporate these customs into program structures, but this need exists across the entire province.

Community living programs provide a vital service to individuals with developmental disabilities. It is vital that our government recognize the vital need for

community living organizations to be provided with the funding and support they need to ensure the people of the north are able to have their needs met within their own communities.

SCUGOG CHRISTIAN SCHOOL

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I rise in the House to pay tribute to the staff, students, parents and friends of the Scugog Christian School

community on the completion of their new school addition.

This really is about community building. This is a school community of about 40 families who committed themselves to raising $220,000 to build a new gymnasium,

plus new classrooms to accommodate the music program, library and other resources. Additional support came from local business in the form of donations, such as bricks, windows and insulation.

Volunteer labour built much of the new addition, with a group of about 10 volunteers on-site each day. They received no government funding.

Last Friday evening, May 7, I was pleased to join community leaders such as Scugog mayor Marilyn Pearce for the official opening. Highlights included singing by

students and banners the students created to thank the many volunteers. Scott Jeffery, of Jeffery Homes, was the evening's master of ceremonies. He also was a member of the building committee. The

dedication was offered by Rev Rob Elkington. Fred Spoelstra brought greetings from the local Christian school community known as the "Group of Seven." I would like to commend the board chair, Ron

Bruinsma, principal Tony DeKoter and the many volunteers who made this community dream come true.

This is an outstanding example of what can be accomplished when friends and neighbours work together as a community of faith. I am confident that everyone here

will want to wish the Scugog Christian School community continued success and blessings for the students and their families in the many years to come.

CANADIAN MEN'S HOCKEY TEAM

Mr Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): I rise in the House today to congratulate Team Canada's gold medal performance at the 2004

world championships. Every player and all the support staff should be very proud of their accomplishment in what was a hard-fought international tournament held in the Czech Republic.

Within a span of 16 days this team came together as a unified force. Each and every player was brought in after a disappointing season in which their teams did

not make the NHL playoffs or experienced an early first-round exit. Further, this team had to adjust to an emergency coaching change right before the tournament began.

Through all this adversity the team excelled, and last Sunday Team Canada managed to come back from a 3-1 deficit to defeat Team Sweden 5-3 and win the 2004

world championship.

In particular, I would like the House to recognize the efforts of Team Canada's Ontario-born players, Steve Staios of Hamilton, Matt Cooke of Belleville and

Justin Williams of Cobourg, for representing our province and our country and for a job well done.

NURSING WEEK

Ms Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): I'm happy today to acknowledge, on behalf of our party's caucus, that the week of May 10 to May 16

is Nursing Week in Ontario. This year's theme is, "Honouring Nurses. A Team of Dedicated Professionals."

The Ontario Nurses' Association has a variety of activities scheduled for this week across the province, which will help to highlight the importance of the

nursing profession.

Ontario's 49,000 front-line registered nurses should be justifiably proud of the vital contribution they make daily and the support given to all our friends and

loved ones who are unfortunate enough to have to encounter our health care system.

President Linda Haslam-Stroud said it best: "This week Ontario nurses honour their professionalism, caring, dedication and commitment. They have much to

celebrate. They are valued and trusted by the public, and they are confident of their contributions to the health and well-being of Ontarians."

As I have stated in this House many times before, I have been a registered nurse in Ontario for over 20 years. I've had many personal experiences that confirm to

me the importance of recognizing the valuable contribution all nurses make. I have been honoured to work with some of the most dedicated and selfless people in any profession. I hope that through

vehicles like Nursing Week, the Ontario public can gain a much better understanding of these professionals and the vital role they play.

The Ontario Nurses' Association and our caucus will continue to remind this government of the commitments they made to Ontario nurses during the election

campaign. They promised to hire 8,000 more nurses, to increase the percentage of full-time nurses working in the system to 70% and to continue the work of the previous government in funding more

positions for nurse practitioners. It is my sincere hope, on behalf of Ontario nurses and indeed all Ontarians, that over the course of this government's mandate those are promises they indeed

keep.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

GASOLINE CONSUMER

PROTECTION ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

SUR LA PROTECTION

DES CONSOMMATEURS D'ESSENCE

Mr Crozier moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 80,

An Act to provide information to consumers respecting the price of gasoline and the ownership of gasoline retailers and to require certain additional

information from major oil companies / Projet de loi 80, Loi visant à fournir des renseignements aux consommateurs en ce qui concerne le prix de l'essence et les propriétaires des

détaillants d'essence et exigeant certains renseignements supplémentaires de la part des grosses sociétés pétrolières.

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

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): This bill, if passed, requires every gasoline retailer to advertise a change in the price of gasoline at the

retailer's gas station at least 72 hours before changing the price.

The bill also requires gasoline retailers to indicate on their price signs what portion of the price is dedicated to tax.

The bill requires gasoline retailers who are affiliated with major gasoline retailers to indicate their affiliation on signs at their gas stations and on the

receipts issued at their gas stations.

Finally, the bill requires large oil companies that produce, refine and market gasoline to file segmented earning reports with the Minister of Consumer and

Business Services annually.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'd like to ask the government if they'd like to deal with Mr Crozier's

bill right now.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Motions?

MOTIONS

CONSIDERATION OF BILL 68

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I seek unanimous consent to immediately call the orders for second and third

reading of Bill 68,

An Act to amend the repeal date of the Edible Oil Products Act, and, further, to allow the motion for second reading to be moved by a member of the official opposition and the

motion for third reading to be moved by a member from the third party, the question to be put on the motions without debate or amendment and that any bells shall be limited to five minutes.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): The government House leader requires unanimous consent for this motion. Agreed.

EDIBLE OIL PRODUCTS REPEAL DATE

AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

MODIFIANT LA DATE D'ABROGATION

DE LA

LOI SUR LES PRODUITS

OLÉAGINEUX COMESTIBLES

Mr Hardeman, on behalf of Mr Peters, moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 68,

An Act to amend the repeal date of the Edible Oil Products Act / Projet de loi 68, Loi modifiant la date d'abrogation de la

Loi sur les produits

oléagineux comestibles.

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

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): The Conservative Party strongly supports this change to the Edible Oil Products Act on behalf of the dairy farmers

who are present today in the gallery.

EDIBLE OIL PRODUCTS REPEAL DATE

AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

MODIFIANT LA DATE D'ABROGATION

DE LA

LOI SUR LES PRODUITS

OLÉAGINEUX COMESTIBLES

Mr Hampton, on behalf of Mr Peters, moved third reading of the following bill:

Bill 68,

An Act to amend the repeal date of the Edible Oil Products Act / Projet de loi 68, Loi modifiant la date d'abrogation de la

Loi sur les produits

oléagineux comestibles.

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

Be it resolved that the bill do now pass and be entitled as in the motion.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

LONG-TERM CARE

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): Mr Speaker, I'm pleased to rise in the House today to advise you that I have

received the written report by Monique Smith, the MPP for Nipissing and my parliamentary assistant, on recommended changes to long-term care in Ontario.

On behalf of all Ontarians, I would like to thank her for the work that she has done, and I'd like to thank the people of Nipissing for freeing her up from her

local responsibilities to travel to all corners of the province to make unannounced visits and the like for long-term care.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): She's scaring seniors, visiting unannounced.

Hon Mr Smitherman: You're scaring us all.

Monique's report, Commitment to Care: A Plan for Long-Term Care in Ontario, is the result of our government's review of the province's long-term-care system.

It is an amazing accomplishment and it represents a real labour of love. Her report answers the question of how we can make long-term-care homes true homes for our loved ones, homes where our

parents, relatives and friends are safe and enjoy a real sense of community.

More than 70,000 people live in long-term-care homes in Ontario, and our aging population will drive that number much higher in the future. That is why I would

like to recognize as well the work of the Honourable John Gerretsen, the minister responsible for seniors. What is clear is that all seniors across this province need to know that they have no

greater champion in their corner than your minister responsible for seniors.

I am humbled by the responsibility given to me by the Premier as Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. I'm energized by the responsibility of helping to

transform our health care system. It is, after all, our system. It belongs to 12 million of us.

Our system has in some measure been falling short when it comes to protecting seniors. When I was appointed Minister of Health six months ago, I hit the ground

running. Last year's high-profile media reports of shocking incidents of neglect, poor care and physical and psychological abuse lifted the veil on problems that have been for too long ignored in

our province. The McGuinty government made a real commitment to deal swiftly and forcefully with this issue. I called for a revolution, because that's what is required, and a revolution in

long-term care is now underway in Ontario.

I appointed Monique Smith to conduct a top-to-bottom review of long-term care, to get at the cultural issues affecting the quality of care and to recommend

practical actions to strengthen long-term-care services. Since then, she has made unannounced visits to homes across this province, as have I. She met directly with people living in the homes; she

met with their families, caregivers, health professionals, operators and administrators; she met with seniors' groups, union representatives, academics, gerontologists and others active in the

long-term-care community to hear their views about improving our system.

Monique visited many homes that are delivering excellent, safe, professional, compassionate quality care that one could really recommend to a loved one. Others

proved to produce disheartening results, with poor quality of care -- not the standard that we expect in this province and certainly not the standard that we will achieve in this province. The only

standard for long-term care in Ontario is a high standard.

This report reflects our commitment to a revolution in long-term care and was the initial step in the McGuinty government's plan to address the needs of people

living in long-term-care homes. Our system needs to do a better job of protecting our most vulnerable citizens: our seniors in long-term-care facilities. All too often, our long-term-care homes

and, more importantly, the mothers, fathers, sons and daughters in them have been forgotten or neglected. This shouldn't be a revolutionary concept, but, sad to say, it is. There are so many

hard-working, dedicated, skilled and compassionate front-line heroes caring for our seniors, our parents, our neighbours, day in and day out, but we as a society have let these caring and

courageous nurses, personal support workers, dieticians and so many others do all the work for us.

Caring for our seniors and getting the community involved in long-term care is about more than work; it's about heart. That is why the McGuinty government is

going to fix it once and fix it for all: for all of us and for our mothers and fathers. This report serves as a blueprint, a starting point for action. This revolution is about meaningful change

for seniors and their families, about starting with a plan of action. It starts with taking decisive actions to create a community culture in long-term care, to toughen enforcement and make

long-term care more accountable.

Monique Smith's report, Commitment to Care, confirmed that many homes provide safe, compassionate quality care. It also revealed, however, that other

facilities provide poor quality care, and this is simply not acceptable. The McGuinty government is responding to Monique Smith's report with a comprehensive strategy of reform that will take place

starting now.

Today I want to tell you about the actions we are taking. Cultural change is a responsibility that we share, as a government, as long-term-care providers and

as community members. The actions we are taking will change the culture of long-term care by increasing resident, family and community involvement, making homes more accountable to Ontarians and

toughening inspection and enforcement. As part of the plan, we will create a culture of community in our long-term-care homes. We will mandate that all long-term-care facilities establish a family

council. We're giving a stronger voice to residents by supporting and strengthening resident councils in every home. Our government, I'm proud to say, will reinstate the policy of allowing couples

to live together in a home even if their levels of care are different.

We bring zero tolerance for abuse and neglect to the residents of long-term-care facilities. That is why our plan will dramatically toughen inspection

processes for long-term-care facilities and create tools to ensure that high standards are enforced. We've already started. Since the beginning of January, all inspections of long-term-care

facilities are unannounced and they will remain that way. This is giving us a much more accurate picture of residents' care and enabling us to deal with violations more effectively. We will begin

targeted surprise inspections throughout the year for homes that have a poor track record. This will allow us to concentrate our resources on dealing with homes with demonstrated problems and

serious violations.

We will separate the compliance and inspection functions. Currently the ministry compliance officers play a dual role of compliance and inspection. We believe

that inspectors need to have a distinct role and the ability to apply tougher penalties to non-compliant homes.

We will crack down on elder abuse by making it mandatory for staff to report suspected abuse, and in legislation we will offer whistle-blower protection to

ensure that those workers have all of the freedom and support necessary to call in any claim of suspected abuse.

We're going to move to make our long-term-care system more accountable to protect the health and safety of residents. Facilities will be more accountable, and

long-term-care homes must be answerable to the people who live there and to the communities they serve.

We will establish a third-party advocate who will play a watchdog role on behalf of residents and families regarding inspection and compliance.

Last January, we announced a toll-free action line that has subsequently dealt with 1,700 calls and resulted in almost 500 specific inspections. The action

line remains, but because we believe the public has the right to have all of the best information available, we will now launch a public Web site. When it's complete, it will be the most

comprehensive public report on long-term care in all of Canada.

Within four months, Ontarians will be able to go on-line and find a profile of every home in Ontario, the number, types and rates of complaint for each home, a

satisfaction survey to be filled out by residents and their families, and accreditation information on every home. Within a year we'll add to that a compliance record for every home, the number of

violations in a home's most recent annual review, and staffing information, including number of staff per resident and their training.

This Web site will allow people to compare long-term-care homes and track performance of Ontario facilities over time.

We know that not everyone can go on-line, so we'll make hard copies of those same reports available in a variety of different settings. In addition, we will

mandate that all homes publicly post the complaints process and the inspectors' reports in highly visible and accessible locations.

Because we believe that rewarding good behaviour and supporting best practices is as important as taking a hard line against poor performers, we will recognize

superior homes by applying a gold standard that can be achieved by any home that demonstrates, over three years in a row, a superior performance. These homes would be inspected every two years

instead of annually.

The revolution underway in long-term care is about cultural change, and there's no question that we need greater stability and resources to complement those

changes. I've said on many occasions that this is necessary. I'm pleased to be able to report today that as part of the plan we are announcing, our government will invest $531 million on an annual

basis in long-term care. This annualized investment includes $191 million to significantly increase staffing and standards of personal care in existing long-term-care beds. This investment will

allow homes to hire 2,000 new staff. This will include at least 600 new full-time nurses, RNs and RPNs, in addition to personal support workers, activity coordinators, dieticians, therapists and

nurse practitioners.

With this increased funding, all homes will be required to achieve specific high standards of care. Our government is moving to reinstate the requirement that

a registered nurse be on duty in every long-term-care facility every minute of every day in each and every year. This new investment in staffing will enable us to create and enforce minimum

standards of personal care that are currently not being provided in all long-term-care homes. We will be establishing a minimum care standard to ensure that residents receive, at a bare minimum,

two baths a week, or more, depending upon their personal care needs.

This annual investment also includes $340 million to expand the number of long-term-care beds in communities all across this province; that way, more seniors

will be able to live in their communities.

Change in the culture and quality of care in long-term care will require us to modernize the laws that govern long-term care, and later this year we will be

introducing legislation to make sure that all types of homes are subject to the same high standards of care, enforcement and penalties.

I want to thank everyone who contributed to Monique Smith's report for their openness, for their ideas and for their commitment to long-term care. By working

together, we will ensure that all Ontario seniors live in dignity, with the highest possible quality of life. Together, we will build a healthier Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Responses?

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): Certainly the announcement this morning brought back some fond memories for myself. In 1998, we

chose the same wonderful long-term-care facility to make our announcement. At that point in time we announced a very historic investment of $1.2 billion in order to build 20,000 more long-term-care

beds. That was after coming to the realization that no beds had been built in the province of Ontario for 10 years before that time. What we were doing was making sure that when hospital beds had

been closed -- and 10,000 had been closed during the time of the NDP and the Liberals -- we were setting up a continuum of care that started with prevention, primary care, hospitals, and then

long-term care and community care. I'm pleased today that this government is continuing to build on that strong foundation of putting in place that continuum of care, providing for the needs of our

elderly and our vulnerable citizens.

I do want to congratulate the minister and the parliamentary assistant. I think the report that has been undertaken in order to provide for support and care of

our seniors -- the strategy -- goes a long way to doing what is necessary, and I do offer my congratulations to them.

However, it's amazing what a difference a day can make. It's amazing what a difference an opposition motion threat can make. Last week, we called upon the

government to live up to their campaign promise and immediately increase long-term-care funding and stop the clawback of property tax reimbursements. Well, guess what? That opposition day motion is

tomorrow and, lo and behold, on Sunday the minister hastily gathered together the long-term-care sector, who had been asking for meetings and finally got one. They were informed that despite the

fact that they had been told there would be clawbacks in the property tax reimbursements of 2003, the government was no longer going to do that.

So we thank the government for responding to the motion, and we appreciate their compassion in this regard. However, I will tell you that the announcement

today still does not respond to the promise that was made by the Premier.

The Premier committed to invest an additional $6,000 on behalf of the residents in long-term-care facilities. As you well know, the money today, $340 million,

simply goes to make operational the annualized funding for the new beds that have opened since mid-2003 and 2004. It was money that would always have flowed to those facilities in the first place.

There is an additional $191 million, but that's not quite the $6,000 per resident; you're still about $250 million short.

The other thing we are not sure of is when this money actually is going to flow to the facilities. What is the timeline? When will this additional staff

actually be hired? I also noticed that in the plan of action, it says that the residents are going to receive two baths a week. I would just remind the minister that your Premier, in 2003, promised

the seniors three baths a week. So you've still got a little way to go.

I have to congratulate the people in the long-term-care sector. They did their own survey of residents and families. They got responses, and the number one

priority for people in the long-term-care sector was overwhelming demand for more staff and more funding. That had 18,000 votes.

The announcement today still does not provide for the annual case mix increased adjustment of 1.4%, so I hope the minister will make that amount of additional

funding available. I also hope the clawback that he was intending for 2003 is not included in the $191 million. I hope that will be additional funding.

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I'm pleased to respond on behalf of the New Democratic Party. I'm sure the minister and the government won't

be surprised that I have a bit of a different take on this announcement than the member for Kitchener-Waterloo.

Look, I would have been happy if, in the announcement today, the government had just lived up to the promises it made to residents and their families during

the election campaign. I would have been happy if the government would have done just that. Let me give three examples where that didn't happen today.

First of all with respect to funding, this government promised during the election campaign that they would invest 6,000 new dollars per resident per facility

-- $6,000 per resident per facility. What did we get today? We got an announcement of $2,700 per resident -- less than half of what was promised. More importantly, there was no commitment by the

minister today that the sector, the families or the residents are going to see that balance of $3,300 any time soon. There was no commitment made by the minister for the balance of the $3,300 that

was promised by this government. Why don't you live up to that very specific commitment?

Secondly, during the election campaign the government promised it would cancel the fee hike that was imposed by the former government on residents in

long-term-care facilities. Did we hear anything about that at the announcement today? No, not a word, not a peep. That is money that those who live on fixed incomes in long-term-care facilities

should have in their pockets, because we know that so many of them are on fixed incomes, can barely afford to make ends meet and certainly don't have much money in the pocket after to buy a few

amenities here and there. The government said not a word about cancelling the fee hike imposed by the Conservatives that the Liberals promised they were going to roll back.

Thirdly, the government had nothing to say about standards of hands-on nursing care per resident. The Liberals made it very clear in their election platform

that they were going to bring back standards of hands-on care for residents living in long-term-care facilities. The government today talked about baths -- didn't say when that's going to go into

effect. The government talked about having a full-time RN in a facility 24/7 -- again, didn't say when that's going to happen. But the government was silent on the critical issue of how much

hands-on care each resident in a facility should receive. Ontario has the dubious distinction of having fewer hours of hands-on care now than Mississippi. What a distinction. That's shameful.

If it really wanted to, this government could go to cabinet tomorrow and pass a regulation to implement a certain standard of hands-on nursing care. Why won't

the government do that? Why won't the minister go to cabinet tomorrow and pass the regulation on bathing or pass the regulation on full-time RNs 24/7?

I say to the government, we don't have to wait till the fall for legislative changes, which is what the minister talked about today. You can pass those

regulations by order-in-council at cabinet on a Wednesday morning. If you really care about the quality of care being provided to residents, why don't you do that tomorrow morning so that Ontario

doesn't continue to have the dubious distinction of having fewer hours of hands-on care for the frail and elderly than Mississippi?

I heard the minister talk this morning about elder abuse and how there was going to be mandatory reporting of abuse to the ministry and how there was going to

be whistle-blower protection. I say to the minister, if you're interested in dealing with elder abuse, you can pass Bill 47 today, the private member's bill that stands in the name of our leader,

Howard Hampton, a private member's bill that creates a positive duty on all of those who work in facilities to report any allegations of abuse and for the minister to have the power to follow up on

that abuse. It follows as a positive duty that is already on teachers and nurses and child care workers to report abuse of children to the CAS. The government could pass second and third reading of

that private member's bill today, because it would very clearly meet the goal of protecting seniors from abuse that the minister outlined in his statement today. I encourage the minister to do that

today if he's serious about seniors abuse.

In closing, let me say that I would have been happy if the government had just lived up to the election promises it made to residents and to the families of

those who live in long-term-care facilities. Unfortunately, the announcement didn't do that.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I would like to ask for unanimous consent to pass private member's

notice of motion 18, proposing that fees collected from water-taking activities be designated to municipalities and property owners to aid them in complying with provincial water quality

regulations.

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous consent? I heard a no.

ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): On a point of order, Mr Speaker, for a brief moment, please: On March 22, I tabled four order paper questions

to the Ministries of Education, Health and Long-Term Care, Children and Youth Services and the Attorney General regarding all the costs that have been incurred by the ministries to date for the

autism court cases involving Deskin-Weinberg and other families. Also on that day I sent in an additional order paper question to the Attorney General asking for all the costs that have been

incurred by his ministry to date for the ministry's intervention at the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal in the case of Luke Burrows, who is also an autistic child.

Those responses were due last Wednesday. I have not received any of them and I am looking for your assistance to try and get responses to what I believe to be

very serious questions.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): In response to the member for Nickel Belt, I've checked into it. All those answers were tabled today except

for the one from the Ministry of Children and Youth Services. I will then ask the minister to respond as soon as possible to the question from the member for Nickel Belt.

Ms Martel: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: If I might, I was advised they would be both tabled and delivered to my office. As I stand here, I

tell you that I have not received any of the five responses.

The Speaker: I understand that they have been tabled and I hope they will be there when you get back to your office.

ORAL QUESTIONS

TAXATION

Mr Ernie Eves (Leader of the Opposition): I have a question for the Premier. Do you consider an increase in retail sales tax a tax on working

families in Ontario?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I think I know what the leader of the official opposition is getting at.

He has this abiding interest in the details of the budget, which I can well appreciate. Obviously I cannot provide those details at this point in time. We will be doing that a week from today. But

I can say that as a symbol of one of our areas of greatest priority, I'm very proud of the announcement made today by Minister Smitherman with respect to the investments we're making in long-term

care, ably assisted by Monique Smith and the outstanding work she has done.

I know there is a real interest here in terms of where we are going to go. That's an indication of where we're going.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Supplementary.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): Premier, you were able to answer all those questions when you were trolling for votes before last

October's provincial election. You put ads on TV and spent millions of dollars where you looked into the eyes of working families right across Ontario and promised that you wouldn't raise their

taxes. Your promise was simple, your promise was clear and it was an unambiguous commitment.

Premier, you don't have to pay for the time here today. This is free time. You can speak to the entire province right here, right now. Why don't you stand in

your place, set the record straight and clear up any confusion before this issue spirals out of control as other trial balloons have? I ask you to do one simple thing: Would you stand in your place

and just repeat the commitment that you made to the people of Ontario not to raise their taxes?

Hon Mr McGuinty: There is no confusion now on a very important matter, and that is that the people of Ontario had been burdened with, saddled

with, at least a $5.6-billion deficit. We're going to do our very best to address that burden. We're going to do it in a responsible way. We're going to do it in a way that also gives effect to our

priorities, which are Ontarians' top priorities: health care and education.

Mr Baird: Premier, your refusal to answer a direct, simple, straightforward question speaks volumes about you and the integrity of commitments

that you make to the people of Ontario. This non-answer reminds me of Chuck Guité appearing before the public accounts committee in Ottawa. But at least Chuck Guité has a defence, I say

to the Premier.

The people of Ontario are quickly coming to the conclusion that you were prepared to say anything to get elected. If you break your promise not to raise the

retail sales tax, how can we believe anything you ever say again?

Hon Mr McGuinty: In order to ensure that the kinds of shenanigans the people of Ontario have had to contend with -- that is, they got the word

of the previous government that there was no deficit and they found out there was a $5.6-billion deficit -- never happen again and that that kind of thing cannot be perpetrated once again on the

people of Ontario, we're going to change the law in Ontario. We're going to make sure there is transparency, openness and accountability before the election so that what happened before doesn't

happen again.

ONTARIO BUDGET

Mr Ernie Eves (Leader of the Opposition): Premier, this morning you told reporters that you don't have time to visit Hamilton East voters in

the by-election you called on April 14. You said you were too busy working on the budget with the finance minister. This morning we were told by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation that you have

refused to meet with them about that very budget. Exactly eight months ago today, September 11, 2003, you made a big production out of meeting with them and signing your taxpayer protection pledge.

How is it that you can't find time to meet with them now?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): We have devoted more time and more energy to meeting with Ontarians on

the matter of their budget than ever before. The Minister of Finance has the principal responsibility to meet with people who have specific interests. He in fact has, I say to the member opposite,

met with representatives of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Supplementary.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): In the leaders' debate during last fall's election, on September 23, I want to tell you what you told the

voters of Ontario. You said, "We will not raise taxes one cent on Ontario families. Families will pay the same in taxes under a McGuinty government as they are under the present Conservative

government." What did you mean when you said that?

Interjections.

Hon Mr McGuinty: I'm listening. I'm being entertained, Speaker. I'm enjoying the entertainment.

I understand how disappointed Ontarians are with the turn of events and to have discovered that the state of their government finances was not in fact as was

represented. As I said a moment ago, we will ensure that never happens again, so everybody going into an election campaign, whether it's somebody in opposition, a representative of the government

or the public at large, has an accurate accounting of the state of government finances. We will ensure that that kind of misrepresentation never happens again.

Mr Baird: Premier, I know what working families thought you meant. They thought "not one penny out of their pockets" meant you wouldn't dig

your hand even deeper into their pockets. That's what they thought. What working families now think is that when you promise not to raise taxes by one penny, you really mean you want to raise taxes

by $2 billion with your retail sales tax increase.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I would regard what the member from Nepean-Carleton did is deliberately put forward a prop and then completely disregard

the Speaker when he got up. I would ask him to conform to the decorum of the House. I ask your support on that. New question.

HEALTH CARE

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. The Ontario Chiropractic Association is worried that you are about to

delist some or all of the services they provide in the upcoming budget. Chiropractors believe you are about to cut those services, forcing 1.2 million Ontarians to pay out of their own pockets for

those health care services. You have said that choosing change meant more health care, not less. One of your backbenchers, the member for York West, called the delisting of health care services "a

continuous attack on our purse and those of seniors." Premier, will you commit today that your government will not delist any chiropractic services?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I thank the leader of the NDP for the question, but again this is an

inquiry with respect to specific details in the upcoming budget, and I will not provide those.

The member does raise the issue of our interest in and concern for seniors. Again, it takes me back to the wonderful announcement that was made today calling

for a very significant investment in long-term care. As a result of this investment, seniors who are residents in long-term-care centres -- and there are close to 70,000 -- are going to get at

least two baths per week. There will be a registered nurse on duty at all times. We'll be hiring 2,000 more staff, including 600 more nurses. We're going to crack down by way of more unannounced

inspections. We're going to take a genuine interest in the welfare of Ontario seniors by means of this announcement we've made today. We're proud of that.

Mr Hampton: Premier, this is a question about health care services. What you choose to do in the budget next week is something you can talk

about then. This is about health care services. It's about 1.2 million patients. What they're worried about is that, in your negotiations with the doctors, you will choose to cut services offered

by chiropractors and others in order to finance a pay raise for doctors. That's robbing Peter to pay Paul, and it hurts people and results in higher costs elsewhere in the system, because I know

what will happen: People who can't access a chiropractor will show up at the hospital emergency ward.

Premier, it's about health care services, something you are so willing to talk about, and the question is simply this: Will you state categorically today that

there will be no cuts, no delisting of chiropractic services in Ontario by your government?

Hon Mr McGuinty: The member's just going to have to wait for the budget. But I can tell you this: We are absolutely determined to make the

essential investments in our health care system. More than just a matter of money, we're determined to get real results.

The minister has put forward a very progressive plan that speaks to reducing wait times for things like cardiac care, cancer care, MRIs and CTs. We've got a

plan to invest in more nurses, to bring primary-care reform, as a reality, to Ontario -- something that the others have talked about for years on end. That's where we're going, and that too will be

reflected in our budget.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): New question.

Mr Hampton: To the Premier: The people of Ontario didn't vote for more cuts to health care. Whether you distribute those cuts to health care

on the chiropractic side or whether it's on the physiotherapy side or the optometry side, people didn't vote for that.

The optometrists are also concerned. They were here on March 31, demonstrating. They are also concerned that you are going to delist a number of their

services. Will you state today that you will not delist or cut any of the health care services provided by optometrists?

Hon Mr McGuinty: The same answer applies. I'm not going to provide details with respect to the budget. The member talks about cuts -- we just

health care.

Mr Hampton: You have floated a lot of trial balloons over the last six months. Most of them have been, shall we say, public relations

disasters. Let me tell you, no one in this province -- no one in this province -- heard you say, before the election or during the election, that important health care services, like being able to

have your eyes tested, might be delisted; that having access to a physiotherapist, if you're a senior or if you're somebody who is disabled, might be cut; that having access to a chiropractor

because you have severe back pain, those services might be cut. No one heard those things.

So I'm saying to you today, this is not about the budget. You and your Minister of Finance can spin your stories next week about the budget. This is about

health care services. You had lots to say over the last four or five years. You had lots to say during the election campaign. Stand up and tell the people of Ontario today that you are not going to

delist the health care services of chiropractors, of physiotherapists, of optometrists, that there aren't going to be any cuts to those services. Will you do that now?

Hon Mr McGuinty: I can assure the members opposite, and the people of Ontario, that we're going to throw our weight behind health care in the

province of Ontario -- not into tax cuts, but behind health care. We're going to do what is necessary to transform our system of health care, medicare, into one that is suited to the beginning of

the 21st century.

We're going to deliver real results. We're going to reduce wait times. We're going to bring more nurses and more doctors on to the job in the province of

Ontario. We are committed to health care. Again, I say, I appreciate the questions raised by the member opposite, but our budget will clearly reflect our commitment to health care. We look forward

so much to bringing that into this House a week from today.

TAXATION

Mr Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Ajax): My question is for the Premier. It's about his promise not to raise taxes, to hold the line on taxes in

Ontario. Every January, people in Whitby and Ajax, and towns and cities and rural areas all across this province, get up and go to work. They work all through the winter months: January, February,

March, into the spring: April, May, June, up to June 28th, for the governments of Ontario and Canada and for our municipal governments. The people of Ontario, the average families which this

Premier used to talk about when he was the Leader of the Opposition, when he cared about "working families," as he used to say -- these working families work almost six months for government.

This Premier has already increased personal income taxes -- the largest single tax hike in the history of the province of Ontario -- after promising that he

would not raise taxes and would hold the line on taxes. Now there are rumours about increasing the retail sales tax, which is regressive.

Will you first of all admit that the tax burden is until June 28, that you understand it and that you will not increase the overall tax burden on working

families?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I appreciate the question. Let me tell you that working families, by way

of a message that they are sending to the government today -- do you know what they are saying? They are saying, "Can you do something to improve the quality of education that my kids get in their

public schools?" And we are going to do that.

They're also saying, "Can you make sure that we can invest in health care and transform medicare so that it meets our 21st century needs?" That is what they

are saying. And they're saying something else as well. They don't begrudge the fact that they have to pay taxes. As somebody once said, that's the price of living in a civilized society. They're

also saying, "Can you make sure, for the first time in a long time, that we start to give care to our most vulnerable?" That is something else we intend to address.

Mr Flaherty: The working families of Ontario are already taxed to the max. In fact, in 2003 -- and these are all the taxes that this

tobacco, amusement taxes, more than $2,000; auto insurance taxes, more than $1,000; social security and pensions, more than $8,000. Do you know what it adds up to? It adds up to just over $39,000

on an income of $80,500, with both partners working. That is 48.5%, until the end of June. Are you saying that you are going to insist the people who work in this province work into July for your

government, that they pay more than half of their income to the government of Ontario?

Hon Mr McGuinty: There's no secret here in terms of what the member's solution is to the challenges of the day. He would say, "Here is some

money; now send the kids to the private schools." He would give up on public education, and we won't do that. He would say, "There's no hope for medicare, so let's allow more privatization to our

health care system." We are not going to give up on medicare. He would say to the vulnerable, "They are on their own; too damned bad about them." We won't say that. We're here for the vulnerable as

well.

This is an important and interesting contrast in terms of the approach brought by that member and representatives of this government. We believe in public

services, and that is the kind of investment we will be making in the upcoming budget.

SERVICES FOR THE DISABLED

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): My question is to the Minister of Citizenship. During my previous role as critic for persons with

disabilities I had the opportunity to meet hundreds of Ontarians with disabilities. Without exception, they had excellent advice for me. However, when asked about the existing ODA, the best they

could say was, "Well, it's better than nothing." That is not much of an endorsement, is it? And that is not my question.

What they did say to me consistently was that they had very little opportunity to provide input into the drafting of the ODA, and when they did get the

opportunity to speak, they weren't listened to and their input wasn't acted upon. Would you describe for us the process that you are using to receive input from Ontarians with disabilities?

Hon Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I'd like to thank the honourable

member for the question and his commitment and his work in this field over the years while critic.

I'd like to reiterate for this House that the McGuinty government is committed to strengthening the Ontarians with Disabilities Act by the fall of 2004.

To meet this end, my parliamentary assistant, the member from Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale, Dr Kuldip Kular, and I had consultations across the province,

and I would like to take this opportunity to thank Dr Kular for the vast amount of effort he put into this.

What we heard in these consultations was the need for a common planning process, the need for a strengthened accountability framework, the extension of the ODA

to organizations in the private sector and the need for an effective public awareness and education program. We are analyzing all of the data we heard from literally thousands of people, including

a Webcast, for the first time, of 2,000 students. Once we analyze this data, we will come forward with a proposal for

an act by the fall of 2004.

Mr Parsons: The current act focuses very heavily on visible disabilities. However, there are invisible disabilities such as mental illness or

acquired brain injury, that are just as real. Can you assure Ontarians that the new ODA will include and support all disabilities equally?

Hon Mrs Bountrogianni: I know that for both professional and personal reasons my colleague has a passion for and interest in this that we all

respect in this House. My answer is yes, we will be taking invisible disabilities just as seriously as visible disabilities.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): My question is to the Premier. Over the last few days, we in this House have challenged you to assure seniors in

our province that in your budget you will not do what a number of your backbenchers have suggested may happen; that is, that chiropractic services will be delisted and many of the other services

seniors need from day to day will cost them more. There was a great deal of discussion through the course of your consultations that seniors would have to pay much more for drugs, which of course

they can't afford. Can you stand in your place today and confirm what one of your backbenchers said yesterday, that in fact the upcoming budget will not result in higher costs to seniors for their

drugs? Would you confirm that that will not happen in this province?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Curiosity is running rampant over there, and I guess it's somewhat

understandable when it comes to the contents of the budget.

Again, with respect to our commitment to seniors, I don't think anything speaks more powerfully and more eloquently than the announcement we made today.

Here is something that was put out by the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, and I'm sure the member opposite will be interested in hearing this: "`We

wholeheartedly applaud Premier McGuinty and Minister Smitherman for their clear commitment to older persons,' said Joan Lesmond, president of the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario."

Notwithstanding the reluctance on the part of our colleagues opposite, there are some people who feel we've done something good today in Ontario for seniors.

Mr Klees: Seniors across the province are watching this, and they're seeing a Premier who has broken a multitude of promises and who cannot

answer a straight question. The question was very specific, and it had to do with Ontario drug benefits for seniors. Why won't the Premier simply confirm what one of his backbenchers said very

publicly, that in fact the upcoming budget will not call on seniors to pay more for their drugs? We have stood in this place for the last number of weeks and challenged the government to back down

on charging seniors more for their drugs. We would like to claim victory here today. Will you confirm for us that you, as Premier, will ensure that the upcoming budget will not call on seniors to

pay more for their drugs? It's a very specific question, Premier. Show the people of Ontario that you can answer one question.

Hon Mr McGuinty: The member opposite well recognizes that it would be entirely inappropriate for us to tell the public, through him, where we

stand with respect to specific budgetary matters. But I can say that I anticipate seniors will very much appreciate the commitment made to them through our budget.

IMMIGRANT SERVICES

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a question for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Ontario is a province that attracts a large

number of immigrants. In fact, nearly 60% of all Canada's immigrants settle in Ontario, with a large proportion of those settling especially in Toronto. Surprisingly, Ontario is the only province

in this country that does not have an immigration agreement with the federal government. The consequence of this is that Ontario receives the lowest per-capita federal spending on settlement and

adult language training services in the country.

We brought this to the attention of the minister previously when we were in opposition. Now you are the minister. What are you going to do to change this to

help new Canadians to succeed in today's Ontario?

Hon Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Children and Youth Services, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I would like to thank my colleague

for the question. As he mentioned, yes, we are the only province without an immigration agreement in this country. It seems like the former Tory government was not interested in an immigration

agreement with the federal government.

Within the last seven months of taking office we did more than you dreamed of doing in the eight sorry years you were in government. We just wrote a letter of

intent that will include municipalities in the devising of the funding formula. We have an acknowledgment from the federal government that Ontario does need more money. This is a very important and

cutting-edge development, because municipalities do bear a lot of the responsibility with respect to new Canadians, and they will be part of the negotiations for the first time in Canadian history.

I anticipate that the rest of the country will follow our model in the months to come.

Mr Ruprecht: This is really great news. As you know, Toronto is home to a significant number of new Canadians. Many of them have gained

educational and professional credentials in other countries, but unfortunately, some of these credentials are not recognized when they arrive in Canada. Well-trained and experienced individuals end

up taking low-skilled jobs just to make ends meet because it is too difficult, or they don't know how, to get their credentials recognized. Our economy needs internationally trained professionals

in order to thrive and to provide the goods and services that the people of this province need as we move into the 21st century. This is an important issue for downtown Toronto communities but also

for small towns and cities across the province. Minister, what is our government doing to help new Canadians to practise their chosen trades and professions in this, their chosen province?

Hon Mrs Bountrogianni: My colleague the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities is the lead for this part of the process, and I refer

to her.

Hon Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): I'm happy to respond to the question from the member for

Davenport. I have already met with several of the 38 regulatory bodies that work with the professions that we're talking about here. In fact, I've written to all of them and met with most of them.

We have information documents done on 18 or 19 of those professions now. We are making incredible headway in that regard. We have already provided the first quarterly report on our progress in that

regard. In January we announced $4 million in funding for bridging programs for accreditation. So we are making excellent progress and we have a one-year target for a report card which will

demonstrate the progress being made in that regard.

GASOLINE PRICES

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a question to the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. On May 2, 2001, you tabled a private

member's bill rolling back and freezing gas prices for up to 150 days. You said at the time that you were standing up for consumers. You know how much northerners depend on their vehicles. You know

how much high gas prices really hit northerners. You know that gas prices are at a record high and we need a solution now. That's why we have reintroduced your bill to freeze and roll back gas

prices. So my question to you is simply this: Will you and your colleagues pass Bill 74, second and third reading, today?

Hon Rick Bartolucci (Minister of Northern Development and Mines): The simple answer to the question is no. We believe that you should bring

your bill forward for full and open debate. That's what happens around this place. I think that's very important.

While we wait for you to bring your bill forward, I as Minister of Northern Development and Mines have met with the Canadian petroleum products industry to

talk about the severe impact that negative prices have in northern Ontario, that the volatility of prices has an effect in northern Ontario. I think it's very important to act responsibly as a

northern minister. That's why I invited the petroleum products industry into my office to discuss that.

I would like to ask the former government if they did -- the answer would be no -- and if the previous NDP government did. The answer would be no as well.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Supplementary.

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): Minister, speak or consult. It's your bill. That's the one we brought back. You drafted the bill. You

consulted within your caucus. You know full well what's in it. All we did was reprint your bill. Don't talk to me about having to consult.

You introduced the bill back then. You thought it was a good bill. We, as New Democrats, supported it. The Tories voted against it. This is your chance to

shine. You brought the bill forward. We reintroduced it. Talk is cheap. Stop the consultation. Will you pass it for second and third reading now to provide security in prices for people not only in

northern Ontario but across this province?

Hon Mr Bartolucci: The reality is, the process in this place is that you introduce bills and bring them forward for discussion. We all know

that's what happens. I look forward to them bringing that bill forward to have full and open debate.

But let's talk a little bit about sincerity. I think that's what this is all about. The third party stands up and talks about increasing hospital beds, yet

when they were in government they cut hospital beds by 8,000.

Let's talk about sincerity with doctor shortages. They stand up here and say we need more doctors, yet when they were in government they cut medical spaces by

10%.

This is a party that today pretends they care about gas prices. The last time the provincial portion of the gas tax was increased was in 1992, under that

government.

There is no sincerity over there. Let's allow the process to unfold.

TAXATION

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): My question is to the Premier. Canadians from coast to coast are becoming cynical about politicians and

the promises they make before election day. Voter turnout is in decline right across the country because voters don't think their votes matter.

Premier, before election day you promised not to raise taxes by one cent -- not by one cent. But today you won't rule out raising provincial income tax rates

and you won't say no to a 9% or 10% PST. If it was good enough to promise before election day that you wouldn't raise taxes, why can't you get up and just promise not to raise them today? Why can't

you just say no to your finance minister, who seems to be on a spending spree and wanting to raise taxes? Will you just stand in your place and say no to a 9% or 10% PST?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): We have a much more positive outlook on the world, as you might expect.

We look forward to saying yes to smaller classes in the early years; yes to lead teachers in our elementary schools with special skills in numeracy and literacy. We look forward to saying yes to

higher student achievement. We look forward to saying yes to shorter waits for cancer care and cardiac care. We look forward to saying yes to more nurses and more doctors. We look forward to saying

yes to the vulnerable who have waited far too long when it comes to having their basic needs met. Those are the kinds of things we look forward to saying yes to.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Supplementary.

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): I just want to follow up on the question my colleague asked about the breeding of cynicism in this province,

Premier. I wonder if you're feeling at all bad about it.

Today alone your northern minister got up -- he had every answer when he was in opposition about gas prices in northern Ontario and across the province, and

you refused to even pass the legislation he brought forward at that time. Northerners today have a reason to be cynical. Obviously, today you say you're going to put money into long-term care for

our seniors, but in February you took away tens of millions of dollars by eliminating the property tax rebate in our nursing homes.

I've got another one for you: You don't pay your bills to municipalities. The Town of the Blue Mountains is owed $360,000 for last year's policing costs under

the CRF program. You're not paying your bills. You promised to pay your bills. You're going to bring a budget out next Tuesday. Would you end the cynicism, at least among municipalities today,

since you won't help people who pay for gasoline and you won't help seniors? Would you at least end the cynicism among municipalities and pay your bloody bills from last year before you bring the

budget out this year?

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Could I ask the House's indulgence to give me a moment for us to calm down a little bit.

Hon Mr McGuinty: I appreciate the member's commitment and determination. I can understand why he's so frustrated because of the unpaid bills

left behind by the previous government. It's not just a matter of a $5.6-billion deficit. It's a matter of the unpaid bills with respect to our hospitals, the unpaid bills with respect to our

children's aid societies, the unpaid bills with respect to our colleges, and now the member brings to our attention -- and we're grateful for this information -- yet another unpaid bill left behind

by the previous government, something else that we're going to have to clean up. I can tell you, we're working as hard as we can to clean up all those unpaid bills left behind by the previous

government.

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

EDUCATION PROGRAM

Ms Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): My question is for the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Minister, Sarnia-Lambton is

well on its way to becoming a model community that is both pro-environment and pro-business. Lambton College in my riding has been a leader in this unique effort to better prepare its students to

be both responsible industry leaders, highly trained employees and good citizens. To that end, Lambton College has been laying the groundwork for some time for better educational opportunities in

the field of environmental health and safety and sustainable development. Minister, can you tell us what progress has been made on this front?

Hon Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): I'd like to thank the member from Sarnia-Lambton for this

question. I'm really pleased to say that Lambton College has brought forward and received approval for a new program in environmental health and safety. It will be a four-year degree program which

will qualify students for a bachelor of applied technology in environmental health and safety. The first batch of students will be admitted in September 2005, 48 students to start.

I think this is a perfect example of what our locally based thinking can do for our province. Here is a college in Sarnia bringing forward environment-related

programs which will be very helpful to their area. Another example of this could be our institutions in northern Ontario coming forward with forestry-type programs. It just goes to show you that

our province is not simply run from Queen's Park.

Ms Di Cocco: I'm proud of the work that Lambton College has done to attain this program, and this is excellent news for the students of

Lambton College and for Sarnia-Lambton. Minister, can you tell us what types of employment opportunities will be available to the graduates of this program?

Hon Mrs Chambers: The graduates of this program could be educators in environmental issues. They could be consultants or industrial

hygienists. They could be involved in a variety of environment-related practices. They could also work with our government to ensure that the work the Minister of the Environment and her ministry

are working on will be successful and will benefit all of the people of Ontario.

BY-ELECTION IN HAMILTON EAST

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): A question for the Premier: The member for Nepean-Carlton, Mr Baird, and I have a friendly bet. He says you don't

have the courage to go and campaign in Hamilton East. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt. He says you don't have the guts to go door to door in Hamilton East. I think you're going to knock

on at least one, maybe two doors. Premier, don't let me down. Will you visit Hamilton East, even just once, before the vote?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I will take that as a plea for more research money on the part of the

opposition. I'll speak to the Minister of Finance about that directly.

I can say that we are very proud of the effort being made by Ralph Agostino, our candidate in Hamilton East. He has been leading an outstanding effort. We very

much look forward to the results of the by-election and have every confidence in the people living in that riding to make the best decision.

Mr Hudak: The Premier may be proud of his local candidate, but he certainly is not very proud of you. I looked through each of his brochures,

and not a single picture of Dalton McGuinty in any of those local brochures. In fact, the last time the Premier was in Hamilton East was the day he dropped the writ. He's been the invisible man in

Hamilton ever since. Everybody else in the assembly has been down to Hamilton except for the Premier. But I think I know why. It's because Dalton McGuinty is the albatross around Ralph Agostino's

neck.

If you don't have the courage to go door to door, this is what you would hear from the people of Hamilton East: "Premier, you've broken your promises. You said

one thing before the election, and once you got the keys to the big office, you said something completely different. You're asking us, cynically, to vote just five days before the budget of tax

hikes, big deficits and broken promises." I'll ask you again, Premier: There are just over 50 hours left before the vote. Will you knock on at least one door in Hamilton East?

Hon Mr McGuinty: This is the first time I've learned my picture is not on the pamphlet. I must say I've been cut to the quick. I'm not sure --

I'm deeply hurt. As I say, I'm proud of the effort being led by Ralph Agostino and the team he has assembled, the people there on the ground. I know they've been working feverishly and furiously to

get the support of the people of Hamilton East. I know he's very much committed to serving the people in that riding and earning the privilege of representing them in the upcoming by-election.

We're proud of that effort, and again, I very much look forward to the results coming up.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr Dave Levac (Brant): My question is for the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. We all know that some senior citizens who live in our

province's long-term-care facilities are some of the most vulnerable and fragile citizens in this society. Today you announced our government's strategy to protect those very dear people. In my

riding and ridings across the province, that is great news. Can you explain for us again how much money is going to be spent on this particular initiative you've introduced, and more importantly,

how will it be allocated across the province?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I think it's fair to say that all members of the House and all Ontarians were

shocked to see what I saw reported by the media, which was conditions of abuse and neglect in our long-term-care facilities. The actions we've taken today based on the report by the member for

Nipissing re-establish as a priority the provision of services in long-term care: $531 million, $340 million for the expansion of beds in long-term care on an annualized basis and $191 million to

enhance by 2,000 the number of people working in support of our frail seniors in long-term-care facilities. That's 600 nurses as a minimum, dieticians, nurse practitioners and a variety of others

who will be deployed to enhance the quality of life for those people living out their final days.

We deliver on the promise of revolution, to ensure that people have the opportunity to live out their final days with all the dignity and respect a province

like Ontario ought to provide.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Supplementary?

Mr Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): I have a supplementary to the same minister. The high standards you reference are only as good as your

ability to enforce them. Nurses are on the front line of health care delivery in long-term-care facilities and are in the best position to report violations of the standards. Minister, what will

you do to ensure that nurses and other health care workers can be protected by proper whistle-blower legislation?

Hon Mr Smitherman: One of the things the member from Nipissing found as she did her work in discussion with union representatives, as an

example, was that on the issue of mandatory reporting of abuse, workers require the protections necessary.

I'm very pleased to say that our reforms announced today include a commitment to bring forward the necessary legislation to provide whistle-blower protection.

On that point, here's what the registered nurses of Ontario had to say: "Whistle-blower protection is an important safety valve in the health care system that ensures nurses and other health care

workers can report suspicion or evidence of elder abuse without fear of reprisals from employers." On that basis, it's well said by the RNAO. That's why we've committed to it. We think it's an

essential element of the protections necessary for our seniors as they live out their final days with all the dignity and respect that a province like Ontario ought to deliver. We haven't, on a

consistent enough basis, done that. But I assure you that with the reforms we introduced today, we will.

TFO

M. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-Baie James): Ma question est au premier ministre. Vous savez que dans la dernière élection il y a eu des

engagements par votre parti demandant que TFO ait son propre CA autonome, séparé des anglophones. Justement, dans votre plate-forme électorale vous avez dit :

« Un gouvernement McGuinty posera des gestes concrets en vue de favoriser le développement de la collectivité francophone par le biais des

initiatives suivantes :

« En donnant à TFO son autonomie par la création de son propre conseil d'administration dont tous les membres parlent

Quand est-ce qu'on peut attendre que vous allez garder cet engagement?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Speaker, I refer the matter to the minister.

Hon Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): One day I hope to be able to respond to you in French.

Let me tell you what we are doing so far with TVO/TFO. The board is 13 members strong and currently has three francophone members. As a first step we are

filling the next three vacancies, two of which are available right now, and another one will become available next month, with francophone members. This will bring the composition of the board to

six francophone members and seven anglophone members, and we will continue to work with this organization to make sure that our francophone Ontarians are very well represented by TVO/TFO.

M. Bisson: Ce n'est pas votre engagement, la promesse que vous avez faite. C'était très clair dans la dernière élection.

Dans votre plate-forme électorale vous avez dit que vous étiez pour avoir un conseil d'administration séparé, autonome pour les francophones. Là, on apprend qu'on va

peut-être avoir une autre personne qui va siéger sur le CA en totalité de TFO/TVO.

Quand le GITE vous avait écrit une lettre, vous avez dit une deuxième fois que oui, vous alliez assurer -- que vous étiez pour avoir une

administration et pour avoir un CA francophone autonome pour les francophones. Pourquoi ne pas garder votre engagement? Vous avez dit très clairement, « Autonomie pour

TFO. » Vous n'avez pas dit, « Avoir une autre personne sur le CA. » Est-ce que c'est encore une autre promesse électorale qui a été brisée?

Hon Mrs Chambers: I'm happy to tell the member that we are going in the right direction. We are indeed working toward that commitment, and I'm

very pleased that we have already, so very quickly, taken steps to make sure that Ontario's francophone population is very well represented in their educational programs.

These francophone board members will continue to work hard toward representing the interests of francophone Ontarians. We are getting there, and I'm very

pleased with the progress we have made so far. We do have a four-year mandate.

PREMIER'S ANNOUNCEMENT

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): My question is for the Premier. We were just advised that your office has asked the provincial

television networks for free time next week for you to appear on province-wide TV -- before the budget apparently -- to make an announcement of "historic significance." I wonder if you could ensure

that that is a legitimate request, that you have made exactly that request, and elaborate on why you would not be making an announcement of historic significance in this chamber.

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I can say that my office may very well have made some inquiries, but

nothing has been finalized, and nothing has been concluded.

Mr Runciman: If the Premier is contemplating making an announcement of historic significance before the budget, I'd ask him how that squares

with the rhetoric we've heard from his party and his government with respect to a democratic deficit. We all, hopefully, believe in this place that the members who come here are representing the

constituents throughout the province.

Will you show the appropriate respect for this chamber so that any announcement of historic significance will take place in this chamber? If, indeed, you're

going to be making an announcement before the public at large through the various TV networks, following the announcement in the chamber, will you also join that request so that the members, the

leaders of the two opposition parties, will have equal time?

Hon Mr McGuinty: This is just too rich. To get this kind of criticism from a member of the previous government, which had the temerity, the

audacity, to break with parliamentary tradition going back hundreds of years, to be the first government ever to introduce a budget outside these hallowed halls, is just a bit too rich. I can tell

you this much: We will respect the traditions of this Legislature, and we will introduce the budget inside this building.

FOREST FIREFIGHTING

Mr Bill Mauro (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): My question is for the Minister of Natural Resources. There was a fire management strategy prepared 15

years ago. Why, on Friday, did you introduce a new forest management strategy? What are the benefits of that strategy?

Hon David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources): I thank the member for the excellent question and his interest in forest management,

especially in northwestern Ontario. As the member said, the previous fire management strategy was designed 15 years ago. This strategy really has to reflect today's changing demands on our forest

uses in our plans, which are very complex, more complex than they were 15 years ago.

This strategy is consistent with our commitment that was made under the Ontario forest accord to increase levels of fire protection in the developing forest

areas. This new management strategy is an important step forward in taking a more balanced approach to forest fires. It will continue to focus on protecting human health, property and natural

resources against the threats of wildfire.

Mr Mauro: You mentioned the Northern Boreal Initiative and the six new management zones. How will this new strategy address the Northern

Boreal Initiative?

Hon David Ramsay: This is a very important part about this. As I think many members would know, we are working on a northern boreal strategy

that is basically working in partnership with our First Nations north of 51, in developing the future harvesting of resources in that area. As we work and develop in that area, we're going to have

to have more intensive fire protection of that resource, as these communities are going to become dependent upon that for a revenue stream. We are gradually increasing fire protection as we move

north, so that we protect the future revenue resources of our aboriginal peoples.

WATER QUALITY

Ms Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): Today my question is for the Minister of the Environment. This past weekend, your colleagues

attended the Ontario Small Urban Municipalities Conference. While they were there, they announced to residents of Walters Falls that there would be a six-month moratorium on regulation 170.

Minister Smitherman was quoted on Friday as saying, "We recognize there's a challenge in the regulations, and that's why Minister Dombrowsky indicated that the regulations that affect them are on

hold for six months." Yesterday in the House, the Minister of the Environment stated, "We most definitely are prepared to deal with regulation 170."

Small businesses, campgrounds, community halls and churches have been trying for months to get you to listen to their concerns. Their concerns have been raised

repeatedly by both opposition parties in the Legislature. This matter has been pre-announced to death. Would the minister please confirm today that the government is going to listen to the people

and is imposing a six-month moratorium effective today?

Hon Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of the Environment): I've had the opportunity on numerous occasions in this House to address the issue of

regulation 170. As recently as yesterday I explained to the members of the assembly that I would be making an announcement this week with regard to that particular regulation.

I know that there is a great anxiety and people across the province are very anxious for the ministry's response to this, but I would suggest that it is a very

complex issue. This government intends to take the time to consult with the people we need to, to ensure that we get this right this time, something that the previous government did not take the

time to do.

It strikes me as very strange that members from the previous government stand in this House regularly to press for an answer, and it was because they were in

such a rush in the previous administration that they didn't get this regulation right the first time.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Supplementary.

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): Minister, the announcement of a six-month moratorium on regulation 170 by two of your cabinet colleagues was not

made by accident. I can't believe two cabinet ministers would misspeak at the same conference at the same time to members of the media.

A moratorium on this regulation would save rural churches and halls the unnecessary anxiety of rushing to meet regulations that may not apply to them in the

end, and it would allow your ministry to stop enforcing the regulation until the changes were made.

Minister, as you have just stated, you are going to make an announcement this week. Why would you not make that announcement today and say there is a six-month

moratorium, so these people in the churches and halls will no longer have to live with this anxiety? They can quit prancing around and start looking after the needs of their community, as opposed

to waiting for your regulation changes to be made, so they can get on with their business. Minister, why don't you make that announcement today if you know what it's going to be?

Hon Mrs Dombrowsky: If the honourable member knew what was needed in rural Ontario, why didn't you do it when you crafted the regulation?

What I have committed to this Legislature is that there will be an announcement this week. What I will also be able to commit when we make the announcement is

that it will have had a fulsome review. We will have had an opportunity to consider totally what the stakeholders have contributed to this debate, this very important issue. When we come forward, I

can assure the members of this Legislature and the people of Ontario that it will provide both a short-term and a long-term plan on how to ensure that water in the province of Ontario is

protected.

ROAD SAFETY

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): My question is for the Minister of Transportation. You introduced a bill that talks about the measures it

will take to protect Ontario's youth. I think this is an important initiative. I think we can all welcome your commitment, at first reading, to seek to reduce the number of children injured or

killed on our roads. But can you, Minister, please tell me what sort of scale of problem we are dealing with here and why you believe that extending the law on booster seats and children's car

seats is the right way to move forward?

Hon Harinder S. Takhar (Minister of Transportation): First of all, I want to thank my colleague for asking the question, but I also want to

thank him for the work he has done in this area.

The bill that I introduced in the Legislature is based on very concrete research. In the last five years, about 700 children were killed on the roads, and

death on the highway is the leading cause of death of kids between the ages of one and nine. The research shows that booster seats can reduce the likelihood of death and injury by about 75%.

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Pursuant to standing order 37(a), the member for Simcoe North has given notice of his dissatisfaction with

the answer to his question given by the Minister of Transportation yesterday concerning consultation with police services. This matter will be debated this afternoon.

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I would ask for unanimous consent right now to be able to move my Bill

74, Keep Your Promises at the Pump Act, Mr Bartolucci, and that it be passed today, second and third reading, by unanimous consent.

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous consent for the motion by the member from Timmins-James Bay? No.

PETITIONS

PROPERTY TAXATION

Mr Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): I have a petition signed by about 900 constituents from Glengarry county, and on which I've

affixed my signature.

"To the Parliament of Ontario:

"Whereas Glengarry county property holders are now under extreme financial stress due to soaring property assessments;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Parliament of Ontario to act immediately to remedy this dire situation as follows:

"(1) that Glengarry ratepayers living on fixed incomes have their property assessments reviewed and pegged to the annual rate of inflation; and

"(2) that all other Glengarry ratepayers have their property assessments capped at 3.5% per annum."

HIGHWAY 407

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the timely and efficient movement of people and products is critical to the success of the Ontario economy;

"Whereas the province of Ontario is meeting the challenge of traffic congestion in the greater Toronto area by improvements to our highway network and by"

providing public transit;

"Whereas the construction of Highway 407 eastward into Durham region, across Clarington to Highway 35/115, would improve the flow of traffic in Durham region

and throughout the GTA;

"Whereas citizens and municipalities of Durham region have faced uncertainty over the final alignment of the proposed 407 highway for many years and are

entitled to a timely resolution of this matter;

"Whereas CAAC, the Clarington agricultural advisory committee, has expressed concerns and advocates for final construction completion of Highway 407 through

Clarington, connecting 35/115;

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

"That the Parliament of Ontario take steps to fast-track the extension of Highway 407 eastward into the regional municipality of Durham and that this

commitment include the extension of Highway 407 through Clarington to connect with Highway 35/115, while ensuring that all the necessary environmental assessments and public consultations are

followed," as they should be.

I'm pleased to sign this in support of this petition presented by Mr Bert Werry.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the Sudbury Regional Hospital is a regional referral centre, serving patients from across northeastern Ontario;

"Whereas the burden of raising money to pay the local share of the hospital reconstruction costs has fallen primarily on to local residents;

"Whereas city council and local residents have already committed more money to the project than we were required to;

"Whereas imposing a private mortgage scheme on the hospital to pay more costs at the local level would be disastrous for patients, hospital programs and

staff;

"Therefore

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"We call on the Liberal government to fund 85% of the capital costs of reconstruction at the Sudbury Regional Hospital."

I agree with the petitioners and I sign my name to this petition.

GO TRANSIT SERVICE

Mr Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have petition from another group of weary commuters in Mississauga, and it reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the city of Mississauga has, within a generation, grown from a linked collection of suburban and farming communities into Canada's sixth-largest city,

and tens of thousands of people daily need to commute into and out of Mississauga in order to do business, educate themselves and their families and enjoy culture and recreation; and

"Whereas gridlock on all roads leading into and out of Mississauga makes peak period road commuting impractical, and commuter rail service on the Milton GO

line is restricted to morning and afternoon service into and out of Toronto; and

"Whereas residents of western Mississauga need to `commute to commute,' driving along traffic-clogged roads to get to overflowing parking lots at the

Meadowvale, Streetsville and Erindale GO train stations;

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

"That the government of Ontario, through the Ministry of Transportation and highways, instruct GO Transit to allocate sufficient resources from its 2004-05

capital budget to proceed immediately with the acquisition of land and construction of a new GO train station, called Lisgar, at Tenth Line and the rail tracks, to alleviate the parking congestion,

and provide better access to GO train service on the Milton line for residents of western Mississauga."

As one of those residents, I'm pleased to affix my signature.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): A petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals by no means campaigned on raising the rates associated with the Ontario drug benefit program; and

"Whereas the majority of seniors, many of whom live on a fixed income, cannot meet the expense of higher costs for essential medication; and

"Whereas seniors in Simcoe-Grey and across Ontario should never have to make the choice between eating and filling a prescription;

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

"To cancel any plans to raise costs for prescription drugs for our seniors and to embark on making vital medication more affordable for all Ontarians."

I've signed that petition.

PRIMARY CARE

Mr Jeff Leal (Peterborough): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

physicians; and

"Whereas the community of Peterborough has demonstrated extraordinarily strong local leadership in developing a proposal for primary care reform, which is very

innovative and will provide access to primary care for a growing list of more than 20,000 residents in our community without a family physician; and

"Whereas this proposal has been endorsed by the county of Peterborough, the city of Peterborough, the Peterborough County Medical Society, the Peterborough

Community Access Centre, the Peterborough Regional Health Centre, and the Peterborough County-City Health Unit;

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

"To work with representatives of the local community to ensure that all residents of Peterborough have access to an appropriate primary care provider through

the timely implementation of the proposed integrated primary care model, as this model provides appropriate and equitable compensation for family physicians while incorporating sufficient

interdisciplinary health care providers, community linkages and appropriate administrative, infrastructure and information technology supports to enable health professionals to enjoy a more

realistic, healthy work-life balance."

I will sign this petition.

MOTORCYCLE INSURANCE

Ms Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas tens of thousands of responsible motorcyclists are being hit with huge increases in insurance or are being denied coverage because of the type of

vehicle they ride;

"Whereas the premiums for the mandatory insurance coverage for motorcyclists have increased on average over 40% in the past two years;

"Whereas many responsible riders can no longer afford to insure their motorcycles due to high insurance costs;

"Whereas sales of motorcycles in Ontario have dropped over 7% year-to-date this year, a figure attributed directly to the increase in insurance rates; and

"Whereas many businesses and individuals in the motorcycle industry are suffering due to the loss of sales and decreased employment high insurance rates are

causing;

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

"Please amend the insurance regulations to make motorcycle insurance more affordable and to ensure motorcyclists are treated fairly and equitably by insurance

companies, brokers and agents."

It's signed by many people from my riding.

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

Mr John Wilkinson (Perth-Middlesex): A petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Ontario enjoys the continuing benefit of the contributions of men and women who choose to leave their country of origin in order to settle in Canada,

raise their families, educate their children and pursue their livelihoods and careers; and

"Whereas newcomers to Canada who choose to settle in Ontario find frequent and unnecessary obstacles that prevent skilled tradespeople, professional and

managerial talent from practising their professions, trades and occupations for which they have been trained in their country of origin; and

"Whereas Ontario, its businesses, its people and its institutions badly need the professional, managerial and technical skills that many newcomers to Canada

have and want to use;

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

"That the government of Ontario, through the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities and the other institutions and agencies of and within the

government of Ontario, undertake specific and proactive measures to work with the bodies regulating access to Ontario's professions, trades and other occupations in order that newcomers to Canada

gain fair, timely and cost-effective access to certification and other measures that facilitate the entry or re-entry of skilled workers and professionals trained outside Canada into the Canadian

workforce."

I proudly affix my signature.

OPTOMETRISTS

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

"Whereas the last funding agreement between the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and the Ontario Association of Optometrists expired March 31, 2000;

and

"Whereas the optometric fees for OHIP-insured services remain unchanged since 1989; and

"Whereas the lack of any fee increase for 15 years has created a crisis situation for optometrists; and

"Whereas fees for OHIP services do not provide for fair or reasonable compensation for the professional services of optometrists in that they no longer cover

the costs of providing eye examinations; and

"Whereas it is in the best interests of patients and the government to have a new funding agreement for insured services that will ensure the most vulnerable

members of society are able to receive the eye care they need;

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

"That the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care resume negotiations immediately with the OAO and appoint a mediator to help with the negotiation process in

order to ensure that optometrists can continue to provide quality eye care services to patients in Ontario."

I affix my name in agreement.

ONTARIO BUDGET

Ms Laurel C. Broten (Etobicoke-Lakeshore): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the parliamentary tradition in Ontario of presenting annual budgets in the House of the Legislative Assembly has existed for decades; and

"Whereas the previous government in 2003 showed disrespect for our public institutions and the people of Ontario by presenting a budget inside a private,

for-profit auto parts factory; and

"Whereas the previous Speaker of the Legislative Assembly condemned the actions of his own party's government;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to uphold parliamentary tradition and hold a public presentation and debate of the 2004

budget, and every budget thereafter, by our publicly elected members of Parliament inside the legislative chamber."

I agree with the petition and I am signing my name to it.

TTC RIGHT-OF-WAY

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition that will affect every resident who lives near the St Clair Avenue area in Toronto.

"To the Parliament of Ontario and Minister of the Environment:

"Against a dedicated TTC right-of-way on St Clair Avenue West;

"Whereas an environmental assessment is underway on St Clair Avenue West to study potential transit improvements, including the possibility of installing a

dedicated TTC right-of-way;

"Whereas the consultation process so far has been in bad faith, top-down and rushed, which has disappointed and angered the local community almost entirely,

and not been up to any acceptable public standards;

"Whereas comments by the chair and the members of the Toronto Transit Commission have made it clear that there is a predetermined outcome to the environmental

assessment process, regardless of the objections of the local community;

"Whereas a dedicated right-of-way would force significantly more traffic on to our local streets;

"Whereas safety must be a high priority for any alternative selected and, according to the ambulance and fire department staff, they don't like to work with

rights-of-way;

"Whereas a right-of-way would lead to the reduction or elimination of on-street parking on St Clair Avenue West;

"Whereas the right-of-way will have substantial negative economic effects on local businesses;

"Whereas there is no guarantee that a dedicated right-of-way will improve transit service substantially, as the number of streetcars serving the street will

actually be reduced;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, strongly urge the Minister of the Environment to order a full environmental assessment on St Clair Avenue West, one that

genuinely consults and takes into consideration the views and opinions of the local community."

Since I agree, I affix my signature to this petition.

TAXATION

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas every day, 1.5 million Ontarians, including seniors, health care workers and students, purchase a basic meal that costs less than $4; and

"Whereas a new 8% tax on such meals will disadvantage low-income Ontarians; and

"Whereas adding a tax for the first time on a glass of milk, a salad, a bowl of soup or a cup of coffee will affect a total of 1.5 million Ontarians each and

every day in restaurants and cafeterias across the province;

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

"Do not impose a new 8% tax on basic meals under $4."

I agree with that petition, and I have signed it.

ONTARIO BUDGET

Mr Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads as

follows:

"Whereas the parliamentary tradition in Ontario of presenting annual budgets in the House of the Legislative Assembly has existed for decades; and

"Whereas the previous government in 2003 showed disrespect for our public institutions and the people of Ontario by presenting a budget inside a private,

for-profit auto parts factory; and

"Whereas the previous Speaker of the Legislative Assembly condemned the actions of his own party's government;

"We, the undersigned ... petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to uphold parliamentary tradition and hold a public presentation and debate of the 2004

budget, and every budget thereafter, by our publicly elected members of Parliament inside the legislative chamber."

I agree with the petition, and I affix my signature to it.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

GOVERNMENT

ADVERTISING ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR

LA PUBLICITÉ GOUVERNEMENTALE

Resuming the debate adjourned on May 6, 2004, on the motion for second reading of Bill 25,

An Act respecting government advertising / Projet de loi 25,

Loi concernant la publicité gouvernementale.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): The member from Oshawa has the floor.

Mr Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I'll continue where I left off. As mentioned before, I'm sharing my time with the

member for Haliburton-Victoria-Brock.

When we were discussing this last Thursday, I spoke about the difficulties of bringing a writer in from the United States and the impact it would have, and the

fact that it takes about three years for that impact to be seen within our community. In this particular bill, the concern I was expressing at the time was turning over authority to the deputy

minister. If that individual doesn't believe it's warranted or can be of assistance, then it may not be of benefit.

I also wanted to mention one of the aspects under subsection 6(1)1, where it specifically states the standards that an item is required to meet: "To inform the

public of current or proposed government policies...." I have some concern under that

section that essentially it doesn't change what's taking place. Later, it goes on to talk about: "To promote

Ontario or any part of Ontario as a good place to live, work, invest, study or visit." How does that affect or change what's taking place?

Mind you, I will admit that in accordance with what they've said in subsection 6(1)3, on promoting a positive image, where it talks about the "voice or image

of a member of the executive council or a member of the assembly" not being shown in any of that. When I had the privilege and honour to work as a minister, I very much remembered when I was in my

youth and how that ministry stood out in my mind, and what took place in time and how I used to receive those fishing regulations every year. The minister's message used to be in there and I looked

forward to that every year as a young kid. I thought, "Someday, that would be a nice thing to do." I don't recall who it was, but I do recall Lyn McLeod's comments in there later, or Vince Kerrio's

and a number of other people, and what they had to say about their ministry and how they intended to move forward and the things they wanted to do.

I was somewhat concerned or felt it was lacking within the new regulations, whether it was the parks guides or the fishing guides or the hunting guides, when

they came out, that there was no direction or understanding put forward. I kind of felt that, as a minister, you have a certain pride within your ministry, and you take that pride, no matter which

party you represent, and try to represent the best interests of all people. Yes, we have different opinions on how to move forward, but that was an opportunity for those ministers to say what they

wanted to do, and it's now lacking in that aspect.

Also, I spoke about the positive impact. What was taking place was that advertising was being allowed outside the province of Ontario. The difficulty with that

is, what happens if the ads show up back in Ontario? If you're trying to promote Ontario and the great things that we have to offer here -- and the people -- but what happens when you get into the

CRTC regulations, when the ads all of a sudden, on a Buffalo station, show up being advertised in Ontario? Those are some of the ways that you could kind of work on that.

I know that my colleague the member from Haliburton-Victoria-Brock is anxiously waiting, so I will turn the floor over to her.

Ms Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): I'd like to thank my colleague from Oshawa for his comments on the bill. I'm happy to have the

opportunity to speak to Bill 25 and join the debate on that, the Government Advertising Act, 2003. I am a new member of the Legislature, so I hope I can add some productive comments on the

observations that I've seen since I've been here, and before.

The government's motive for introducing the legislation is perceived indiscretions of the past government with regard to government advertising. Many people

and organizations have waded into this debate over the course of the past number of years as to what is perceived to be partisan and what is not. Far be it from me to take this House's time in

reviewing all the many and varied advertising products that we've all seen before I was elected and since I've been elected, but this is a mutual concern.

As an example, I don't think anyone in the House would be critical of the past government when it spent taxpayers' money on advertising for precautions: the

West Nile virus, the flu shots, anti-smoking campaigns, or the Telehealth advertisements, which were certainly needed to be public out there and to inform people of these various topics. Everyone

in this House, and indeed all of the constituents, don't object to this past form of advertising. I don't think they would object today or in the future, because that form of government advertising

is certainly acceptable and needed.

The truth of the matter is that the vast majority of the monies spent by the past government were spent on public information campaigns about the many

different issues of the day. The past government received very few complaints from the public about the partisan nature of the advertisements. It often seemed that the only complaints registered

were from the members of the opposition or from their supporters.

The current government, upon taking office, has also made some changes to make government publications reflect, for example, their political party colours on

many of their publications, including on their own government's letterhead. We've all heard in the House, from a number of speakers, about the changing of the government job publication Topical. As

we know the story, the masthead of the publication was changed to Liberal red. Then the publication was subsequently changed back to a different colour -- to green.

It does show that everyone, all ministers, have to be cautious and vigilant when it comes to making sure their publications are not seen to be too partisan.

Topical is news and information about the Ontario public service. It's published by the Management Board Secretariat, Minister Phillips. I would like you to see the recent issue of Topical that

featured the heading, "Government Leads by Example to Reduce Energy Consumption." It also showed a nice picture of the Management Board Chair, Gerry Phillips, on the cover.

Does this satisfy the standards that are set out in the legislation? We must lead by example, but I don't believe that the publication has met the standards,

in at least two ways. The legislation sets out, "It must not include the name, voice or image of a member of the executive council or a member of the assembly." It further sets out that, "It must

not be partisan." Obviously it fails that, because we have a picture of the Chair of Management Board. Right there, we seem to have an example of where the publication would fail to satisfy that

standard.

I don't know how to assess what "partisan" is or how it's going to be defined in the legislation. It's going to be subjective, and I guess the auditor or

someone else is going to be making those calls. There's certainly going to have to be a balancing act involved in what is called "partisan" and what is not. Maybe the guidelines should be: Does it

promote government policies, or is it in the public interest? So it's going to be up to the auditor to make that decision, when and if the legislation is passed.

When you're putting a picture of a member of the executive council when the primary objective of the item is to foster a positive impression of the governing

party, and you know that this item is paid for by the government, certainly that has to be covered by this legislation. I hope this type of practice is going to stop once this legislation is

passed.

The statute deals with the partisan political interests of the governing party, whether it's advertising, printed material or messaging. It does not deal with

specific advertising that attacks the opposition. That is something that certainly should be covered under any amendments.

The government is already advertising in local community newspapers, trumpeting the new water regulations, which have been discussed many times in this

Legislature. Under the past government, these ads would have been seen as partisan, because they are touting what a great job the government thinks it's doing on water regulations and the

environment. Those of us in the Legislature who represent rural ridings can attest that the jury is still out on whether or not these water regulations, as they are currently enforced, are indeed

something this government should be trumpeting. I'm hopeful that soon, as the minister explained today, there will be changes to the drinking water standards in our community halls, our churches

and our municipalities that are reasonable.

I know in the past there was the issue of the highway signs that were put up during the last government's term. These signs, I will say, as has also been said

before, were not put up for partisan reasons. They were put up because most Ontarians were not aware the federal government gave no financial support to the province of Ontario for road

construction. I hope that changes, and that the federal government does become involved in some road construction improvements that are much needed. I hope they can persuade their federal cousins

to become involved in that. They were put up to inform the taxpayer as to which level of government actually put money into the construction and repair of our province's roads.

The current government has several ministry publications going out already with the pi