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

May 19, 2011

39th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2011-May-19 (PDF)

L124 - Thu 19 May 2011 / Jeu 19 mai 2011

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 19 May 2011 Jeudi 19 mai 2011

LEGISLATIVE INTERNS

NOTICE OF REASONED AMENDMENT

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TAXATION

TIME ALLOCATION

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

ENERGY POLICIES

ENERGY POLICIES

GOVERNMENT’S RECORD

GOVERNMENT’S RECORD

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

CORONER’S INQUEST

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

TUITION

ELECTORAL REFORM

HOSPITAL FUNDING

INSURANCE RATES

CONSUMER PROTECTION

EDUCATION FUNDING

ACCESS TO PUBLIC LANDS

ABORIGINAL CHILDREN AND YOUTH

DEFERRED VOTES

TAXATION

TIME ALLOCATION

MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

MOOSE TAGS

AGAPE CENTRE

JOE HUDSON

HEALTH CARE

PERSONAL SUPPORT WORKERS

ROTARY CLUB OF COURTICE

SINGING CONTEST

YAD VASHEM

YAD VASHEM

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

DRIVERS OVER THE AGE OF 80

IDENTIFICATION ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 EXIGEANT

UN MOYEN D’IDENTIFICATION

POUR LES CONDUCTEURS ÂGÉS

DE PLUS DE 80 ANS

PROVINCIAL OFFENCES STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT (JURY TRIALS), 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE

LES INFRACTIONS PROVINCIALES

(PROCÈS DEVANT JURY)

PROVINCIAL OFFENCES

AMENDMENT ACT

(SENTENCING AND APPEALS), 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES INFRACTIONS PROVINCIALES

(PRONONCÉ DE LA SENTENCE

ET APPELS)

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ PUBLIC BUSINESS

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ PUBLIC BUSINESS

PETITIONS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

REPLACEMENT WORKERS

PARAMEDICS

MATTHEWS HOUSE HOSPICE

TAXATION

DOG OWNERSHIP

RURAL SCHOOLS

PRIVATE MEMBERS’

PUBLIC BUSINESS

MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS AMENDMENT

ACT (COMMENCEMENT OF TERM

OF OFFICES DATE), 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES ÉLECTIONS MUNICIPALES

(DATE DE COMMENCEMENT

DES MANDATS)

BANNING COLLUSION IN

ELECTORAL ADVERTISING ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 INTERDISANT

LA COLLUSION DANS LE CADRE

DE LA PUBLICITÉ ÉLECTORALE

BRITISH HOME CHILD DAY ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 SUR LE JOUR DES PETITS

IMMIGRÉS BRITANNIQUES

MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS AMENDMENT ACT (COMMENCEMENT OF TERM

OF OFFICES DATE), 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES ÉLECTIONS MUNICIPALES

(DATE DE COMMENCEMENT

DES MANDATS)

BANNING COLLUSION IN

ELECTORAL ADVERTISING ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 INTERDISANT

LA COLLUSION DANS LE CADRE

DE LA PUBLICITÉ ÉLECTORALE

BRITISH HOME CHILD DAY ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 SUR LE JOUR DES PETITS

IMMIGRÉS BRITANNIQUES

BRITISH HOME CHILD DAY ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 SUR LE JOUR DES PETITS

IMMIGRÉS BRITANNIQUES

BANNING COLLUSION IN

ELECTORAL ADVERTISING ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 INTERDISANT

LA COLLUSION DANS LE CADRE

DE LA PUBLICITÉ ÉLECTORALE

BRITISH HOME CHILD DAY ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 SUR LE JOUR DES PETITS

IMMIGRÉS BRITANNIQUES

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Good morning. Please remain standing for the Lord’s Prayer, followed by a moment of silence for inner thought and personal reflection.

Prayers.

LEGISLATIVE INTERNS

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I’d like to explain to the members that this morning, I am not Mr. Speaker; I am Mr. Sneaker. I am wearing a pair of purple Chuck Taylor Converse All Stars. As many of you know, I collect the shoes, and as the honourable member from Welland knows, there’s nothing clear in the standing orders as far as apparel requirements within the chamber, so I took the advantage to wear these purple sneakers today.

But I want to thank the OLIP interns. These were a gift to me from the interns. They named me an honorary intern. The interns and their advisers are sitting in the Speaker’s gallery today, and I just want to thank you for the great work that you have done in support of members on all sides of the House. I hope you’ve had an enjoyable time while you’ve been here.

On behalf of all the staff and all the members here at the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, we just want to wish you all the best in your future endeavours and thank you for the great work that you’ve done for us.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): If you’d just hold tight while I sit down, perhaps the camera will get a good shot for the record. I know it’s not good, but I’ll cross my legs and I can show off the wonderful little badge that the interns gave me. Wonderful red—I mean purple. They’re actually gothic purple Converse, so thank you very much.

Now, to the business of the day.

NOTICE OF REASONED AMENDMENT

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I beg to inform the House that the member for Wellington–Halton Hills has filed notice of a reasoned amendment to the motion for second reading of Bill 196,

An Act to amend the Election Act with respect to certain electoral practices. The order for second reading of Bill 196 may therefore not be called today.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TAXATION

Resuming the debate adjourned on May 16, 2011, on the amendment to the amendment to the motion by Ms. Smith on Ontario’s tax plan for jobs and growth.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Pursuant to the order of the House dated May 18, I’m now required to put the question.

On May 16, Ms. Smith moved that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario recognizes that to make life easier for Ontario families and help our economy remain strong, Ontario’s tax plan for jobs and growth, as reaffirmed in the 2011 budget, removes 90,000 Ontarians from the income tax rolls, provides 93% of Ontarians with a permanent personal income tax cut, maintains the harmonized sales tax at the current rate and provides $12 billion in tax relief for families and $4.8 billion in tax relief for businesses; and

Recognizes that with Ontario’s tax plan for jobs and growth, the economy is turning the corner by creating more than 293,000 new jobs since the global recession; and

Rejects the introduction of a carbon tax as a measure that would hurt Ontario’s economic growth; and

Rejects an increase to the HST rate or a decrease to the rate that would benefit the wealthiest Ontarians the most, take $3 billion out of health care and education funding and harm Ontario’s economic recovery.

Mr. Yakabuski then moved that the motion be amended as follows: by deleting all the words after “strong” in the first paragraph; deleting the second paragraph; substituting the word “it” for “and” at the beginning of the third paragraph; and deleting the words after “HST rate” in the last paragraph.

Mr. Chudleigh then moved that the amendment to the motion be amended as follows: by adding the following “or more hidden fees, or a revival of eco taxes planned by the McGuinty Liberals.”

The first question to be decided is Mr. Chudleigh’s amendment to the amendment. Is it the pleasure of the House that the amendment to the amendment carry?

All those in favour will say “aye.”

All opposed will say “nay.”

In my opinion, the nays have it.

This vote will be deferred until after question period.

Vote deferred.

TIME ALLOCATION

Hon. Gerry Phillips: I move that, pursuant to standing order 47 and notwithstanding any other standing order or special order of the House relating to Bill 179,

An Act to amend the Child and Family Services Act respecting adoption and the provision of care and maintenance, the Standing Committee on Social Policy be authorized to meet at 4 p.m. on Tuesday, May 31, 2011, for the purpose of clause-by-clause consideration of the bill; and

That the deadline for filing amendments to the bill with the clerk of the committee shall be 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 31, 2011. On Tuesday, May 31, 2011, at no later than 5 p.m., those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved, and the Chair of the committee shall interrupt the proceedings and shall, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto.

Any division required shall be deferred until all remaining questions have been put and taken in succession, with one 20-minute waiting period allowed pursuant to standing order 129(a). The committee shall be authorized to meet beyond the normal hour of adjournment for clause-by-clause consideration on Tuesday, May 31, 2011; and

That the committee shall report the bill to the House no later than Wednesday, June 1, 2011. In the event that the committee fails to report the bill on that day, the bill shall be deemed to be passed by the committee and shall be deemed to be reported to and received by the House; and

That, upon receiving the report of the Standing Committee on Social Policy, the Speaker shall put the question for adoption of the report forthwith, and at such time the bill shall be ordered for third reading, which order may be called that same day; and

That, when the order for third reading of the bill is called, one hour shall be allotted to the third reading stage of the bill, apportioned equally among the recognized parties. At the end of this time, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings and shall put every question necessary to dispose of this stage of the bill without further debate or amendment; and

That, except in the case of a recorded division arising from morning orders of the day, pursuant to standing order 9(c), no deferral of the third reading vote shall be permitted; and

That, in the case of any division relating to any proceedings on the bill, the division bell shall be limited to five minutes.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Debate?

Ms. Sylvia Jones: I’m pleased to rise to speak to this time allocation motion. For me, this time allocation motion is all about lack of planning. We have had lots of opportunity to raise the issue of Bill 179. The government chose to take seven and a half years, quite frankly, to bring forward any kind of substantive amendments relating to adoption, and what we’re seeing this morning as we discuss this time allocation motion is in fact a lack of planning, a lack of forward momentum, on behalf of the Liberal government.

Bill 179 was introduced in the Ontario Legislature within the last month. We actually had a debate when we were discussing public hearings and public consultation because, as I’m sure you know, many members—all MPPs—have been receiving letters asking—pleading with us—to take a very close look at what Bill 179 is proposing and ensure that the public has the right to hear and offer input.

While we were discussing when public input could take place, the initial proposal from the government was a mere two hours of public debate, which, as you know, ends up being fewer than 12 people in all of Ontario having the opportunity to share their thoughts, concerns and, quite frankly, praise for Bill 179.

We were successful in getting an additional day of public hearings, which we have now held. We have scheduled Bill 179 for clause-by-clause on Monday in social policy committee, which is actually four hours of debate and discussion. I don’t think that bills on adoption—I don’t think any new legislation—should be rushed through, but particularly when you’re dealing with families, when you’re dealing with children that we’re trying to place in care in the most appropriate way.

What we’re seeing today with this time allocation motion is an attempt by a government that really didn’t plan ahead. They could have brought forward Bill 179 or an amendment to it a number of months ago. The report that we’re basing a lot of the Bill 179 changes on has actually been tabled for over a year, so there’s quite frankly no excuse.

I find it a little hard to take that we’ve spent this much time waiting for some substantive changes on adoption and instead what we are seeing is an attempt by the Liberal government to rush through very serious changes to how we will view adoption, how we will view crown wards and, moving forward, how we will allow children who are currently crown wards in our various children’s aid societies to be placed with adoptive families. It’s discouraging. It’s unfortunate that we have come down to the last five sessional days and we are forced to discuss time allocation motions instead of actually discussing the true issue, which should be how we can improve the current adoption system.

As members will know, the vast majority of children who are currently crown wards within our various children’s aid societies do not have the ability or the option available to them to be available for adoption to find forever families. That’s what we’re trying to bring forward and discuss with Bill 179. How unfortunate that the government has waited so long into their legislative mandate to bring forward any kind of changes.

I do not want to mislead the public to assume that these are substantive changes. There are some positive changes coming forward with Bill 179. I think that if you review the second reading debates from the Progressive Conservative caucus as well as from the NDP caucus—although I certainly wouldn’t want to speak for my NDP colleagues—we have generally spoken in support of the changes coming forward with 179. For the government to think they must ram through a time allocation motion is an unfortunate way to deal with a piece of legislation that all three parties would like to see move forward in Ontario, and move forward this spring.

What I really would like to have seen is the ability for Bill 179 to be introduced earlier in the session, and to have further input and allow people to actually see what the changes are, discuss with their children’s aid societies, discuss with their constituents and families within their individual ridings what the changes will mean. There aren’t any of us in this chamber who wouldn’t have an ability to speak to or find someone who is either adopted or attempting to go through the current adoption process or, of course, ultimately, the children’s aid society, which plays such a critical role in placement and encouraging families to adopt.

For the government to talk about a time allocation motion instead of actually giving the social policy committee the time to continue to work collaboratively—as I say, all of our second reading debates, you will find, have spoken generally in positive terms about Bill 179. For this time allocation motion to come forward, it really ends up throwing down the gauntlet a bit, quite frankly. We were working together. We were finding times that were appropriate. As I say, we had four hours of clause-by-clause scheduled for the next potential sitting of the social policy committee on Monday the 31st.

I think it’s really unfortunate that we’ve now been bullied into a time allocation motion. I don’t think we’ll need it, quite frankly. I don’t think we did need it. It puts a different view on how, collectively, the members within the social policy committee and within this chamber could work together for the benefit of crown wards and families looking to adopt in Ontario.

I’ll leave it at that. I think there are better ways that we could approach these issues. A time allocation motion on a bill that we were working together on is a really unfortunate way to end what could have been a very positive story about improving adoption in Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): Further debate?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I confess that I find this time allocation motion puzzling. As far as I can tell from talking to my colleagues, debate was proceeding in a straightforward way. People had their opinions, weren’t trying to talk this bill out, weren’t trying to run the clock, and were grappling with very substantial issues; issues that, as everyone in this chamber is aware, have been left essentially to the last hour of an eight-year run by this government; issues that could have been debated earlier in this term.

We find it very strange that a bill that is of great consequence to so many children and so many families has essentially been brought in at the last minute. Now, instead of having a debate—not a held-up debate, not a debate that is going to be strangled—that allows everyone in the House to have the say that is necessary, to give the stakeholders an opportunity to comment, it’s being pushed through at an extraordinary rate, time-allocated.

I have to say to you, you’re well aware that night sittings were scheduled and then cancelled. It wasn’t as though we were running out of time. We are coming to the end of the session, but there was time set in the House for debate that has not been used. We look at this time allocation motion and we ask ourselves why on earth this government is acting in this way. Has it become more erratic in its planning? Is there an agenda that we’re not aware of? We find it not a very productive way of running the business of this House.

Given that this motion will probably pass, given that the government has a majority, it’s my hope that in the short time that will be allocated the substantial issues will get the airing they need; that there will be some debate to actually illuminate all the consequences of the bill before us. But I have to say to the government: You could have done a lot better with this. I think you misread the House. And if you didn’t misread the House, then you’re acting in a way that is very, very strange.

There’s not a lot more to add on this, but I will say this: If the government wants to build up a record of time allocation and cutting off debate, then, with this motion, it has just continued to build on that record.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): Further debate?

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer: I certainly want to echo the comments made by the two previous speakers, particularly my colleague from Dufferin–Caledon. I think we were all very shocked to learn that Bill 179, the Building Families and Supporting Youth to be Successful Act, was going to be time-allocated. It is a very heavy-handed approach to a bill that was receiving the support of the opposition parties.

Despite the fact that the bill certainly didn’t go as far as it should have, it was at least a start in the right direction. The government has had almost eight years to address the issue of adoption. Unfortunately, I think they have not given this whole issue of adoption the attention that it deserves. They received recommendations from the Honourable David Johnston in his report in 2009. There were certainly many other recommendations that had been brought to their attention regarding the need to facilitate adoption, and they have ignored it until the very end of their term.

Instead of giving us the opportunity to thoughtfully put forward amendments to the bill, give the time needed to debate those amendments, come back into this House and debate the issues that were brought to our attention during the committee hearings, we’re now going to be forced into a position where the bill is rushed through.

That’s very disappointing, because many people came before the committee. We have received many, many written submissions from individuals who, although they support the bill, have brought to our attention glaring omissions and actions that are occurring now in regard to adoption that need to be improved upon.

Unfortunately, we’re not giving any of those submissions the due diligence they deserve. It is disappointing, when we were all moving forward and the bill was going to be passed. I don’t think anybody was prepared to stand in the way of the bill moving forward. It could have been passed before the House supposedly adjourned on the second of June.

We’re now in a position where we’re really saying to people, “Your thoughts and your concerns don’t really matter. We’re going to bulldoze through at this point in time. We’re not going to thoughtfully consider all of your amendments. We’re not going to have a thoughtful debate. There’s going to be a limited amount of time available.”

I would say to you, adoption is a very important issue. This bill makes some steps forward to support both the children, who obviously need caring homes, and the families who can provide those homes.

I also think what happened when this bill was introduced is that we soon became aware of the need to do so much more for the children who are placed in homes—the follow-up, the financial support. Many children are going to be prevented from being placed in homes simply because families can’t afford the care that’s going to be needed if these children have special needs.

As I say, it is regrettable that we can’t air and put on the table all of the concerns that have been brought to our attention. We were certainly committed to moving the bill forward, and it’s disappointing that the government rushed the bill through, introduced it at the last minute and now is not going to give the opportunity for thoughtful debate and thoughtful discussion.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): Further debate?

Seeing none, Mr. Phillips has moved government notice of motion number 78. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour, please say “aye.”

All those opposed, please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

This vote will be deferred until deferred votes, after question period.

Vote deferred.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): Orders of the day.

Hon. Gerry Phillips: Mr. Speaker, no further business.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): There being no further business, this House stands in recess until 10:30 a.m., at which time we will have question period.

The House recessed from 0925 to 1030.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Mr. Jim Wilson: It’s my pleasure to introduce Gary and Maggie Perry, who bid on a lunch and tour with their MPP in support of the Gibson Centre in Alliston. Welcome to Queen’s Park and condolences at the same time.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I would ask the House to welcome my daughter, Jesse Cowparthwaite; her partner, Stan Welsey; and their darling child, Olivia Jane Wesley, who is also my first grandchild.

Mr. Mike Colle: I also have with me a family that won a prize of lunch with their MPP today. They’re from Allenby school, one of Canada’s finest grade schools, and they’re the Abbey family. I’d like to welcome Nancy Abbey; her husband, Mitch; their daughter, Megan; and their son, Jonathan. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Rosario Marchese: I would like to introduce the parents of Jonah Villanueva Merali, who are here to my left. The parents are Isfahan Merali, the mother; and Sergio Villanueva. I want to congratulate these parents for having raised a wonderful young man who speaks Spanish very well. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Harinder S. Takhar: I would like to welcome to the Legislature 90 grade 5 students from Edenrose Public School along with their teacher and volunteers from my riding of Mississauga–Erindale. I’m sure they’re going to enjoy question period today.

Mr. Ernie Hardeman: I don’t believe they are in the House yet, but—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): They’re in the Speaker’s gallery.

Mr. Ernie Hardeman: Oh, they’re in the Speaker’s gallery. We have a group here from Oxford Reformed Christian School from the great riding of Oxford county. We want to welcome them here today. I didn’t realize they were here yet, but I knew they were coming. We want to welcome them to Queen’s Park.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I want to welcome the school as well, but particularly a good friend of mine, the teacher, Jake Van Meppelen-Scheppink, who’s here with them as well. Welcome.

Mr. Paul Miller: I’d like to welcome Mr. Hayter and grade 5, Mountain View Public School, to the Legislature. They’re up in the gallery.

Mr. Yasir Naqvi: Today is personal support workers’ day at Queen’s Park. There are a lot of PSWs who are visiting, so I welcome them to Queen’s Park. Right after question period there’s a reception in committee room 1. I welcome all members to please attend.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Page Erica Geen is here today from Marchmont Public School, and her family is visiting us. Today, she is the page captain. In attendance we have her father, Andrew Geen; her mom, Claudia Swoboda; Emily Geen, her sister; Stewart Geen, her grandfather; Donna Geen, her grandmother; Jonathan Geen, her uncle; George Swoboda, her uncle; and Sandra Swoboda, her aunt.

Mr. Ted McMeekin: We have several students from McMaster University, my old alma mater, with us this morning, and all have been engaged at one point or another in my post-secondary advisory committee in the riding. Huzaifa Saeed is here; welcome. Alicia Ali is here as well. Alicia, welcome. Matthew Dillon-Leitch is here; welcome, Matthew. Katie Ferguson is here, and, I understand, Duncan Thompson and Michael Wooder. Thank you very much for being with us today. Welcome.

Hon. John Milloy: I’d like to welcome Emily Hartman, an intern in my office, who is in the gallery today to watch question period.

Mr. Lou Rinaldi: I, too, would like to welcome a couple of folks here at Queen’s Park to have lunch with me today: Kate Mackinnon and Ben Normand.

Mr. Tony Ruprecht: I have the real pleasure to introduce some very distinguished guests and visitors who are showcasing the great musical talents of young Canadians. They are Mr. Srini Iyengar, director of multicultural markets for the Bank of Montreal; Mr. Durval Terceira, business manager of LIUNA Local 183 labourers’ union; Franco LaMagna and Zack Werner, iSTARS artist development, Musical Performing Arts Centre; Alan Ko, from OMNI television; Mr. João Vicente, from the OMNI diversity programming department; and Mr. John Santos, the founder and musical director of the national singing contest.

Since they are celebrating their fifth anniversary today, I’d like to invite all the members to the festivities in room 163 at 11:30, right after question period.

ORAL QUESTIONS

ENERGY POLICIES

Mrs. Christine Elliott: My question is for the Minister of Energy. For eight years, Premier McGuinty has taken billions of dollars from Ontario families and thrown it away on expensive energy experiments. Rates have skyrocketed. Seniors and parents try to avoid a 150% rate hike for mandatory time of use by getting up early to shower and staying up late to do the laundry. He has turned a temporary debt retirement charge into a permanent tax grab. Adding insult to injury, he slaps the greedy HST tax grab on top of all of it.

Ontario PCs think that’s wrong, which is why our leader announced that an Ontario PC government will give families relief by taking the HST off residential hydro and home heating bills and removing the so-called debt retirement charge from their hydro bills. Minister, why won’t you?

Hon. Brad Duguid: For the second week in a row, the Leader of the Opposition has made another huge rookie mistake. Let me get this straight: You want to replace the clean energy benefit that’s taking 10% off people’s bills with a scheme that’s going to take 8% off people’s bills? That’s going to cost Ontario families 2% more.

Then you want to take the $350 million a year that’s being put on to the hydro debt that you created when you were in power and add that to the provincial deficit. How is that credible? How does that help Ontario families?

Then on top of that, you want to put thousands of Ontario workers out of work. You want to tear down our clean energy economy. You want to damage our international reputation.

This is a desperate Leader of the Opposition resorting to desperate promises that Ontario families are going to see right—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mrs. Christine Elliott: The fact is that Premier McGuinty has simply forgotten what it’s like to have to worry about paying the bills. After eight years in power, he’s simply too tired and too out of touch with families and seniors who are struggling to keep up.

The Ontario PC caucus has been listening to people in our communities who are feeling squeezed, which is why our plan to take the HST off residential hydro and home heating bills and to remove the so-called debt retirement charge from hydro bills provides people with—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Stop the clock. The Minister of Research and Innovation will withdraw the comment that he just made.

Hon. Glen R. Murray: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Please continue.

Mrs. Christine Elliott: Our plan will provide Ontario families with $275 in immediate relief. Why doesn’t Premier McGuinty listen to Ontario families and seniors who say they can’t afford his tax increases and skyrocketing hydro bills?

Hon. Brad Duguid: I think the Minister of Finance has a thing or two to say about that, so I’m going to refer that to him.

Hon. Dwight Duncan: This is a reckless plan, and it is completely false that Ontario families will save $275. That party lacks credibility. They bring in the debt retirement charge; now they’re going to take it off. They’re going to eliminate the 10% Ontario clean energy benefit. They’re going to eliminate the northern Ontario energy credit.

Let me tell you what else they’re going to have to do: They’re going to have to close hospitals and close schools. It was 16 years ago today that the former leader of that party looked at the camera and said, “It is not my plan to close hospitals.” They closed hospitals. They closed schools.

This is a reckless plan that lacks credibility—no numbers. I’ll be filling in the blanks on all of that as we engage this debate. Ontarians will reject your—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Members will please come to order.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Member for Peterborough.

Final supplementary.

Mrs. Christine Elliott: Despite the Minister of Finance’s bluster, the $275 that an Ontario PC government would provide to Ontario families has been costed, is realistic and can be done. All told, an Ontario PC government would give a 23% break to seniors and families on their hydro bills and we will give Ontario families a choice on how to save money by pulling the plug on mandatory time of use.

We are giving families and seniors a clear choice this October: another government led by Premier McGuinty who will increase their taxes and hike their hydro bills even more, or an Ontario PC government that respects them and gives them relief from tax increases and skyrocketing hydro bills.

How can you justify asking Ontario families and seniors to pay more?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: This reckless plan will cost jobs, raise the deficit, raise the debt, and they refuse to say what hospitals they will close.

Let me fill in some of the blanks. They are proposing $1.3 billion in cuts and they’ve proposed no new revenue. We know what that means: That means that nurses will be laid off. That means cuts to education. That means cuts to the environment. That means a reckless approach that lacks credibility.

We’ve laid out a plan that is lowering prices for consumers across Ontario, that’s building a new grid and that is building a better and safer supply of energy. Their plan is reckless, it lacks credibility and it will force the closure of hospitals and schools to accommodate their numbers that simply don’t add up. No credibility and—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

ENERGY POLICIES

Mr. Jim Wilson: To the energy minister: The Ontario PCs are offering Ontario families and seniors who struggle to pay their hydro bills some much-needed immediate relief. Premier McGuinty said just yesterday when we were talking about this that he’ll keep doing what he has been doing. Well, what has he been doing? He has been raising taxes and putting hydro bills through the roof. He’s so desperate for money that he’s still charging the debt retirement charge, even though the debt it goes to was paid off in 2010.

We know it’s true: He will keep doing what he has been doing because he says he will keep collecting the debt retirement charge until 2018, an extra six years. That’s $6.3 billion more out of the pockets of Ontario families.

Minister, why will you take billions from the pockets of Ontario families for a debt they’ve already paid?

Hon. Brad Duguid: To the Minister of Finance.

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Let me remind the member for Simcoe–Grey what he said in this House—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I’ve warned the member from Lanark previously about some of these comments, and I’m just going to ask that he withdraw the comment that he just made, please.

Mr. Randy Hillier: I withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you.

Minister?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Let me remind the member for Simcoe–Grey what he said with pride just two months ago: “I brought in the debt retirement charge”—the debt retirement charge—“when I was Minister of Energy.”

Let me tell you where he’s wrong: The debt is not paid off. I invite him to look at the financial statements of the province of Ontario. They did not pay it off. In fact, this scheme that they’ve put forward today reminds me of the scheme they put forward 10 years ago that closed—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Halton will withdraw the comment that he just made.

Mr. Ted Chudleigh: I withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Minister.

Hon. Dwight Duncan: They don’t want to hear the facts. Their plan will force the closure of schools and hospitals, raise the debt and raise the deficit. They’ll lengthen the period of time it takes to balance the budget. It is reckless. It’s irresponsible. It will lead to cuts in health care and education. We will fight them every step of the way—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary? The member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke.

Mr. John Yakabuski: They don’t like it when somebody decides to do the right thing.

The Ontario PC leader wants to give seniors and families relief; Premier McGuinty wants to give them a permanent tax grab. Budget 2011 shows that Ontario families have already paid $9.7 billion for a residual stranded debt that was $7.8 billion. The debt is paid off, but you’ve pocketed $2 billion more in debt retirement charges since it was paid off. The Premier won’t say what he has done with the money. He just says he’ll keep doing what he has been doing, collecting the debt retirement charge until 2018.

Ontario families and seniors need immediate relief from skyrocketing hydro bills. An Ontario PC government will give them just that. Why won’t you?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Let me refer the people of Ontario to the Auditor General’s 2010 annual report, where he speaks about the debt retirement charge and the stranded debt. It was introduced in 1999 by that party. Here’s what he said: “Initially, little progress was made in reducing the stranded debt.” However, over the last few years, it has been steadily decreasing. According to the Auditor General, the stranded debt is now $14.8 billion. We’ve reduced it $6 billion. They are not levelling—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Simcoe–Grey will withdraw the comment that he just made.

Mr. Jim Wilson: I withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Minister?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: This is referred to as the province’s stranded debt by the Auditor General. You’ve been caught out. You’re not levelling with the people of Ontario. You raised their bills. You raised their debt. You raised their deficit. You undermine the future stability of this province. Your plan is reckless, it’s irresponsible. We’ll fight you in the streets, every corner—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Stop the clock.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary.

Mr. John Yakabuski: I’ll tell you what undermines this province’s ability to trim the deficit: his secret OPSEU deals and bonuses for those people at eHealth who wasted a billion dollars.

Ontario families make sacrifices to pay up to $84 a year for debt retirement charges. The public record shows that the debt was paid off last year. They shouldn’t have to pay for the debt retirement charge any longer. That’s the residual stranded debt, Minister. But you’ve turned the DRC into a permanent tax grab. Financial statements of the independent commission responsible for hydro debt show they paid the debt. The Premier will keep doing what he’s doing until families and seniors have paid $16 billion for a $7.8-billion debt.

It is no wonder that Ontario families are looking for a change. An Ontario PC government is offering to give them permanent relief on their hydro bills. Why is Premier McGuinty only offering to give them a permanent new tax grab?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: At the time the debt retirement charge was brought in—I’d like to read a quote from Canada’s new foreign affairs minister, because he’s a very credible politician. At the time, in 1998, he said, “I think we’re looking at 10 to 17 years, depending on conditions,” to pay it off, and he was right. The Auditor General has verified that. You’ve ignored the Auditor General’s report. You refuse to look at facts.

This plan has no credibility. It will raise the deficit and debt. They will have to cut hospitals; they will have to cut education, Mr. Speaker. We will fight them at every street corner in Ontario. The people of Ontario will see through the rhetoric over there and listen to people like the Auditor General. They’ll do right; they’ll vote for a government that will build on our health care and our education, eliminate our deficit, and bring down the debt in a—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

GOVERNMENT’S RECORD

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is to the Acting Premier. Over the last two weeks, we’ve watched the Premier avoid serious questions about the state of his government after eight long years in office: meddling with freedom-of-information requests, public dollars ending up in the coffers of the Ontario Liberal Party, and a culture of entitlement from a government that has gotten way too comfortable after that eight years in office.

Maybe the Acting Premier can tell us: Does the Premier of Ontario really believe that there are no problems here and the McGuinty Liberal status quo is actually working?

In terms of political contributions, there are rules which we all follow, and I’m confident that those rules are strong rules and that, where there are challenges, errors can be corrected.

This government has a record of openness and accountability that is unparalleled in Ontario’s history. We will continue to build on that. We will continue to improve the public services that Ontarians rely on, and we’ll continue to offer a credible economic plan that will help build a better future for our children and grandchildren.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: These are issues that matter to families. While Liberal staff try to hide the facts about the unfair HST, and colleges and utilities spend scarce resources at Liberal fundraisers, Ontarians are paying the highest tuition in Canada, the highest electricity rates in Canada, and $800 a year in harmonized sales tax.

The public dollars we invest in schools and utilities don’t belong to the Liberal Party. The government of Ontario doesn’t belong to the Liberal Party. Why don’t the McGuinty Liberals get that?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: I think what Ontarians care about is health care. They care about the fact that we’ve introduced greater accountability in health care. We now measure a whole variety of services and wait times. According to outside independent observers, we are bringing those wait times down. That’s what accountability is all about.

I think Ontarians are concerned about accountability in their school system, and that’s why we’ve invested in the Education Quality and Accountability Office that helps parents and families understand how their kids are doing in school.

That’s why we’re making investments. That’s the kind of accountability people in Ontario are interested in. They’re not interested in false accusations and innuendo. They’re interested in better schools, better health care. This government and party have a plan to continue to build on a record of success in those areas.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: After eight long years of this government’s mandate, families are tired of a government that puts them last with an unfair sales tax that makes life less affordable, with closed emergency rooms and a growing wait-list for long-term care, and with the highest electricity prices and tuition fees anywhere in Canada. They are even more tired because they see that government putting themselves first, time and time again.

How can the government find time to meddle in freedom-of-information requests when they haven’t found the time to confront the challenges that families are facing?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Over a year ago, the NDP promised to post their expenses online. We just checked, and they’re not there. Shame on you.

Let me caution the leader of the third party: Those of us on this side of the House are ready to go. We’re implementing full-day learning, even though they stood against it. We are continuing to reduce wait times in our hospital emergency rooms, even though they don’t want to do that. We are prepared to help low-income Ontarians with the support of truly progressive Ontarians. That’s why I don’t understand why they voted against the child benefit. We on this side are prepared for the future. We’re building the future, we’ve laid out a plan to get there and we’re raring to go. The ideas we’re putting forward will build better schools and health care and a better future for our children.

Where are your ideas? Get out of this innuendo and—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

GOVERNMENT’S RECORD

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also to the Acting Premier. Families struggling to stay afloat want a little bit of help from their government, but their needs just don’t seem to be a priority. The government can’t find the time to give a straight answer on the HST, but they have plenty of time to stop freedom-of-information requests about it. The government can’t find the money to give families a break, but public money keeps turning up at Liberal fundraisers. When did this government’s priorities get so out of whack?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: We’ve laid out a plan, we’ve laid out 10 studies by independent economists, we’ve debated this across the province, and, by the way, we welcome the support and the acknowledgment by the Conservative Party of Ontario this morning that they’re going to keep the HST. That was really, really an important announcement that was lost on many people this morning. We welcome that.

And let me tell you: We are going to continue to implement full-day learning for our kids; we’re going to continue to innovate in health care to protect public health care in Ontario; we’re going to continue to build a better environment for our children and lay out a plan to get back to balance as we build those public services, as we improve them, because that’s what families want. I urge the leader of the third party to come clean on what you’re going to do with the HST. Forget the innuendo and talk about what people really want to talk about: their schools and their hospitals and their health care system.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I’m listening to what people are saying, and here’s what people are telling us. Nick and Judy Caruso in the Soo write, “Every time we see a little daylight, we seem to face another hike in our day-to-day expenses—groceries, heating, gasoline, taxes etc. Help us to enjoy our senior years without worry.” That’s their plea.

Can the Acting Premier tell us how it is that the McGuinty Liberals can find money for everything from corporate tax giveaways to eHealth bonuses, but Nick and Judy can’t manage to scratch a break from this government?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: When we found money for the Ontario clean energy benefit to lower rates by 10%, that member and her party voted against it. They said we should only have given 8%. When we created the Ontario child benefit to lower taxes for Ontario’s most vulnerable and to help families with their children, that member and her party voted against it. When we created the northern energy credit for homeowners and businesses in the north, that member and her party didn’t support it.

What she won’t tell Ontarians is what she is going to do about the HST. We know that, like the Conservatives, she will keep it. That was a great announcement this morning, I must say. Judging by the looks on their faces, they are a little bit surprised by that.

This government has a plan. This party will take it to the people in October, and the people will vote for better schools and better health care, and reject the reckless plan of the Leader of the Opposition.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Margaret Leishman in Mississauga writes, “My husband and I are struggling to pay the high cost of heating and electricity bills with the addition of the HST. We have to sit with blankets on in the winter to keep warm, since we have to keep the thermostat down to try and save on the gas. We do everything possible to keep the hydro bills down as well, but to no avail.”

Margaret could only have dreamed of getting the $5,000 cheque that paid for admission to the Premier’s fundraising dinner. When is he going to make her a priority?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Why, then, did that party vote against every tax break we’ve brought forward? Why don’t they stand up for working families? That’s precisely what we’ve done. And you know, the leader of the third party was strangely silent last week when the opposition decided to cancel 53,000 clean energy jobs.

Let me read you some quotes about that from people who actually work in these places. Somebody named Misty Oakley, a Siliken employee with three children who was on social assistance before securing her job, said that employment with the solar manufacturer means security and a good future for her family.

Get with us. Join us as we continue to implement a green energy plan that builds jobs, that will ensure a better future for our families and children as we invest in better health care and education. That’s what the future is; that’s what the people of Ontario want to hear about. Let’s hear something of a plan—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: My question is to the Acting Premier. When the billion-dollar eHealth boondoggle first started breaking, the Premier dodged, he deflected and he stonewalled. He said everything was fine, that he had things under control, that rules were in place and he expected them to be followed. But then, the McGuinty government didn’t get eHealth under control.

Now Ontario families are waking up to news that they still haven’t gotten control of this runaway agency. Ontario families are looking for leadership from Premier McGuinty, but he’s a no-show. He’s missing in action. Is this the type of leadership that Dalton McGuinty is talking about?

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I’ve reminded the honourable member in the past about the use of names.

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: Is this the type of leadership Premier McGuinty is talking about when he says we should keep doing what we’re doing?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: To the Minister of Health.

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Let me say that I take the issue of compensation at eHealth seriously. I know Ontarians take it seriously, and that’s why yesterday I spoke to the president and the chair of eHealth Ontario. I asked them to go back and take another look at this decision in light of the fiscal circumstances that we find ourselves in. That review is under way now, and I’m looking forward to the report back from eHealth Ontario.

EHealth has made tremendous progress over the past little while. We are back on track, and I look forward to the supplementary.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: It’s clear that eHealth doesn’t care what the finance minister, the Premier or the Minister of Government Services say. They don’t respect them. You keep going to the well, and it’s Ontario families who have to keep paying for all of the blunders at eHealth. Watching them let the architects of the billion-dollar eHealth boondoggle stick Ontario families with paying this bill again is why people are losing faith in this government. EHealth awarded pay increases and bonuses as though Ontario families did not go through a recession.

You said you had things under control, but the Premier, his Minister of Government Services and you are nowhere to be found when it comes to enforcing the rules protecting Ontario families’ interests. Something has to change. It has to come from the start. Why didn’t Premier McGuinty pay closer attention to this runaway eHealth agency, or is he just going to continue to do what he’s been doing?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: I think I’ve responded that we’ve asked eHealth to take a good, hard look at this decision, and I look forward to what they have to say. I can tell you that my focus is on getting results for the people of Ontario.

I just want to use this opportunity to describe one initiative under eHealth Ontario that is making a profound difference for people who have suffered brain injuries. The ENITS program—emergency neurosurgery image transfer system—is allowing people to get the care they need in their local hospitals while obtaining expert advice from neurosurgeons who are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, because the images are available to those experts.

This initiative alone has saved $50 million—$50 million that we’re putting into better front-line health care. This is one of many examples where eHealth is—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

CORONER’S INQUEST

Mr. Howard Hampton: I have a question for the Attorney General. Over the last week, the Attorney General has said in this Legislature and to the media that the long-delayed coroner’s inquest into the disappearance and death of a First Nations high school student in Thunder Bay, which occurred in 2007, can now proceed. But when we called the coroner’s office today we were told that the Reggie Bushie coroner’s inquest in Thunder Bay is postponed. In fact, we’re told that all four coroners’ inquests in Thunder Bay are postponed.

Can the Attorney General tell us why he says these coroners’ inquests can now proceed, but when you talk to the coroner’s office, they continue to say that they’re postponed?

Hon. Christopher Bentley: The heart of the issue here is to try to do whatever we can to find out what happened and what can be done to prevent tragedies like this from occurring.

I was directing my comments to my friend’s questions over the past several days about the legal issues that went all the way up to the Court of Appeal, with a possibility of further appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. Those issues were resolved by the Court of Appeal—we’re not appealing—so that issue can no longer hold up the coroner’s inquest.

The coroner is in charge of the inquest process. If there are further questions about that, I’ll send them over to my friend the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Howard Hampton: The Attorney General continues to say that everything is resolved, but he only need read the recent decision of the regional senior judge in northwestern Ontario, Madam Justice Pierce, who looked very specifically at the issue of whether or not the jury panels in Thunder Bay district are representative or not.

She looked specifically at the question and she said, just a couple of weeks ago, “It is evident to me on the testimony before the court that the process for selecting members of the First Nation communities to serve on jury panels is not representative of the population of the district of Thunder Bay”—and that’s why none of these coroners’ inquests are going forward.

The parents are no closer to getting the answers they deserve now—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Minister?

Hon. Christopher Bentley: As I said, the heart of this issue is what else can be done, what could be done and who can do it to try to make sure that terrible tragedies like this don’t occur in the future.

We’re working very hard within government. The coroner’s inquest—the coroner is in charge of that process; they’ll deal with that. That legal issue that went to the Court of Appeal—they gave a decision. We’re not taking an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. We’re all working very hard and we’re all hoping that anything that can be found will be found and anything that can be done will be done to try to prevent terrible tragedies like this from happening in the future.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Bob Delaney: This question is for the Minister of Economic Development and Trade. The opposition is confused about our province’s green energy plan and the thousands of jobs it is creating across Ontario. The Leader of the Opposition has referred to Ontario’s investment by Samsung in renewable energy manufacturing capacity in unparliamentary terms and has called Ontario’s feed-in tariff program “unsustainable.”

Regions everywhere in the world disagree. They look to renewable energy as they compare the capital costs of baseload generation, the poisoning of the atmosphere from burning dirty coal and the need for a distributed electricity grid with generation from diverse sources.

Will the minister clarify what Samsung’s investment in Ontario and the feed-in tariff program have done to develop Ontario’s world-class green energy industry and create high-value—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Minister?

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: I’m delighted to answer this question because the people on this side of the House are interested in going around the world and bringing new companies to Ontario to invest in clean energy—and the best example of that is an investment deal of billions of dollars by Samsung. So this so-called deal that the opposition wants to refer to is actually billions of dollars of investment that Samsung is making in Ontario, creating those jobs and the whole supply chain that that creates across our economy.

We are meeting these people every day, people like Sean Moore from Unconquered Sun, who moved from the auto industry to start a business and who is already selling to American counterparts in the area of green energy.

This is a great contrast between us and the opposition. They are for dirty coal; we’re for clean—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Bob Delaney: Minister, there should be no illusions or confusion as to what Samsung’s investments in Ontario and the feed in-tariff program are all about, and what a huge boost they are to Ontario’s growing world-class green energy industry.

Ontario’s much-acclaimed green energy plan builds the green energy sector in Ontario and enhances many other manufacturing and science-based industries as well. It’s one of the factors in Ontario’s first-ever economic recovery from a recession without a corresponding US economic rebound.

Will the minister describe how Samsung’s investment and the feed-in tariff program have helped create world-class green energy supply chains and helped business people start, relocate and expand world-class, profitable industries here in Ontario in a leading-edge 21 st -century industry?

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: Thank you, and this is important. It’s important that the people in Sault Ste. Marie understand that the steel from Sault Ste. Marie is going to those turbines that are being built by Samsung. Some $7 billion worth of investment: That’s the deal that Samsung is making with Ontario.

Just for contrast, the Leader of the Opposition is part of a history government that created the attempt at privatization and cost us $20 billion in debt for hydro, compared to our government creating a $7-billion investment deal in Ontario that creates a supply chain: everything from racking and solar panels to turbines and blades to people in Tillsonburg understanding that they are part of this clean, green energy renewal. That’s the difference between the past and the future.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: My question is to the Acting Premier. In my previous question, I couldn’t believe my ears when the Minister of Health defended taxpayers being billed for yet another scandal at eHealth. Ontario families are looking for the Premier to show leadership and get control over this runaway agency.

They can’t count on you or the Minister of Government Services: He says the 10% bonuses were within the so-called “tough new rules” that you brought in. They can’t count on the Minister of Health: She just offers crocodile tears, blames you for not following the rules and blames the runaway agency for not following them.

They’re not self-regulated. Ontario families are paying you to do the job. Why isn’t anyone in the McGuinty government able to defend Ontario families—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Acting Premier?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: To the Minister of Health to defend Ontario families.

Hon. Deborah Matthews: I have to confess that I’m a tiny bit confused by the question, but let me do my best.

I have a quote that I’d like to read about eHealth. “The province of Ontario, by the way, has taken some important steps forward in terms of electronic health records and so on. These are very important. The province is looking for savings ... I know that the provinces have to be efficient and effective in health care, just as they know we’re going to have some significant increases in health care over time.” Who’s singing the praise of Ontario’s eHealth strategy? Jim Flaherty.

Let me just tell you that we are working very hard to improve front-line care. The personal support workers are with us today. Those are the heroes. Those are the people we’re working for.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: Speaker, I’m sure that Jim Flaherty and the folks up there are just as ashamed of her as I am for the amount of money that they have let slip away at this troubled agency.

The Minister of Health says that she met with her troubled eHealth agency after they got caught handing out 10% merit pay bonuses during a recession. It is hard to know what she had to say. You had your moral authority undermined to protect Ontario families from runaway spending on pay increases when you did nothing to deal with arbitrators and union bosses who called your bluff on a wage freeze. Then you got caught handing out secret wage hikes to OPSEU and others, and then you handed Ron Sapsford a secret settlement to go away from eHealth. If the Liberal billion-dollar boondoggle didn’t get the McGuinty Liberals to make changes at eHealth, then what will?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: I am very, very proud of the progress that is happening at eHealth Ontario. Make no mistake: I have asked the CEO and the chair to review the decision that was made and I’m giving them a few days to do exactly that.

In the meantime, we’re looking at getting results for families. In fact, we’re very concerned about your announcement this morning. Your announcement will actually increase visits to emergency departments, because as the air gets dirtier, more children will be coming to our emergency departments. Asthma is one of the leading causes of children coming to emergency departments. By cleaning the air, we’re reducing that demand.

The people opposite want to smog up the air again. We’re with the children in this province; we’re on the side of clean air.

TUITION

Mr. Rosario Marchese: To the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities: Later today, the University of Toronto governing council—without even holding a vote, as I understand it—will impose a new flat-fee structure for students in the faculty of arts and sciences. Starting in September, students who take only three courses will be forced to pay for five courses. This will increase tuition fees by a staggering 66%. Does the minister support this plan?

Hon. John Milloy: I’m very proud that our government has worked very hard to make sure that post-secondary education is affordable for students in the province of Ontario. For the past number of years, we have worked to cap tuition and at the same time put forward one of the most generous student assistance programs in the country.

Some of the changes that we brought in about a year ago have addressed a variety of concerns that were brought forward to us from student groups and organizations.

It’s very interesting; we did an exercise, which I’m very happy to share with members, where we looked at a student from a family that was earning $70,000 a year. When we took office, if that student went away to study, he would have received about $4,000 in loans. Under our program, the same student would receive $12,000 in a combination of loans and grants.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Rosario Marchese: I’m not sure how this blah, blah, blah—or, to put it more delicately, this blather—is going to help students.

On the ground, university education is becoming less and less affordable for Ontario students, who pay the highest fees in Canada and shoulder the heaviest debt load.

Over 4,000 students, parents, faculty and alumni have voiced their opposition to the U of T flat-fee model because it penalizes students. Why won’t the minister show some leadership and require the University of Toronto and all Ontario universities to end this unfair flat fee?

Hon. John Milloy: Quite frankly, I find it galling that a member of a party that, when they were in power, cut student aid by 48% and allowed tuition to increase by 50%, would stand up and do nothing short of applaud our efforts to make sure that post-secondary education in the province of Ontario is affordable.

We have a tuition framework in place which limits tuition increases at colleges and universities. If colleges and universities do take advantage of that, they have to provide additional funding and support to students who are in need.

I am proud of the fact that in the province of Ontario we have the most generous student assistance program in the country, which is benefiting students and has seen an additional 140,000 students at our colleges and universities.

I have no lessons to take from a member—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

ELECTORAL REFORM

Mrs. Liz Sandals: My question is for the Attorney General. In the recent federal election, voters in my riding of Guelph were allegedly subjected to extreme voter-suppression tactics. I heard from many of my constituents who received automated telephone messages claiming to be from Elections Canada and directing them to go to a new polling location. They went to the new polling location; there was no poll there.

My constituents are understandably angry that someone deliberately misled them and interfered with their democratic right to vote.

Some voters barely got back to the right poll in time to vote; others may never have gotten back to the right poll.

I know that people in Guelph who were directly targeted by this organized scam are glad that we are taking action.

Attorney General, how exactly will our—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Minister?

Hon. Christopher Bentley: The member for Guelph raises a very important issue that concerns us all: the right of individuals to exercise their freedom to vote, their right to vote; their very precious democratic expression, without interference, without it being undermined.

These amendments to the Election Act will specifically prohibit—because the act doesn’t contain that now—people from interfering with an elector’s right to vote; specifically prohibit somebody from interfering, from representing themselves as a candidate or as an elections official; and specifically raise the penalties for any such corrupt practice to a $25,000 fine and potentially two years less a day in jail; strong protections for conduct we should all—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mrs. Liz Sandals: My constituents in Guelph are glad that the government is taking action. It’s obvious to me and it’s obvious to them that removing any interference with voting should be of paramount importance to all members of this Legislature. We are, after all, a key institution in the functioning of true democracy, empowered by the people of Ontario to act on their behalf. That is why I was shocked by the reaction of some to the introduction of this legislation designed specifically to protect the right to vote. I can’t understand why anyone would want to delay passage of this important legislation.

Can the Attorney General explain to this House why it is so important that we get these changes made?

Hon. Christopher Bentley: I would have thought it was important to us all. I would have thought it was important—I know it’s important to all Ontarians because, however they exercise their right to vote, they want to be able to—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member from Simcoe North, the member for Lanark, please come to order.

Minister?

Hon. Christopher Bentley: Why are people trying to shout down these very important pieces of information? Why would anyone not want an elector to be able to go to the right polling station to cast their ballot? Why would anyone think it was okay to represent themselves as an election official or represent themselves as a candidate from another party when they were not? Why would anyone in any way condone or accept that activity? I call on the members opposite, who are so loud right now, to stand up and support—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. New question.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Ted Arnott: My question is for the Minister of Health. The government’s budget papers indicate that she plans to spend more than $2.5 billion on hospital infrastructure this year. My constituents in Wellington–Halton Hills deserve their fair share. When will the minister announce the capital grant for the Georgetown Hospital renovation project and when will she announce the planning grant and approval for the Groves Memorial Community Hospital in Centre Wellington to move to the next stage of planning for our new hospitals?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. I understand that Georgetown Hospital has submitted a proposal to expand their emergency department. The Minister of Infrastructure and my ministry and others are currently developing a 10-year plan so we can continue with building the infrastructure in this province.

I do understand why the member opposite might be a little antsy about this because if, by any chance, his government ends up in power after the next election, I think we’ll see a screeching halt to any capital development whatsoever.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Ted Arnott: That is utter nonsense and the minister knows it. Excuses and political bafflegab—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Stop the clock. Members will please come to order. Minister, your seatmate wants to hear the question.

Continue.

Mr. Ted Arnott: We have made our case for these projects. I’ve raised our hospital issues time and time again in this House, as members know. I’ve said I didn’t believe that the Liberals would be so miserable as to punish our communities by ignoring our hospital needs because of past voting patterns. I’m beginning to wonder if I gave the Liberal Party too much credit.

The council of the town of Halton Hills needs an immediate answer on what support you’ll extend for Georgetown Hospital. My Wellington county constituents are anticipating an announcement on the Groves project. When will the government do the right thing and approve our hospital projects, as my constituents deserve?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: What I can tell you is that when we came to office in 2003, we inherited a disgraceful deficit when it came to our health care infrastructure. You know that, Speaker.

We are the party that, when we had the chance, started to build. We have built 18 brand new hospitals across this province—18 brand new hospitals. You’re the party that closed hospitals. We have 100 major capital projects across this province and we intend to keep on building.

I think what you have to think hard about is whether you really want to be part of a party that wants to cut health care, because you cannot cut taxes without cutting health care. The first thing that will go, once you fire the nurses, is that you will close the hospitals. It’s what you did before, and I would love you to stand up and say, “Keep on going,” when it comes to building.

INSURANCE RATES

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is to the Acting Premier. This week, Ontario’s insurance brokers joined a chorus of consumers and anti-poverty group in demanding an end to the use of credit scores to obtain home insurance. They’ve actually launched a website called soaringinsurancerates.ca that says that about half of the big insurance companies are using credit scores to set premiums and even to deny coverage.

Why won’t this government listen to the insurance brokers, to the consumers’ groups, to the anti-poverty groups and ban the use of credit scores in the home insurance industry?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: In fact, we do meet with all of those groups. We have applied those rules to certain forms of insurance. We will continue to work with them.

But I am most proud of our record on auto insurance and how we’ve held the rate of growth on costs in auto insurance, because that’s what matters to people. They’ve got better insurance at lower costs. We’ll continue to work with consumers and the industry to ensure that we have a strong, vibrant insurance industry: home and auto. That’s important to Ontarians. I’m glad we’ve been able to keep the rate increases low, certainly lower than the previous government, and lower than they were in the early 1990s. That’s a record to be proud of. We’ll continue to work with everyone in the industry, particularly consumers, to keep their prices down.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Perhaps this is information for the Acting Premier. The brokers looked at one insurance company known to aggressively rely on credit scoring. They found that credit scoring increased premiums by up to $762 annually. Evidence shows that credit scoring discriminates against those with low incomes as well as newcomers.

Why won’t this government make it easier and more affordable to obtain home insurance and ban credit scoring in the home insurance industry once and for all?

Hon. Dwight Duncan: Let me give the leader of the third party just a number of the things that we’ve done. First of all, our government banned the use of credit scores on auto insurance. We eliminated the backdoor use of credit scores when it comes to quoting rates for a consumer. Going forward, we will continue to look into the use of credit scores. It’s important that, just like our five-year review, we have a balanced approach.

The leader of the third party is probably not aware that in November, the Canadian Council of Insurance Regulators, the CCIR, posted the results of a questionnaire. She probably didn’t want to put this into her question, because it might tend to undermine the premise of it, but let me just make sure the people of Ontario get the complete story: They are now reviewing and examining the issues surrounding the use of credit information by insurers across the country so that they can work in tandem.

That’s what’s important. Why didn’t you say that in your question? You know what’s going on. It’s another—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): Thank you. New question.

CONSUMER PROTECTION

Mr. Mario Sergio: My question is for the Minister of Energy. Every member of this House and the government of Ontario work diligently to serve and assist seniors in our communities. We do so because too many seniors cannot protect themselves from the underhanded tactics of unconscientious scam artists. This is compounded when the perpetrators approach unsuspecting seniors under the names of recognizable agencies such as Summit Energy, Direct Energy, Just Energy and Active Energy. In some cases, seniors are forced to deal with a new contract they have never signed.

In other cases, they incur higher costs they did not expect and are forced to pay heavy penalties if they wish to cancel. Sometimes they are told straight up that getting out of the contract is impossible.

Minister, my seniors are asking that these underhanded practices be stopped—no more abuses. They would like to hear from you.

Hon. Brad Duguid: I want to thank the member for York West for his question and let him know that I share his concerns and the concerns of his constituents about some of the unfair practices in the retail energy industry.

Retailer conduct and contracts are the number one issue that the Ontario Energy Board used to hear about when it came to complaints, particularly from vulnerable consumers like the seniors the member cares so dearly about. That’s why we brought in the Energy Consumer Protection Act, which took effect on January 1 of this year. Through this act, we’ve greatly strengthened protection for consumers by making sure the contracts offered by retailers are clear and concise, that there are ways out and that those who come to the door have to abide by a strict set of rules.

I’ll be happy to expand on that further, but I want to thank the member for York West for his question and for always standing up for seniors in his community.

Mr. Mario Sergio: Michele Colandrea, Vincenzo Angelucci, Vincenzo Panacci, Placido Mongillo and Mario Iannuzzi are only a few of the many seniors who have been subjected to similar and other scams. Every week, we see someone who has been approached under misleading pretences, and this not only leaves our seniors shaken and frustrated but, all too often, bitter that their sincerity was abused and taken advantage of by unscrupulous individuals. Yes, they were indeed carrying a clipboard.

Therefore, I ask the Minister how he sees this concern and how he addresses these abuses, because our seniors deserve respect and honesty from those who may come to their door.

Hon. Brad Duguid: Grazie to the member. The simple fact of the matter is, the previous PC government opened up the market to energy consumers. When they did that, they failed to put in place any protections or safeguards for consumers whatsoever—another in a long list of the negative legacy that that party left behind when it came to the energy system.

We’re seeing more of that today. When we look back to their legacy, part of their legacy was the hydro debt that they left behind. They brought in a debt retirement charge, and they didn’t use that to pay down the debt. It’s part of the legacy that we’ve had to deal with. Our finance minister will tell that you we’ve paid that debt down steadily since we’ve been in office.

Now they’ve got this reckless scheme which would have the effect of actually increasing bills by 2%. We stand by our clean energy benefit that’s taking bills down by 10%.

They brought up their use of dirty coal by 127%. We’re eliminating the use of dirty coal, and we’re going to—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): Thank you. New question.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer: My question is for the Minister of Education. Minister, under your government, only 56% of elementary schools in Ontario have a teacher-librarian. This is 24% lower than a decade ago. A clear trend is emerging: Despite the billions spent on education, Ontario families and students are paying more and getting less.

Libraries today are information and research centres. In a digital era, they are needed more than ever. Will you show leadership and conduct a review of school libraries to develop strategies to ensure their future?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky: That is very rich coming from a member who, when in government, only cut education. This government has invested in education, and we’ve increased our investment by 46% since we’ve come to government.

That party cuts education. That party does not support full-day kindergarten. What we know today from the announcement that was just made is that our families should be very worried about the cuts that will be coming in education to pay for their reckless plan in energy.

When it comes to investing in education and investing in libraries, our government has a record. It’s a solid record, and I would put it beside their plan any day.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): Supplementary?

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer: Again to the Minister of Education: It has to be extremely disappointing for the thousands of people throughout the province of Ontario who are seriously concerned about the elimination of libraries in our schools to hear the minister refuse to address the issue.

Minister, you responded to the parents in Windsor who opposed the dismantling of the Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board libraries in a very weak way. You urged them to do something, but you are the only person who has the power to correct this situation.

I say to you again: Remember, our libraries are information and research centres. Will you direct your ministry to review the situation and develop strategies to ensure the future of our libraries for future generations?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky: I say that the people of Ontario will remember the deep cuts that libraries suffered under the previous government. People for Education’s report made it very clear that between 1998 and 2002, libraries across Ontario suffered deep cuts at the hands of the previous government.

How we have stood up for libraries and recognized their importance is by increasing library technician and teacher-librarian technician positions by 12% since coming to government. We have also provided $40 million over four years for libraries in elementary schools. In addition to that, we have provided $120 million in one-time funding for library books.

They cut funding to libraries. We have only invested in libraries since we’ve come to government.

ACCESS TO PUBLIC LANDS

Mr. Gilles Bisson: My question is to the Minister of Natural Resources. Minister, as you know, it’s the Victoria Day weekend, otherwise known as the “May run” where we come from, a time when people get out their fishing poles and boats and are finally able to get out and do some fishing. Imagine how mad they are when they go to places like the Foleyet timber road and find out that your ministry has now blocked access to a number of lakes that families have been fishing for generations.

Why is it that your government continually tries to block access for law-abiding citizens in northern Ontario? All they want to do this weekend is go fishing, but they’re prevented by your closure of roads.

Hon. Linda Jeffrey: I’ve said time and time again that the vast majority of crown land in Ontario—over 90%—is not restricted at all. When we actually do restrict access, it’s primarily aimed at limiting motorized vehicular access to protect public safety, to protect sensitive fisheries and wildlife populations.

Again, I want to reassure the honourable member that whenever we restrict access to a crown road for any other reason than emergency public safety, my ministry seeks local input through numerous consultations and open houses. We do this because we know that local problems demand local solutions.

The truth is, road access restrictions are not new. There were road restrictions in northern Ontario when the honourable member’s colleague was the Minister of Natural Resources. There were road access restrictions when the Leader of the Opposition was the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. This has been happening for decades.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): Supplementary?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: First of all, these lakes were all open when we were in government. They were open when the previous government was there. They were open when Dalton McGuinty got elected.

I have a list of what’s being shut down on the Foleyet timber road: Dandilee Lake, Rainy Lake, Ridley Lake, North Ridley Lake, Little Ridley Lake, Cree Lake, Engineer Lake, Silvana Lake—there’s a list of around 30 lakes just on the Foleyet timber road that have been shut down by your government over the last couple of years.

Don’t come here and say you consulted. The only way people are finding out is when they go there and see the sign on the gate on the road.

I say again, why won’t you open up these areas and allow people who have had access to those lakes for years to go out and do what they want to do, which is to fish on those lakes as they have for many generations?

Hon. Linda Jeffrey: It’s funny; whenever the honourable member from Timmins–James Bay asks me a question, I’m reminded of that old Neil Young song You Never Call. It’s even on his album Twisted Road.

I could have saved the honourable member a lot of time if he’d just picked up the phone and called me. If he took the time to call me, come and see me or even tweet me, I would have told him that there are no additional road access restrictions in Timmins and Chapleau districts.

Rather than simply repeating rumours in this Legislature, the honourable member should just come and see me, and I’ll give him the truth about road access restrictions. Just like the roads in northern Ontario, my door is always open.

ABORIGINAL CHILDREN AND YOUTH

Mr. Yasir Naqvi: My question is for the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs. Minister, recreation and physical activity are powerful tools in supporting the development of life skills for youth and have been shown to lead to improved health, well-being and educational outcomes. That is why last spring, I was pleased to table, on behalf of my constituents, a petition encouraging our government to continue expanding youth initiatives in this province, especially in the effort to promote and improve the health of First Nations youth in Ontario.

Would the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs please provide an update on the expansion of aboriginal youth programs and how his ministry has been working to improve conditions and opportunities for these deserving young people?

Hon. Christopher Bentley: My colleague from Ottawa Centre is exactly right: These programs can make quite a magical difference in the lives of aboriginal youth who have not yet had the opportunity. Right to Play, for example: My colleague the Minister of Energy and the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs have worked hard to bring them into Ontario. There are two communities that are benefiting, and, we hope, more in the future.

Canadian Tire Jumpstart has done a great job in partnering up with this ministry and with the Ministry of Health Promotion in making sure that seven communities have access to community wellness workers who engage young people in positive athletic activity, and Canadian Tire Jumpstart has provided equipment for them. We have one laptop per child that is going to five different communities in the province of Ontario.

These are just some of the initiatives. We’re trying to give kids a little bit of hope and chance where they haven’t had it before.

DEFERRED VOTES

TAXATION

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): We have a deferred vote on Mr. Chudleigh’s amendment to the amendment to Ms. Smith’s motion concerning Ontario’s tax plan for jobs and growth.

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

The division bells rang from 1141 to 1146.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): All those in favour of Mr. Chudleigh’s amendment to the amendment will please rise one at a time and remain standing until recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Bisson, Gilles

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Steve

DiNovo, Cheri

Dunlop, Garfield

Elliott, Christine

Gélinas, France

Hampton, Howard

Hardeman, Ernie

Hillier, Randy

Horwath, Andrea

Jones, Sylvia

Klees, Frank

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Miller, Norm

Munro, Julia

O’Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Savoline, Joyce

Tabuns, Peter

Witmer, Elizabeth

Yakabuski, John

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): All those opposed to the motion will please rise one at a time until counted by the Clerk.

Nays

Albanese, Laura

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Bentley, Christopher

Best, Margarett

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Cansfield, Donna H.

Chiarelli, Bob

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dickson, Joe

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hoskins, Eric

Hoy, Pat

Jaczek, Helena

Jeffrey, Linda

Johnson, Rick

Kular, Kuldip

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Matthews, Deborah

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Murray, Glen R.

Naqvi, Yasir

Pendergast, Leeanna

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramal, Khalil

Rinaldi, Lou

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Sousa, Charles

Takhar, Harinder S.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

The Clerk of the Assembly (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 24; the nays are 49.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): I declare the motion lost.

We will now deal with Mr. Yakabuski’s amendment to the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour will please say “aye.”

All those opposed will please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the nays have it.

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): Is it agreed? Same vote? Agreed.

The Clerk of the Assembly (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 24; the nays are 49.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): I declare the motion lost.

We’ll now deal with the main motion. Is it the pleasure of the House that Ms. Smith’s motion concerning Ontario’s tax plan for jobs and growth carry?

All those in favour will please say “aye.”

All those opposed will please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1150 to 1151.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and remain standing until recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Albanese, Laura

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Bentley, Christopher

Best, Margarett

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Cansfield, Donna H.

Chiarelli, Bob

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dickson, Joe

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hoskins, Eric

Hoy, Pat

Jaczek, Helena

Jeffrey, Linda

Johnson, Rick

Kular, Kuldip

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Matthews, Deborah

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Murray, Glen R.

Naqvi, Yasir

Pendergast, Leeanna

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramal, Khalil

Rinaldi, Lou

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Sousa, Charles

Takhar, Harinder S.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): All those opposed will please rise one at a time and remain standing until recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Bisson, Gilles

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Steve

DiNovo, Cheri

Dunlop, Garfield

Elliott, Christine

Gélinas, France

Hampton, Howard

Hardeman, Ernie

Hillier, Randy

Horwath, Andrea

Jones, Sylvia

Klees, Frank

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Miller, Norm

Munro, Julia

O’Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Savoline, Joyce

Tabuns, Peter

Witmer, Elizabeth

Yakabuski, John

The Clerk of the Assembly (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 49; the nays are 24.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): I declare the motion carried.

Motion agreed to.

TIME ALLOCATION

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): We now have a deferred vote on the motion by Mr. Phillips for allocation of time on Bill 179,

An Act to amend the Child and Family Services Act respecting adoption and the provision of care and maintenance.

Call in the members—

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): Same vote? No?

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

The division bells rang from 1153 to 1154.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and remain standing until recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Albanese, Laura

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Bentley, Christopher

Best, Margarett

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Cansfield, Donna H.

Chiarelli, Bob

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Steve

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dickson, Joe

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Elliott, Christine

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hillier, Randy

Hoskins, Eric

Hoy, Pat

Jaczek, Helena

Jeffrey, Linda

Johnson, Rick

Jones, Sylvia

Klees, Frank

Kular, Kuldip

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Matthews, Deborah

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Munro, Julia

Murray, Glen R.

Naqvi, Yasir

O’Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Pendergast, Leeanna

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramal, Khalil

Rinaldi, Lou

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Savoline, Joyce

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Sousa, Charles

Takhar, Harinder S.

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): All those opposed to the motion will please rise one at a time and remain standing until recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

DiNovo, Cheri

Gélinas, France

Hampton, Howard

Horwath, Andrea

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Tabuns, Peter

The Clerk of the Assembly (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 65; the nays are 8.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): I declare the motion carried.

Motion agreed to.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Jim Wilson): I don’t believe we have any more deferred votes. This House stands in recess until 1 p.m.

The House recessed from 1156 to 1300.

MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

MOOSE TAGS

Mr. Randy Hillier: Bruce Munro and members of his hunting party were recently denied moose tag permits from the MNR. I’m told that MNR receives 100,000 moose tag applications each and every year, yet only about 3,000 moose tags are issued. For those who are not selected each year, they are put in a preferential pool for the following year’s selection. Unfortunately, Bruce and his group will not be in the preferred pool this year because the ministry lost his application.

Bruce’s application was not the only one that was lost, however. The ministry is offering to correct their own error if an individual can show a copy of the application and the receipt of the registered mail. However, individuals such as Bruce are less fortunate. He only has an affidavit from his local postmaster confirming that his applications were put in the mail which, according to the ministry, is not enough.

I would like to suggest to the minister the following advice: If applicants must protect themselves from the incompetence of the ministry by making copies of their submissions and sending them by registered mail, maybe people should be informed of the MNR’s incompetence at the start of the process, not after the damage is done.

AGAPE CENTRE

Mr. Jim Brownell: I rise in the House today to thank and pay tribute to the Agape Centre in my riding of Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry.

The Agape Centre strives to reduce the impact of poverty in the community by providing food, clothing and household items to those in need. The Agape Centre is run by a group of tireless volunteers and staff members who make sure operations run smoothly and the needs of clients are met.

Alyssa Blais, the newly appointed executive director of the centre, has been hard at work in her first four months on the job. Alyssa and her team recently achieved the fundraising goal of $17,000 for kitchen repairs and new appliances in the centre.

The Agape Centre held a successful food drive over the Easter weekend at local grocery stores. The event brought in hundreds of food items for clients of the food bank program.

The Agape Centre is hosting an event, in partnership with the Cornwall Public Library, on May 31 from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m., to have a discussion about hunger and to launch their first Go Hungry 4 Agape fundraiser.

Since its founding in 1971, the Agape Centre has ensured that no family in Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry goes hungry or cold or without any of their basic necessities of life. I would like to thank everyone at the Agape Centre, and especially the volunteers, for everything they do and the support they provide to our community.

I would like at this time to congratulate and thank Alyssa, the newly appointed executive director, and the former executive director, Judy Dancause.

JOE HUDSON

Mr. Steve Clark: It’s an honour to rise and speak about Joe Hudson, one of the most outstanding business owners and citizens in my riding of Leeds-Grenville.

In Lyn, Joe operates Burnbrae Farms, one of Canada’s leading producers and processors of eggs. In fact, Joe is known as the Omega 3 Man for Burnbrae’s development of the Naturegg brand, Canada’s number one omega 3 egg.

Recently, Joe was honoured with the 2011 Get Cracking Award at the Egg Farmers of Ontario annual general meeting.

Burnbrae Farms is not only a major employer in my riding, but the Hudson family is a tireless supporter of community causes. Joe has been a strong proponent of Ontario’s agribusiness sector and supply management in his 31 years as a board director with the Egg Farmers of Ontario.

His daughter, Mary Jean McFall, stepped into his seat on the board and was director for 12 years, from 1998 to 2010.

Joe and his brother, Grant, took over the family farm in Lyn from their dad, Joseph, during the 1940s. It had been a dairy farm, and there’s a great story about how Canada’s top egg producer got its start. The idea was hatched when Joe raised 50 leghorn chickens for a high school science fair project in 1943. By the time he graduated, those 50 chickens had become 3,000. The rest, as they say, is history.

Burnbrae now has operations coast to coast and is an industry leader in innovation and product development.

On behalf of everyone in my riding, I congratulate Joe and his entire family on this latest recognition. I can think of no one more deserving.

HEALTH CARE

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I’ve had the opportunity recently to talk to people in my riding about the health care system. As is probably true with everyone in this chamber, people in my community treasure that public health care system. They have tremendous admiration for doctors, for nurses, for personal support workers, all those people who make that system function, who deliver the health care that they need.

But I want to tell you now that many of the people I talk to in my community feel that that system is under siege. They find that they can’t find doctors, general practitioners. They find that services have been delisted. They find long waits in emergency rooms. Most important, they’re worried that this public health care system is something that could be lost, that its public nature could be lost.

Premier McGuinty, in his delisting of services, in his privatization of hospital financing, in his mismanagement of the eHealth file, has damaged our health care system. It’s no wonder that people in my riding and across Ontario are worried about the health care system.

PERSONAL SUPPORT WORKERS

Mr. Yasir Naqvi: I am very privileged today to rise and recognize the personal support workers across Ontario and the dozens of PSWs who have come to Queen’s Park today for the second annual Personal Support Worker Day.

These workers are a critical component of our health care system and a vital support for families and seniors in our province. We owe them a debt of gratitude for the hard work and caring service they offer our citizens every single day. Their day at Queen’s Park is an important opportunity for members of this Legislature to meet, listen and learn from these front-line health workers. I can assure them that we are listening.

I thank them for taking time from their busy lives to come here and help us understand their challenges and ideas. In fact, I was pleased that, just moments ago, the Minister of Health announced to stakeholders, supporters and PSWs a new PSW registry, a key step forward to ensuring excellent care at the front lines of our health system.

As our government works tirelessly to transform health care into a high-quality, compassionate and sustainable system constituents want and need, personal support workers undoubtedly play a key role in that transformation, and we are pleased to work with them as we improve our system on behalf of all Ontarians.

ROTARY CLUB OF COURTICE

Mr. John O’Toole: Last night, I had the opportunity of attending the second annual youth and community leadership dinner hosted by the Rotary Club of Courtice in my riding of Durham. The dinner was to honour and recognize the young leaders of our communities and leaders of the future.

I want to recognize the families and the schools and the recipients of this year’s award, which include: Stephanie Ralston from Dr. G.J. MacGillivray Public School; Laura Humphreys and Rob Babikian from Courtice Secondary School; Zachery Prescott from Clarke High School; Alexis Wilcox from Bowmanville High School; Teri-Lynn Kennedy from Holy Trinity Catholic school; Sophie Baron from Clarington secondary school; Tanya Irwin and Hailey Douglas from St. Stephen’s Catholic secondary school; Jamie MacDonald and Mark Theriault from the Interact Club of Clarington; and Warren Heimstra from the Bowmanville Rotary Club.

The evening featured the renowned motivational and sports broadcaster Brian Williams. You may remember Mr. Williams, as he has covered 13 Canadian Olympics for Canada and now with CTV. He spoke to the youth about the lessons of greatness and the efforts that people make to be great and other sporting events.

The proceeds from last night’s event will go to support the building of schools in Africa as well as community projects throughout Clarington.

I also want to thank the Courtice Rotary Club and the other Rotary Clubs in the area, specifically President Sheila Hall and one of the main organizers, Marie Visser, for hosting the event. I’m proud to support this dinner and the youth in my riding who are our future leaders.

SINGING CONTEST

Mr. Tony Ruprecht: We have great musical talent in our nation, and I am very delighted to make some introductions to this Legislature of the winners of the intercultural Canadian national singing contest. They are—if they would like to stand for a minute—Diana Richie, George Antoney, Melanie Frade, Julia Debowska, Olivia Amenta and Stephanie Wojtowicz. Of course, the founder of the contest is with us; his name is John Santos. The studio producer who is going to make a special effort to ensure they become famous national Canadian symbols is Hernani Raposo. Let’s welcome them.

Last month, I and a thousand guests had the great pleasure to attend the intercultural Canadian national singing contest with John Santos. It was truly a Canadian multicultural event.

What I saw and experienced touched me deeply. The program was designed to showcase the real talent of each performer. Mr. Santos is an accomplished music director, and his wife, Lisa, set the stage for a most supportive backdrop.

John’s music lifted the spirit of the performers to such heights, which enabled all of them to soar, to give their best and to give of themselves. The audience too was transformed into a supportive and appreciative cast.

The rhythmic music—sometimes soft, sometimes powerful, sometimes light and darkness—the colourful front and the uplifting, warm, melodious voices produced such a marvellous sound that time was forgotten and people didn’t want to go home. They shouted, “More, more and more!” It was truly a night to remember.

These performers are here with us today, and they are our pride and joy, Mr. Speaker. They certainly deserve to be recognized for their enormous talent. You and I and our members will be delighted to provide some opportunity to them so they can launch their great careers. Congratulations to you.

YAD VASHEM

Mr. Mike Colle: I’d like to welcome the Canadian Society for Yad Vashem and their special guests here to the Legislature. As you know, today we pay tribute to the Ontario Holocaust survivors who are here. The society’s office is in my riding.

It just reinforced to me the incredible experience that—the Premier led a visit to Israel last year, where we visited Yad Vashem with my colleagues Monte Kwinter, David Zimmer, Minister Hoskins, and Sandra Pupatello, the Minister of Economic Development and Trade. We were really deeply moved by what we saw at Yad Vashem.

To have the Canadian society honour these incredible Canadians here today is doubly important, and it just makes me think how powerful a message it is that we shall never, ever forget, and we shall make sure that the voices of those innocent people who were murdered are never forgotten. Our special guests today are here for that.

I just want to say to all of these great Canadians who are here: We really treasure you, we love you, and we encourage you to keep speaking out for all of those innocent men, women and children who were murdered by those madmen back at a day we hope we will forget. Thank you so much.

YAD VASHEM

Mr. Dave Levac: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: the usual last statement. I seek unanimous consent of the House from all parties, and I believe we’ve spoken to each, for each party to have up to five minutes to speak about Yad Vashem.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Monte Kwinter: In a ceremony at Queen’s Park earlier today, we recognized and honoured 19 Holocaust survivors whose stories of anguish, suffering and survival of both body and spirit are a testimony to the human will to live.

These Holocaust survivors, who are in the House today—there they are, in the members’ gallery—came to Ontario, rebuilt their lives and were honoured for their wonderful contributions as citizens of Ontario. Those honoured are Yael Gisela Spier Cohen, Irene (Blasz) Csillag, Valentin Drobner, Philip Epstein, John Freund, Magda Hilf, Howard Kleinberg, Nancy Kleinberg, Pepa Livingstone, Manja Mapa, Willie Moll, Rose Philip, Sally Rosen, Dr. Nadia Rosa, Leon Rucker, David Shentow, Jack (Szalom) Weinberger, Dr. Arthur Weisz, and Helen Yermus.

Today, we recognize Yom ha-Shoah V’Hagvurah, Holocaust Memorial Day—a day designated for Holocaust remembrance in communities around the world.

This is the 18th year that the Ontario Legislature has observed Holocaust Memorial Day, and I’m proud to say that Ontario was the first jurisdiction in the world, outside of the state of Israel, to officially recognize it.

Eighteen is a significant milestone in the Jewish faith. In Hebrew, it is “chai,” which also translates into “life.” As we mourn the death of the six million victims, we also celebrate the life of those who survived.

I have visited Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial and museum in Jerusalem, several times. Just a year ago, almost exactly, Premier Dalton McGuinty, Minister Sandra Pupatello, Minister Eric Hoskins, MPP Mike Colle, MPP David Zimmer and I were at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem and laid a wreath on behalf of all Ontarians in the Hall of Remembrance. The memorial is dedicated to preserving the memory and story of each of the six million people who died in the Holocaust. As a Jew, these memories strike the heart and the soul.

Every Jew is touched by the Holocaust. We lost loved ones, family members or friends. All members in the community lost someone. The Holocaust echoes through generations. The loss is extraordinary. At Yad Vashem, that loss is made real. It is concrete. You can touch it.

In the Valley of the Communities, you stand before wall after wall carved out of solid rock listing the names of more than 5,000 communities that lived, breathed, had life, in which men and women loved, married, raised children, worked, laughed and worshipped. Today, in most cases, nothing remains of these Jewish communities except for their names, forever frozen in the bedrock of Yad Vashem. It was there that I found the name of the city where my father was born, Częstochowa, and the city where my mother was born, Sosnowiec.

The Holocaust reaches out of the past and touches the shoulder of every Jew.

The central theme of Holocaust Martyrs’ and Heroes’ Remembrance Day 2011 is Fragments of Memory: The Faces behind the Documents, Artifacts and Photographs. It focuses, in a graphic and visual way, the remembrance of the pre-war life that was, the unimaginable horror that was inflicted on the six million victims, and then the salvation and the hope for the future of the survivors.

Holocaust Memorial Day commemorates all who died in the Holocaust, not just Jews. We also remember those whom the Nazis targeted for their race, their religion, their politics, their disabilities or their sexual orientation.

It’s important to set aside time to remember all these victims whose lives were taken by the Nazis. In remembering, we bear witness to what these men, women and children endured.

Tragically, other genocides have followed since World War II, in Cambodia, Rwanda, Darfur and in the former Yugoslavia.

It is evident that we must continue our struggle to keep alive the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was approved by the United Nations 63 years ago in the shadow of the Holocaust. The declaration recognized the inherent dignity and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family as a foundation of freedom, justice and peace throughout the world. It called on the world to protect human rights by the rule of law.

We are indeed fortunate to live in Canada and in Ontario, but we must never take our good fortune for granted. We must guard our democratic institutions and democratic freedoms. We must appreciate, nurture and protect them, and we must constantly remind ourselves how easy it is to lose them.

On Yom ha-Shoah, Jewish communities around the world recite a brief traditional mourner’s prayer, the Kaddish. On the afternoon of May 1, some of our members were at Earl Bales Park for the annual Holocaust community commemoration service, and there were hundreds of people who recited the Kaddish.

On behalf of the victims, their survivors and their families, I would like to recite that Hebrew prayer that is something for which all people may pray, and I ask for unanimous consent to allow me to do that.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Agreed? Agreed.

All members please rise.

Prayer in Hebrew.

Mr. Monte Kwinter: One line of this prayer translates as, “He who creates peace in His celestial heights, may He create peace for us.”

We must always remember so that the world will never forget.

Mr. John O’Toole: On behalf of our leader, Tim Hudak, I’m very pleased today to extend our deepest sympathies to the 19 survivors who were honoured at the Yad Vashem memorial service today and to pay the deepest respect for their struggles and courage, as was described in the ceremony today.

We stand with you in the resentment of all of the victimization that Jewish people withstood during the Second World War. It reminds each of us of the responsibility to respect others and to respect the rights of individuals. It means to me—my sister Jane’s husband, Dr. Paul Goodman, died just recently. Paul’s family were from Russia and survived the Second World War, where his parents and their family were lost as a result of the Nazi victimization.

Today, we remember those who we are each touched by. We respect the struggles you have been through. Also, we respect the success—I read the stories of your lives here—and the courage to go forward in a positive way and the contributions you’ve made to Ontario and, indeed, Canada. It’s remarkable. I commend you. Keep up the great work and the spirit and faith in people.

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: It’s an honour to stand and address you, an honour to be in the presence of survivors. It’s an honour to remember those who did not. Certainly, on behalf of Andrea Horwath, the leader of the New Democratic Party, and all of us, this is a day of remembrance.

It’s a day also of recommitment, I believe, that this must never, ever happen again. That means a recommitment to civil liberties. It means a recommitment to all having a voice. We know, as we heard already, that some of the first to be rounded up happen to be living in Parkdale–High Park right now: Roma people, gypsies as they were called. Socialists were rounded up, LGBT people were rounded up, and of course, six million Jews were also rounded up and sent to their death.

What’s very sad about history since then, in a sense, is that what we forget is not only that this was perpetrated by a group of psychopaths but that this was perpetrated by lots and lots of ordinary people. Elie Wiesel, in a wonderful work, talks about the banality of evil: the clerks who signed the forms, those who did nothing, the neighbours who watched as their neighbours were being carted away, those people who knew what the trains were carrying but turned the other way and did nothing and said nothing. That is where evil really resides. That’s what we all have to recommit to struggling against because that same evil is still very present.

I want to tell you, as a United Church minister—this is my third career—I say mea culpa on behalf of all Christians. Only about 1% of Christians actually stood by their Jewish brothers and sisters during that period of time. I think of people like Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who paid with his life. Most of the churches sold you out. That is something that we need to deal with, that we need to look at every day in our own faith. So it has to do with us still.

In fact, the last time before today that I heard reference to the Holocaust was by His Holiness the Dalai Lama. I also have one of the largest Tibetan groups living in my riding. He said he looks to the Jews, really, and to your example, because they now are a community who live in diaspora, who have no homeland. They live in diaspora and because of the actions of China on their country, called Tibet, that isn’t even on the map anymore. They see themselves in affiliation and also send their love.

Certainly, in working with them, we see the same old themes in humankind resurface: the themes of hatred, the themes of bigotry, the themes of the banality of evil, where good people do nothing and watch crimes perpetrated, sometimes because they are somewhere else and not here in our midst.

On behalf of all New Democrats, on behalf of all those who love civil liberties, on behalf of all those people of faith who hold to their faith and not to their religious institutions, to all of those people—to all of them—I say on behalf of us all, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. We are sorry, because we and our ancestors are also implicated in your story.

May this day always recur. May we always remember and, more than remember, may we recommit to it never, ever happening again.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

Mr. Bas Balkissoon: I beg leave to present a report from the Standing Committee on the Legislative Assembly and move its adoption.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Tonia Grannum): Your committee begs to report the following bill without amendment:

Bill 188,

An Act to amend the McMichael Canadian Art Collection Act / Projet de loi 188, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la Collection McMichael d’art canadien.

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

Report adopted.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

Mr. Jim Brownell: I beg leave to present a report from the Standing Committee on General Government and move its adoption.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Tonia Grannum): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 181,

An Act to amend the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997 / Projet de loi 181, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1997 sur la prévention et la protection contre l’incendie.

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

Report adopted.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

DRIVERS OVER THE AGE OF 80

IDENTIFICATION ACT, 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 EXIGEANT

UN MOYEN D’IDENTIFICATION

POUR LES CONDUCTEURS ÂGÉS

DE PLUS DE 80 ANS

Mr. Sergio moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 201,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act to require vehicles driven by drivers over the age of 80 to display markers or identifying devices / Projet de loi 201, Loi modifiant le Code de la route pour exiger que les véhicules conduits par des conducteurs âgés de plus de 80 ans affichent des marques ou des moyens d’identification.

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

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member for a short statement.

Mr. Mario Sergio: The bill amends the Highway Traffic Act to prohibit drivers who are over the age of 80 from driving a motor vehicle on a highway unless markers or identifying devices indicating that the motor vehicle is being driven by a driver who is over the age of 80 are displayed on the vehicle. Unless otherwise specified by regulation, the markers or identifying devices must depict “80 plus” in red and must be prominently displayed and clearly visible from the front and rear of the motor vehicle.

PROVINCIAL OFFENCES STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT (JURY TRIALS), 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE

LES INFRACTIONS PROVINCIALES

(PROCÈS DEVANT JURY)

Mr. Hillier moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 202,

An Act respecting jury trials for provincial offences / Projet de loi 202, Loi concernant les procès devant jury dans le domaine des infractions provinciales.

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

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member for a short statement.

Mr. Randy Hillier: This bill amends the Provincial Offences Act by allowing persons charged with an offence to choose to be tried by a court composed of a judge and jury, if any one of the following circumstances exist:

(1) The penalty for the offence includes a fine of $25,000 or more, seizure of property or term of imprisonment.

(2) There is a reasonable likelihood that a conviction would result in termination or suspension of the person’s professional licence or membership, or a licence or registration of business that is connected to the individual.

The jury is composed of 12 persons selected in accordance with the Juries Act. The jury is required to give a unanimous verdict. If the jury cannot agree, the judge may adjourn the trial or discharge the jury and direct the empanelling of a new jury. The jury may make recommendations relating to sentencing.

The Juries Act is amended to enable the Lieutenant Governor in Council to make regulations concerning the application of the act to a jury trial under the Provincial Offences Act.

PROVINCIAL OFFENCES

AMENDMENT ACT

(SENTENCING AND APPEALS), 2011 /

LOI DE 2011 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES INFRACTIONS PROVINCIALES

(PRONONCÉ DE LA SENTENCE

ET APPELS)

Mr. Hillier moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 203,

An Act to amend the Provincial Offences Act with respect to sentencing and appeals / Projet de loi 203, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les infractions provinciales en ce qui concerne le prononcé de la sentence et les appels.

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

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member for a short statement.

Mr. Randy Hillier: This bill amends the Provincial Offences Act to amend the default penalty for conviction of a provincial offence, if the law does not otherwise expressly provide it.

At present, the penalty is a fine of not more than $5,000. The bill adds imprisonment as an alternative, at the choice of the convicted person. The court will determine the term of the imprisonment, which will be no more than six months. The bill also eliminates the requirement that a person who appeals a decision imposing a fine for a provincial offence must pay the fine in order to appeal the decision.

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon. Margarett R. Best: I believe we have unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding private members’ public business.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Agreed? Agreed.

Hon. Margarett R. Best: I move that, notwithstanding standing order 98(b), the following change be made to the ballot list for private members’ public business: Mr. Colle and Mr. Dhillon exchange places in order of precedence, such that Mr. Colle assumes ballot item 16 and Mr. Dhillon assumes ballot item 70; and that, notwithstanding standing order 98(g), notice for ballot item 16 be waived.

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

Motion agreed to.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Hon. Margarett R. Best: I believe we have unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding the meeting times for the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Agreed? Agreed.

Hon. Margarett R. Best: I move that the Standing Committee on Public Accounts be authorized to release reports during the summer adjournment by depositing a copy of any report with the Clerk of the Assembly.

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

Motion agreed to.

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon. Margarett R. Best: I believe we have unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding private members’ public business.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Agreed? Agreed.

Hon. Margarett R. Best: I move that during consideration of private members’ public business this afternoon, in the event that Bill 185,

An Act to proclaim British Home Child Day, receives second reading, the order for third reading shall immediately be called and the question put immediately, without debate or amendment.

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

Motion agreed to.

PETITIONS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Mr. John O’Toole: I’m pleased to present a petition on behalf of my constituents in the riding of Durham. The petition reads as follows:

“Whereas citizens are concerned that contaminants