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

March 19, 2008

39th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2008-Mar-19 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 19 March 2008 Mercredi 19 mars 2008

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

NEONATAL CARE

BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB

GASOLINE TAX

EVENTS IN TIBET

SIBLEY SKI TOUR

EVENTS IN TIBET

RURAL ONTARIO

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

ONTARIO ECONOMY

WEARING OF RIBBONS

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(CELLULAR PHONES), 2008 /

LOI DE 2008 MODIFIANT

LE CODE DE LA ROUTE

(TÉLÉPHONES CELLULAIRES)

MADRESA ASHRAFUL ULOOM

ACT, 2008

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(SPEED-LIMITING SYSTEMS), 2008 /

LOI DE 2008 MODIFIANT

LE CODE DE LA ROUTE

(SYSTÈMES LIMITEURS DE VITESSE)

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

SPEED-LIMITING SYSTEMS

SHELTER ALLOWANCES /

ALLOCATIONS-LOGEMENT

MINING INDUSTRY

SPEED-LIMITING SYSTEMS

SHELTER ALLOWANCES

MINING INDUSTRY

SHELTER ALLOWANCES

MINING INDUSTRY

VISITORS

VISITOR

ORAL QUESTIONS

ONTARIO ECONOMY

SMALL BUSINESS

WINDSOR ECONOMY

MANUFACTURING JOBS

SMALL BUSINESS

ABORIGINAL RIGHTS

WALKERTON TRAGEDY

MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE

SOINS DE LONGUE DURÉE /

LONG-TERM CARE

TOURISM

DEVELOPMENT FEES

DIET SUPPLEMENTS

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT

IN EDUCATION

MANUFACTURING JOBS

PETITIONS

LORD'S PRAYER

HOME CARE

PUBLIC WASHROOMS

NON-PROFIT HOUSING

HOME CARE

EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

LORD'S PRAYER

ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION

LORD'S PRAYER

HOSPITAL FUNDING

ONTARIO DISABILITY

SUPPORT PROGRAM

NON-PROFIT HOUSING

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

NEONATAL CARE

Mr. Frank Klees: Today is Prematurity Awareness Day. It is dedicated to the children who are born pre-term, or prior to 37 weeks of pregnancy, and their families. Thousands of pre-term babies each year are admitted to neonatal intensive care units across Ontario and are entrusted to the expert care of neonatologists, who ensure they receive the highest level of care possible.

Joining us in the House today are Lauren and Sam Pezzullo, of Newmarket. On July 5, 2003, Lauren gave birth to her premature baby son, Linden, weighing 3.3 pounds. Lauren and her husband, Sam, stood vigil as Linden went from one medical crisis to another, including 16 lumbar punctures, three blood transfusions, respiratory distress syndrome and a brain bleed. Lauren and Sam were asked several times if they wanted Linden's life support turned off, but they would not give up their vigil.

Today, their son, Linden, is a happy and healthy five-year-old. To help other parents with premature babies, Lauren and Sam established the Linden Fund, a charity that raises money to buy equipment for neonatal intensive care units across Canada. A number of volunteers of the Linden Fund are with us today as well.

On behalf of all members of this Legislature and all Ontarians, I express our gratitude to Lauren and Sam Pezzullo and the many volunteers who make the work of the Linden Fund possible. I ask all members to welcome them and encourage them in their work.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Welcome to the Ontario Legislature.

BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB

Mr. Jim Brownell: As a former educator, a father and grandfather, and as representative of the good people of Stormont–Dundas—South Glengarry, I believe that there is no more important function that we play in society than the provision of security and opportunity to our youth. In fact, the way a society treats its youth says a great deal about how it operates as a whole.

This is certainly the case in my riding of Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, where the Cornwall Youth Centre celebrated its 10th anniversary of excellent service to the youth of my riding. To meet the growing needs in our community, the centre has recently transitioned to the Boys and Girls Club of Cornwall/Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry.

The mission of the Boys and Girls Clubs of Canada is to provide a safe, supportive place where children and youth can experience new opportunities, overcome barriers, build positive relationships and develop confidence and skills for life. This has long been the goal of the former Cornwall Youth Centre's board of directors. President Lucien Lalonde and the entire board are to be commended for their unparalleled work over the years.

In particular, I would also like to commend board member and Cornwall Chief of Police Dan Parkinson, who has worked tirelessly to create a positive relationship between local youth and police services. Our youth are our future, and in Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, the future continues to grow as our entire community works to provide a safe environment for our children and opportunities for them to learn and mature. I commend the new Boys and Girls Club of Cornwall/SDG.

GASOLINE TAX

Mr. John Yakabuski: Yesterday, I reintroduced my private member's bill, Bill 38. This bill, if passed, would compel the province to share its gas tax revenue with all municipalities. That is what the federal government does now, because it recognizes what we in rural Ontario have always held: that our roads and bridges are our public transportation system.

The McGuinty Liberals continue to insist that rural Ontario municipalities don't deserve their fair share of the gas tax collected from them. In fact, there's no question that rural citizens pay a far larger per capita share of the gas tax, because without public transportation a vehicle is a must. For the most part, families with two working parents require two vehicles just to get back and forth from work. It is patently unfair for this government to continue to penalize the hard-working people of my riding of Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, as well as all rural people, with their approach to sharing revenue.

This initiative has received broad support from municipalities across the province. The Eastern Ontario Wardens' Caucus has identified it as one of their top priorities. If the Premier is determined to be unfair to municipalities, just because the federal Conservatives are treating them fairly, then I say: Stop playing your childish games. Stop inhaling the fumes of Toronto traffic for a while and come up and visit us in good old Renfrew county. Perhaps the fresh air will clear your head.

EVENTS IN TIBET

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: I rise in the House today on behalf of the over 3,000 Tibetan Canadians who live in Parkdale—High Park. As members have witnessed on international news, over 100 Tibetans have been killed in their homeland simply for demanding democracy and some degree of autonomy. His Holiness the Dalai Lama has called for an opportunity to have a dialogue with the Chinese government, and even that modest request has been denied.

Along with Tibetan Canadians, we call for an immediate withdrawal of all armed forces and martial law from Tibet; we call for the removal of restrictions on movement and communication; we call for the release of political prisoners arrested during the demonstration; and we call for unimpeded access to Tibet for foreign journalists and United Nations representatives.

My resolution, already tabled, is a sister resolution to one tabled in Ottawa urging the Chinese government to meet with His Holiness the Dalai Lama. As the founding member of a non-partisan Ontario Friends of Tibet, set up with other members of this Legislature, I add my voice to the thousands of Tibetans who pray for a free Tibet.

SIBLEY SKI TOUR

Mr. Bill Mauro: I'm very pleased to inform the House that earlier this month Thunder Bay's legendary Sleeping Giant Provincial Park hosted the 31st annual Sibley Ski Tour, and it was a resounding success. As you may be aware, the Sibley Ski Tour is the largest cross-country skiing event in the Thunder Bay region and this year drew over 800 registered participants. It also attracts visitors from all over the region and provides many economic benefits to our local communities.

The Sibley Ski Tour is open to everyone. Young and old, beginners and advanced, skiers come together for an exciting day of fun and recreation. This year, three groomed distances were offered for both classic and skate techniques: the 10-kilometre family event, the 20-kilometre tour, and the 50-kilometre—

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

Mr. Bob Delaney: He didn't have his 90 seconds.

Mr. Bill Mauro: Somebody's got to start the clock. Now I've got a minute, 35 seconds left.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): My apologies. I had just glanced at the clock and I saw the zeros. Please continue and complete your statement.

Mr. Bill Mauro: No problem. I'd like to take a moment to recognize this year's winners. Stephen Hart and Brook Latimer won their respective men's and women's 50-kilometre races. Luke Viljakainen and Lisa Patterson won their respective 20-kilometre races, and David Ek and Manon Magnan won their respective 10-kilometre races.

Hundreds of volunteers come together every year to make Sibley a success. I wish to specifically acknowledge Sibley's key organizer, Diane Ambro. This was Diane's 17th and final tour, and I think she deserves special recognition for her hard work, for making the ski tour one of Thunder Bay's premier sporting events. Taking over for Diane next year is Peter Gallagher. I am confident, knowing Peter, that he will do a great job.

I am proud that we in Thunder Bay host such a fantastic event. I'd like to encourage all my honourable colleagues, and Ontarians, to visit Sleeping Giant Provincial Park to see its spectacular scenery and to ski the best trails in the northwest.

EVENTS IN TIBET

Mr. Randy Hillier: I always stand for freedom, justice and democracy. In the past, I have spoken for those who cannot be heard. I rise today, a voice for those silenced half a world away.

The people of Tibet do not enjoy our freedoms. Freedoms we take for granted are met with violence and the wrath of the Communist Chinese government. Over 50 years ago, China used deadly force invading Tibet. They use deadly force today to maintain their rule.

The history of the Moscow Olympics comes to mind. Then, as now, a cruel government masquerades behind the games for legitimacy. It is inconsistent to participate in an activity of civility and sportsmanship while China openly oppresses the people of Tibet. The Moscow boycott lessened Soviet prestige and muted Soviet propaganda.

As free people, we must encourage the free world to act. Canada must freeze aid, suspend student exchange programs and expedite refugee claims—and boycott the China Olympics unless the Chinese army withdraws from Tibet immediately.

I ask all free Canadians to join with me and lend your voice to those in Tibet.

RURAL ONTARIO

Mr. Jeff Leal: It's with great pleasure that I rise in the House today to share with my colleagues, and with all Ontarians, what the McGuinty government is doing to ensure a strong and sustainable future for rural Ontario. I wish to highlight one component of our rural plan in particular, and that is the rural economic development program, otherwise known as RED.

The RED program is an economic development initiative that helps communities remove barriers to development and economic growth. Since October 2003, 145 projects have been approved, with a provincial investment of $47 million, generating approximately $479 million in new economic activity in rural Ontario.

I know that the Conservative Party believes it speaks for rural Ontario, but the fact of the matter is that the concept of a rural economic development program didn't even make the 2007 Conservative platform. The truth is that the McGuinty government has a proud record of investing in rural Ontario, and we have no signs of stopping. In fact, we plan to increase our annual investment in the RED program by 50%.

The RED program is just one of the many facets of this government's plan for rural Ontario. We understand what rural Ontario communities need, and we'll continue to work with them for a great future in rural Ontario.

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

Mr. Dave Levac: I'm happy to stand in the House today to have the opportunity to speak about the good work our government is doing in terms of the Ontario municipal partnership fund. In my riding alone, we have received over $16 million in much-needed funding: $11.5 million for the city of Brantford and $4.5 million for the county of Brant. This funding is extremely important to our local economy and to our citizens' quality of life. The grant will assist our municipality with their delivery of the social programs, support areas with limited property assessment, address challenges faced by rural communities and respond to the policing costs of those very rural communities.

Early this year, the province took full responsibility for Ontario drug benefit program costs, removing this burden from the municipal property tax base of the riding of Brant. As a result, Brant's municipal social program costs will go down. By 2011, our government will also take full responsibility for the riding's Ontario disability support program costs.

No municipality in the province of Ontario will receive less money than they have from last year. The minister ensures me that OMPF funding will not be reduced in 2008. As a government, we can't do anything better than that in terms of working partnerships with our municipalities. We are building a strong provincial-municipal relationship and showing that we are serious about the people of Ontario and, in particular, of my riding of Brant. To the minister and to the Premier, on behalf of the people in my riding, I wish to thank you for the full support you are providing for us in the riding of Brant.

ONTARIO ECONOMY

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: I rise today to clear up some misunderstandings about our government's approach to the economy. Unlike the federal finance minister and other federal Tories, we want to invest in communities like Brantford, Oakville, Oshawa and Windsor-Essex. These communities are full of great people, and they have great potential. The McGuinty government has not turned and will not turn its back on these communities.

There seems to be a misunderstanding on the part of Progressive Conservatives here as well. They call for tax cuts, but if we do that, just like they did over a decade ago, we would be closing hospitals just like they did over a decade ago, cutting social programs just like they did and sending our public education system back into turmoil just like they did. The havoc that the Conservatives wreaked on this province still reverberates. The McGuinty government has had to pick up the pieces that were left behind by the Conservatives, and now Ontario is moving forward.

The fact is, there are over 450,000 more net new jobs than in 2003, when we took over. In January of this year, Ontario outpaced other provinces in manufacturing sales growth. Combined with Quebec, we contributed 97% of the gain in manufacturing sales in January of this year. I hope this clears things up. This government is doing what is right for the economy, doing what is right for the people of Ontario.

WEARING OF RIBBONS

Mr. Frank Klees: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would ask for unanimous consent for us to wear the prematurity awareness ribbon provided to us by the members of the Linden Fund.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member seeks unanimous consent to wear the ribbon. Agreed? Agreed.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I beg to inform the House that today, the Clerk received the report on intended appointments dated March 19, 2008, of the standing committee on government agencies. Pursuant to standing order 106(e)9, the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

Report deemed adopted.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(CELLULAR PHONES), 2008 /

LOI DE 2008 MODIFIANT

LE CODE DE LA ROUTE

(TÉLÉPHONES CELLULAIRES)

Mr. O'Toole moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 40,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act to prohibit the use of phones and other equipment while a person is driving on a highway / Projet de loi 40, Loi modifiant le Code de la route pour interdire l'utilisation de téléphones et d'autres équipements pendant qu'une personne conduit sur une voie publique.

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. John O'Toole: Today in the Legislature, I urge the Minister of Transportation to take this issue very seriously. The intent of the legislation is to make our highways and byways safer in the province of Ontario. Many governments around the world have already recognized the connection between improving highway safety and the responsible use of technology while driving. The government must recognize the broader issue of driver distraction, and that the use of technology while driving is essentially dangerous and has been proven around the world. I urge the Minister of Transportation to work co-operatively. I would be happy to give him full credit for doing the right thing.

MADRESA ASHRAFUL ULOOM

ACT, 2008

Mr. Qaadri moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr5,

An Act respecting Madresa Ashraful Uloom.

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): Pursuant to standing order 84, this bill stands referred to the standing committee on regulations and private bills.

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(SPEED-LIMITING SYSTEMS), 2008 /

LOI DE 2008 MODIFIANT

LE CODE DE LA ROUTE

(SYSTÈMES LIMITEURS DE VITESSE)

Mr. Bradley moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 41,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act in relation to the use of speed-limiting systems in commercial motor vehicles / Projet de loi 41, Loi modifiant le Code de la route relativement à l'utilisation de systèmes limiteurs de vitesse dans les véhicules utilitaires.

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 Minister of Transportation for a short statement?

Hon. James J. Bradley: I'll await the statements by ministers.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

SPEED-LIMITING SYSTEMS

Hon. James J. Bradley: I rise in the House today to talk about another step in Ontario's plans for a cleaner environment and safer roads. This government has heard the public's concerns about speeding trucks on Ontario highways that pollute our environment and create unnecessary risk. The reality is that over one third of Ontario's greenhouse gas emissions come from the transportation sector; 84% of this comes from road transportation.

Ontario has been studying a mandatory speed limiter program for commercial vehicles for the last 18 months. Our research shows significant environmental and safety benefits. Our government's legislation, if passed, would make speed limiters on large trucks mandatory. This built-in electronic device would cap the speed of trucks at 105 kilometres per hour. The vast majority of large trucks built within the last decade are already equipped with this technology. This legislation will require that these devices be activated on Ontario's roads.

Our proposal would help Ontario to achieve the goals set out in our Go Green action plan on climate change by decreasing fossil fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Under this plan, we have set ambitious but achievable targets to reduce Ontario's greenhouse gas emissions by 6% below 1990 levels by the year 2014, 15% by the year 2020, and 80% below 1990 levels by the year 2050.

Speed limiters will deliver an estimated 1% to 3% of the greenhouse gas reductions needed to achieve Ontario's 2014 climate change targets.

Speed limiters would join a number of important green initiatives already under way to help us meet these targets, including: the green commercial vehicle project, a four-year, $15-million pilot project to help businesses switch to cleaner technologies such as hybrid power; Move Ontario 2020, a $17.5-billion plan to build more than 900 kilometres of rapid transit in the greater Toronto area and Hamilton, the largest transit investment in Canadian history; and more recently, the Next Generation of Jobs Fund, a $1.15-billion fund to support companies whose products reduce pollution and energy use.

A recent Transport Canada study found that capping the speed of all large trucks operating in Ontario at a maximum of 105 kilometres per hour would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 280,000 tonnes. This is like taking 2,700 tractor-trailers off the road each year. It would also save trucks, or truckers themselves, an estimated 100 million litres of diesel fuel each and every year.

Ontario is a leader in road safety, and we are always looking for ways to make our highways safer. Studies show that speed has a direct relationship with the severity of injuries in a vehicle crash. Reducing the speed of a large truck will greatly reduce the impact in a collision. Research shows that excessive speed is a factor in nearly 23% of crashes involving large vehicles. We anticipate that speed limiters would address this situation.

I would like to acknowledge the stakeholders who have helped us to develop this legislation to improve the environment and keep our roads safe. We're joined in the House today by representatives from the Ontario Trucking Association, Pollution Probe, the Canadian Automobile Association, the Ontario Safety League, the Traffic Injury Research Foundation, the Transportation Health and Safety Association of Ontario, the Insurance Bureau of Canada, the Ontario Lung Association, SmartRisk, and the Ontario Provincial Police.

I note, in diverting—I know we're not supposed to divert from the statements—that it's interesting that the Ontario Trucking Association, which is most affected by this, is here today in full support of it and has been for some time. The Ontario Trucking Association states that more than 50% of Ontario's trucks are already voluntarily using speed limiters. The majority of this industry realizes that the use of speed limiters would increase a truck's fuel economy, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and lower maintenance costs. Large trucks must operate at safe speeds so our friends and families may get home safely.

This legislation, if passed, will help to save lives. It will help us breathe cleaner air. We are serious about improving our environment, and we're committed to improving road safety. Let's tackle these issues together. Let's curb pollution by burning less fuel and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Let's reduce collision rates. Let's promote safe driving. Let's keep citizens safe on our roads. I ask all members to support this bill.

SHELTER ALLOWANCES /

ALLOCATIONS-LOGEMENT

Hon. Jim Watson: I rise today to inform members of an important housing program that is helping thousands of low-income working families across the province. The program is called ROOF, which stands for rental opportunity for Ontario families. It is a $185-million program that helps low-income working families to pay their rent. These are working families who are not living in social housing, working families who are not receiving any social assistance, working families who are struggling to get by while spending more than 30% of their income on rent.

In July 2007, the government launched the ROOF program to ease the struggle; it was launched by my colleague the now Minister of the Environment. Currently—

Applause.

Hon. Jim Watson: I thank him for applauding for himself.

Currently there are approximately 14,000 low-income working families, each receiving a housing allowance of $100 per month. For these families, this money can mean the difference in many day-to-day costs like purchasing healthy food or warm winter clothing for children. We know that more families need this assistance. That's why on February 22, I was very pleased to be in my riding of Ottawa West—Nepean, particularly at the Michele Heights Community Centre, when we announced the second round of applications for this important housing allowance program.

Pour ces familles, cet argent peut faire toute la différence quant à plusieurs de leurs dépenses quotidiennes, comme l'achat d'aliments sains ou de vêtements d'hiver pour leurs enfants. Nous savons qu'un plus grand nombre de familles a besoin de cette aide.

At the announcement, I had the privilege to meet with Russell Mawby, the city of Ottawa's director of housing, and Eileen Dooley of the United Way, who said, "We have a waiting list for affordable housing and we hope this announcement will reduce that list." They spoke about how programs like ROOF support their clients in their struggle, and how a single mother needs every bit of help to pay the rent and provide for her family.

Housing affordability is a complex issue and covers a broad spectrum of challenges. It's about homelessness. It's about finding safe, affordable housing in one's own community. It's about keeping up with rent payments and supporting a family. It's also about getting a foothold in a housing market that is becoming less and less affordable.

These challenges are varied and they require a variety of initiatives to address them. ROOF is the latest addition to the province's housing program, which includes the Canada-Ontario affordable housing program, the strong communities rent supplement program, the provincial rent bank, the delivering opportunities for Ontario renters initiative, and initiatives to benefit off-reserve aboriginal households.

I believe that ROOF will be a major help to low-income working families. Eligible families must have at least one child under the age of 18, have a net income below $20,000 per year, as outlined in the program guidelines, and pay more than 30% of their income on rent. Families must not be receiving a rent subsidy or social assistance.

I would encourage families in Ontario to take advantage of the second chance to apply for the ROOF program before the June 30, 2008, deadline. ROOF is making a real difference in the lives of many working families in the province. Families can request applications online at ontario.ca/roof, or by calling the ministry's call centre using the toll-free number 1-888-544-5101.

I hope that all of my colleagues will encourage their constituents to apply for the program. I have sent material to all MPPs' offices and I hope you will distribute it to those individuals who qualify.

Safe, affordable shelter is a basic human need. It is crucial to our survival and our sense of self-worth. Our government believes housing is fundamental to the strength of Ontario.

J'espère que mes collègues encourageront leur commettants à présenter une demande dans le cadre du programme. Notre gouvernement estime que le logement est essentiel à la vitalité de l'Ontario.

I commit to you that our government will continue to do all it can through ROOF and other programs to help people obtain suitable affordable housing. That's why I was so pleased on Monday to be with the Premier and Minister Deb Matthews to announce $100 million to repair affordable housing units throughout the province of Ontario.

MINING INDUSTRY

Hon. Michael Gravelle: I am very pleased to rise in the House today to inform members of the record-breaking levels of activity and investment that are being achieved in Ontario's mineral development industry.

I can report to the House that the mood of the industry is upbeat, as demonstrated by record attendance at the recent Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada annual convention in Toronto two weeks ago. At the same time, we've all heard a great deal these past few days and weeks about issues between aboriginal communities and mineral exploration companies. Our government is saddened by these developments. However, it does not lessen our resolve to work co-operatively with Ontario's aboriginal communities. There are many positive stories that I feel should be acknowledged and looked upon as examples of what can be when we all work together in a co-operative, respectful partnership.

From a mining perspective, the good news is that our most recent statistics show that Ontario is expected to once again lead the country in 2008, with $629 million in exploration expenditures, up from $502 million in 2007. We are hopeful that this kind of activity will lead to the development of new mines such as the De Beers Canada Victor mine, 90 kilometres west of Attawapiskat on the coast of James Bay, which I am pleased to say is completing its first production run as we speak.

With a total investment approaching $1 billion, De Beers expects the mine to produce six million carats of high-quality diamonds during its life. The Victor mine has employed about 600 people during construction and will employ another 375 during production. Estimates are that this project will create a $6.7-billion ripple through the provincial economy; much of it, I'm pleased to say, in northern Ontario.

In preparation for the opening of our new mine, the government put in place a highly competitive royalty rate that has positioned Ontario's diamond industry to thrive now and into the future. I'm pleased to say that the hallmark of the Victor mine has been extensive and forthright consultations with local aboriginal partners. This has led to the signing of impact benefit agreements that cover a wide range of issues, including education and training, employment, workplace conditions, business opportunities, environmental protection, social and cultural protection, and significant financial considerations.

Our government believes this is only the beginning, and that the minerals sector can provide meaningful opportunities for economic development and job creation for many of the north's aboriginal communities.

We also believe that there is a positive way forward. That's why my ministry has been working, over the past several years, to continuously improve relationships and engagement processes with aboriginal peoples. As part of these efforts, and in keeping with our policy goals outlined in Ontario's first mineral development strategy, we initiated a comprehensive engagement process aimed at developing more effective aboriginal consultation approaches for minerals sector activities.

Last year we released a discussion paper as one part of a multi-pronged engagement process that has included numerous meetings, workshops, pilot projects and information-sharing sessions across the north. To date, my ministry has received positive, detailed feedback and advice from many aboriginal communities.

We're also encouraged by the progress made thus far. We're encouraged by the memorandum of understanding that was signed earlier this month between the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada and the Assembly of First Nations. We're encouraged by other local MOUs between exploration companies operating in northern Ontario and local First Nations, and by the impact benefit agreements signed with several First Nations and tribal councils for the Musselwhite gold mine near Red Lake.

At the recent northern boreal prospectors symposium, more than 100 participants from 30 First Nations and aboriginal organizations came to Sioux Lookout to hear from other First Nations members how northern communities and individuals can benefit from the minerals industry. For the first time, at the recent prospectors' convention in Toronto, an aboriginal organization from Ontario actively participated in seeking business-to-business relationships.

There is no question that serious challenges remain, but these communities and others like them have shown us that there is indeed a way forward. My ministry strongly believes this, and through our commitment to meeting our duty to consult, which we are implementing in the context of the Mining Act, we believe the way forward is communication, co-operation and engagement.

Today I will be joining industry partners for Meet the Miners Day at Queen's Park. We will be reminded that Ontario's mining industry produced an estimated $10.7 billion worth of minerals in 2007, and that mining continues to be a pillar of our economy, sustaining some 100,000 direct and indirect jobs. Most importantly, we will be reminded of the opportunity mining offers to the people and communities of the north and, indeed, all of Ontario. I look forward to seeing my colleagues from all sides of the House at today's reception, to greet the members of the mining association. We welcome them all here today and look forward to seeing you later in the day.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Responses?

SPEED-LIMITING SYSTEMS

Ms. Laurie Scott: I rise today in response to the Minister of Transportation's statement regarding speed limiters, and I want to start by thanking our transportation critic for the official opposition, the member from Newmarket—Aurora, for allowing me to respond to the minister.

I think it's important that we remind all members of the House—the ones who were here before and the new ones who just arrived—that back in May 2006, I introduced Bill 115, the Highway Traffic Amendment Act, known as the speed limiter bill, to this Legislature. The Ontario Trucking Association, which is here today, has been advocating for this very concept and has been a leader on this front, and they've literally been waiting for the Liberals to get on board. So I want to thank them for all the support that we've received. This isn't a new parade, but once again, as we've so often seen before, the McGuinty parade crashers have jumped in front of the parade and pretended to take the lead.

Prior to October's election, the Premier travelled all over the province making election announcements on the taxpayer's dime, including a bunch of last-minute environmental items. The minister has asked all members to support this bill, but I think it's also very important to remind everyone here that despite what members of the government are trying to convey now, the Minister of Health himself voted against the legislation when I introduced it.

Interjections: No.

Ms. Laurie Scott: Yes. Not only did he vote against it, I recall him running rapidly from the back room to get into his seat to voice displeasure at the private member's bill, which is the same as the one introduced today. Not only that, the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Transportation at that time also voted against it. But I digress. The Minister of Health, who responds to the real and serious needs of long-term-care residents with the insulting suggestion that he wear a diaper—this is the Minister of Health.

I suppose safety and environmental concerns weren't getting the polling numbers needed in order to be a priority for the Liberals—or, worse yet, maybe they were too busy diving into that slush fund—but the bill was never brought before committee. We support the principles of this bill, and I say how truly disappointing it is that the Liberals, who clearly felt that road safety, reduced fuel consumption and reducing emissions weren't important, are now trying to take credit for a concept that wasn't important to them only a few months ago.

SHELTER ALLOWANCES

Mr. John O'Toole: I'd like to register my concerns in the House that this Minister of Municipal Affairs is using this Legislature as a backdrop for a self-congratulatory reannouncement opportunity for something that has been reannounced three times. There's nothing new in here. In fact, it was first announced by Minister Gerretsen. He said that he'd have 27,000 low-income families. Then it was announced by yourself, back in December, as 20,000 people. That's 7,000 people less. It seems like you're going in the wrong direction with this plan.

What the minister should be doing here is spending a bit more time keeping the costs of shelter down, not raising the costs, raising taxes and the cost of energy, all of the costs inherent with living in a shelter. You're raising the costs, not lowering them.

Minister, spend a bit more time working with those people that can't afford your high cost of doing business.

MINING INDUSTRY

Mr. Tim Hudak: I'm pleased the minister pumped up the "meet the miners" night, which I encourage all members to go to as well. But the minister's statement was a bit like the rooster taking credit for the sunrise. Certainly, Ontario has enormous mineral potential and talented entrepreneurs that are in the industry. But the McGuinty government ain't got much to do with the Victor mine or the other activity, because the minister well knows that his predecessors took Ontario from the number one jurisdiction for mineral investment in the world under the previous Mike Harris PC government out of the top 10 altogether, thanks to Dalton McGuinty's high taxes, high energy and runaway red tape.

I know the minister didn't write this line, but when he says, "In preparation for the opening of our new mine, the government put in place a highly competitive royalty rate"—George Orwell couldn't have come up with that one. I know Gravelle didn't write that, because what you did after the mine was under way was jack the tax rates up, to potentially three times the value—a move, by the way, that would make Hugo Chavez blush. It reverberated throughout the world, and I do hope that this minister, who I know quite well, will fight that and get mining taxes back down to the level that they should be.

SHELTER ALLOWANCES

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: I'm responding to the Minister of Housing's statement. This is how dire the housing situation is in this province: We have over 125,000 households waiting for affordable housing, over 70,000 in the GTA alone, and the average housing wait time is 10 to 12 years. We need ROOF, but we need roofs more, Minister.

I want to announce that I'm going to be tabling a bill next week calling for shelter to become an Ontario human right, because housing is a right. It is a right; it is not a privilege. I know that the McGuinty Liberals treat it as if it were a privilege, so we have one superficial announcement after another. We don't see the shovels in the ground, and that's what Ontarians need. And they need it now.

This is a government, after all, that promised at least 20,000 new builds when they were first elected, and they have provided less than a third of that, by their very own reckoning, which I have to say is also somewhat suspect.

Again, I reiterate: Housing should be a right, according to the United Nations—that's why I am bringing in the bill—not a privilege. This government treats it as if it were a privilege.

So what do we need? We need roofs as well as ROOF. We need a shovel in the ground now—new units.

MINING INDUSTRY

Mr. Gilles Bisson: On behalf of the New Democratic caucus, I want to first of all welcome all those from the mining industry who are here today. We understand very well in our caucus the importance that the mining industry plays in Ontario and what it means for hard-working people who are employed in the industry—some of the best-paying jobs, some of the most technical jobs and some of the jobs that quite frankly sustain our communities, such as Sudbury, Red Lake, Timmins and others.

I want to say to those who might have forgotten, I come out of the mining industry. I worked underground for a number of years as an electrician and understand the industry well. I want to say to the minister across the way, what gall you have coming into this House today and crowing on your record of mining. On the De Beers project, you guys tripled the mining royalty.

You come into the House and you say, "We have a competitive rate for royalties when it comes to diamond mining." De Beers went to the international board and said, "We are selling this project in Ontario as a stable place to grow, as a stable place to do business. We are saying that Ontario is not going to change the rules halfway through the process."

Do you know how surprised everybody was at the last budget? People basically fell off their seats because they couldn't believe this government, after they were involved, getting ready to spend a billion dollars to bring that mine on to production—that you would essentially triple the taxation rate on diamonds. I say that is not a progressive move. That is not a fair move. That is one that is quite regressive and one, quite frankly, that should be undone.

Then you come into the House, today of all days, a couple of days after we've basically jailed the leadership of the community of KI for trying to do what is right by their community and making sure that, yes, mining happens in that community but that the community is able to benefit. The provincial government's response is not to say, "Let's put in place protocols that basically deal with the need to consult between First Nations and the provincial government." The industry understands this.

The industry understands that at the end of the day, if we are going to do business in mining in northern Ontario, we have to have the protocols in place to make sure that First Nations are benefactors of the project.

What have you done? You've taken the leadership and you've thrown them in jail. I say to this government, "Shame on you," because that is not co-operation. That is how you basically entrench the First Nations community into a position that quite frankly none of us are going to benefit from, because you guys have set it up.

I say to this government across the way, if you want to talk about co-operation, resolve the issue. Tell your Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and tell your Premier to do what the mining industries and others have been calling for, and that is to put in place protocols when it comes to development and when it comes to exploration, and have revenue-sharing put in place so that when mining happens in communities, everybody can benefit.

The last point I want to make—I use De Beers as the example of how to do things right. Yes, De Beers did it right, but they didn't have the support of your government or other governments to the degree they needed in order to work their way through trying to negotiate a deal with the community of Attawapiskat and others. They've basically been on their own because this government has been missing in action when it comes to the leadership role that they have to play to assist industry to get those IBAs in place so that you can do the development.

They're still negotiating some of those agreements with some of the communities, and this government has been missing in action. So don't come in here and try to pretend that you guys are progressive on this file, because you failed a long time ago.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I beg the indulgence of the members to introduce a number of guests today.

First I'd like to introduce the former member of the 35th and 36th Parliaments from the riding of Victoria—Haliburton, and from that riding of Haliburton—Victoria—Brock for the 37th Parliament, Chris Hodgson, in the west gallery. Welcome today.

On behalf of the member from Hamilton Mountain, I would like to welcome to the Legislature today Mr. David Agnew, Ms. Judy Agnew and Mr. Ron Barker.

On behalf of the member for Welland, I'd like to welcome the students from the law program at Niagara College, in Welland. Welcome to Queen's Park today.

On behalf of the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, I'd like to welcome Jeff Muzzi, the father of page Daniel Muzzi. Welcome to Queen's Park today.

VISITOR

Hon. Rick Bartolucci: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I'd be remiss if I didn't point and welcome in the gallery a former employee of the Ministry of Energy, my daughter, Angie Robson.

ORAL QUESTIONS

ONTARIO ECONOMY

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: My question is for the Deputy Premier. You can imagine the shock when we read yesterday's headline in the Saskatoon StarPhoenix: "Windsor, Ont. Mayor Wants Residents to Fly West for Jobs." Windsor, as we all know, is the hometown of both the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Economic Development. But thanks to this government's failed economic policies, the mayor of that fine city is looking outside Ontario to find work for his people—not to the two supposedly influential cabinet ministers.

This is just one glaring, and I trust very embarrassing, example of how, thanks to this government's failed economic policies, Ontario is setting records for people leaving the province. If the Premier and his colleagues won't listen to us, maybe they'll listen to the mayor of Windsor and admit that this government's policies of high taxation and suffocating red tape are killing jobs. Will you do that, Deputy?

Hon. George Smitherman: I hope the honourable member might at some point have the opportunity to speak with the mayor of Windsor, who I think was primarily focused on trying to build opportunities through their airport to service a broader array of communities. But our government has been tremendously committed to the people of Windsor, with about a billion and a half dollars of investment—investment which demonstrates our fundamental commitment to the understanding that a strong economy depends on having strong people and strong infrastructure as well.

It's sad that on a continual basis the honourable member, taking his lead from the federal finance minister, is trying to have a flashback in the province of Ontario, a flashback to a circumstance where the panacea of tax cuts was offered without the requisite acknowledgment that that leads to service cuts. It would be nice for the honourable member to stand up and start identifying all of those areas where he would like to see the cuts to services instead of standing up and asking on a daily basis about—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Supplementary?

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: I don't know how the minister can explain the mayor of Windsor's actions with a straight face. In the last few months we've seen British Columbia attempt to lure Ontario workers away, we've seen Alberta hold job fairs here, and now we witness the spectacle of the mayor of Windsor, home of two senior Liberal ministers, outing this government and its failed economic policies, urging his citizens to go west for work—a shameful and sad situation in this wonderful province.

But the mayor is stating the obvious: There are few jobs to be had in Windsor, and your sheep-like follower ministers have failed their community and this Liberal government is failing our province. Minister, when will you stop ignoring the evidence—admit it, you're on the wrong track—and switch course?

Hon. George Smitherman: The honourable member was part of a government that liked to pretend it was on the right track. Its right track was cutting taxes and cutting jobs. Today other jurisdictions compete for workers, but back in their day they called nurses hula-hoops and they sent them packing. That's the difference between our government and theirs.

We fundamentally believe in the idea that a strong economy depends upon strong people. That's why we have 100,000 additional opportunities in our post-secondary environment today, making sure that the well-trained workers are part of the attraction to our province. Theirs is a solution rooted in the past and rooted in ideology, and the people of the province of Ontario have seen that play. They don't want to return to a day where cutting $5 billion because of tax reductions has the result of cutting services left, right and centre.

We're going to continue to invest in the people of Windsor because we know they have strength. That's why we've invested $1.5 billion in the Windsor economy today.

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: Given the minister's recent comments about the challenges facing long-term-care residents, he has a lot of nerve quoting former members.

The deputy and his Premier won't listen to us; they won't listen to other provinces; they won't listen to the mayor of Windsor. They have ideological blinders on, continuing down a dead-end road of high taxes and increased red tape that has cost the province over 194,000 manufacturing jobs since July 2004, and leading to have-not status for the province.

I have a quote from another individual that just maybe the Deputy Premier might listen to: "Corporate tax cuts will give Canada's exporters a tax advantage to replace the lost currency advantage. It's not a left-wing policy, it's not a right-wing policy. It's for families and workers, a sound policy." Stéphane Dion, January 2008.

Deputy Premier, the evidence is all around you. Will you take off the blinders and stop choking business?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Order.

Hon. George Smitherman: I do appreciate the pundits offering compliments on the results in the federal by-elections the other night.

The honourable member wants to talk about nerve speaking about health care. It was the Health Services Restructuring Commission which rolled through his communities and other communities in the province of Ontario and led to the closure of 28 hospitals in the province of Ontario. He talks about ideological blinders. He stands up today and asks for a return to those same policies—cut taxes as a revenue eliminator, so that they can force their agenda of cutting services for Ontarians.

We understand that a strong economy depends on strong people and on strong infrastructure. That's why our government has made those investments. But last year's budget began an elimination of business education taxes. Capital taxes were reduced and eliminated for the manufacturing sector and the forestry sector in our fall economic statement and—

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

SMALL BUSINESS

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: The next question is for the Minister of Small Business and Entrepreneurship. This government—

Interjection: Who is it?

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: Yes, who is it?

This government is laying waste to the small business sector in this province, and this minister is missing in action—nowhere to be found. We saw the latest yesterday with a question from the member for Sarnia about how this government is taking business away from small and independent pharmacies across Ontario when it comes to WSIB claims. I'm sure the minister knows about this. It's a major concern in rural and northern Ontario.

Will the minister tell the House whether or not he has been in touch with the Minister of Labour to protest this decision to steal business from hard-working independent business people and the Minister of Labour's gall in describing it as a "great policy"? Have you done your job here? Have you talked to him about this?

Hon. Harinder S. Takhar: To the Minister of Labour, please.

Hon. Brad Duguid: I have indeed had an opportunity to speak with the chair of the WSIB about this particular policy. Whether it's employers—

Mr. Tim Hudak: Point of order.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Stop the clock, please. Pardon me; no, leave the clock running. A point of order?

Mr. Tim Hudak: Clearly the question was directed at a minister about if a minister is doing his correct job. I ask you if this is an appropriate referral considering the question.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The minister chose to refer to the Minister of Labour, who's responsible for the WSIB.

Minister of Labour.

Hon. Brad Duguid: As I was saying, I have had an opportunity to speak to this particular policy with the chair of the WSIB. The WSIB, as members know, is an arm's-length agency of this government. As I said yesterday, they are responsible indeed for their purchasing policy.

What this policy does is, it provides workers across this province with the ability to pick up the phone and order the material they need. It's a limited amount of material that's available under this program, but it gives them the convenience of—

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: Speaker, is the word "spineless" parliamentary?

The Speaker: Keep the clock running. Again, we had a discussion yesterday about words that are or are not parliamentary. I believe that that is a personal attack, and I would ask that the member withdraw his statement, please.

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: I will withdraw, at your request, Mr. Speaker. But it was also a personal question that dealt with the minister's activities—specifically with his activities.

I want to go back to him. During the pre-budget consultations, the finance committee heard from small business people. They heard about the effects this government's wrong-track economic policies are having on this critical part of the economy. The federation of independent business says that the number one problem for small and medium-sized business in this province is the increase in total tax burden and the burden of red tape.

Will the Minister of Small Business please advise the House if he shares the concerns of the business owners he's supposed to represent at the cabinet table, and whether or not he's been advocating for lower taxes for this critical sector of our economy? Have you been doing your job?

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The Minister of Labour.

Hon. Brad Duguid: I'm pleased to refer this back to the minister responsible for small business.

Hon. Harinder S. Takhar: Actually, it's interesting. About 15 minutes ago, I met with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business . This is what they told me: Our government is on the right track; we are doing the right thing. We are trying to decrease the burden on our small businesses, we are taking the right initiative by decreasing the capital tax on manufacturers, we are providing a capital cost allowance to manufacturers, and we are working with them closely. We are not sitting with them and just asking a question; we are actually out there, meeting with them and hearing them.

I had five sessions with them to hear what needs to be done. We are doing exactly what our members are asking us to do.

Mr. Robert W. Runciman: I don't think we'd find too many people in the business community who would agree with that.

Here are some comments from the small-business community heard at the finance committee hearings, and I'm quoting:

"Taxes and regulation are becoming prohibitive for small businesses. No incentive to be in business in the first place."

Another quote: "Small business is unable to sustain the current level of taxation. We find more and more erosion of our profits, with the lion's share going to government."

This minister is supposedly the advocate of small business at the cabinet table, and one would hope that he understands that a strong economy is the only way we can afford our hospitals, schools, and the programs that we all care about. Surely he's been pushing this message at the cabinet table. Can he confirm this? Has he been doing his job and standing up for small and medium-sized business in the province of Ontario?

Hon. Harinder S. Takhar: I actually had the chance to meet with four independent groups in the last two months. I don't know how many people the Leader of the Opposition met that he can stand here and ask these questions.

Let me just say what Judith Andrew had to say. She said, "It's nice to see that the government is coming in with some tax relief that puts money in their pockets and helps them weather the coming storm."

That's exactly what we are doing: We are doing the right thing that needs to be done. We do have a plan on five fronts. But in addition to that, we are decreasing the capital tax, we are matching the capital cost allowance, we are—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you. The leader of the third party.

WINDSOR ECONOMY

Mr. Howard Hampton: My question is for the Deputy Premier. Yesterday, the Premier rejected the NDP's Buy Ontario plan because he said, "It would compromise our economy." The city of Windsor has already seen 35% of its manufacturing jobs vanish under the McGuinty government. That sounds like an economy that has already been significantly compromised. Given that the McGuinty government has already compromised the economy of the Windsor area with the destruction of 19,000 manufacturing jobs, what is the McGuinty government's real excuse for not adopting the NDP's Buy Ontario plan?

Hon. George Smitherman: I'm not sure what makes a greater mockery of their very plan. Is it the opposition that they have to the expansion of the subway line to York University and beyond to York region, or is it in their very own spending as a party? They hire a polling firm from Winnipeg that they spend $78,000 on and an ad agency from Vancouver that they spend more than $100,000 on. So if the honourable member really believes in Buy Ontario, maybe he should demonstrate it with those dollars that he has authority over.

Mr. Howard Hampton: At least I don't fly to Chicago to seek an image consultant.

But the issue is this: Windsor has lost 19,000 manufacturing jobs, representing more than a third of its total manufacturing workforce. Things have gotten so bad that the mayor of Windsor is now trying to line up direct flights to fly unemployed Windsor workers to jobs in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

My question is this: Does the McGuinty government actually believe that long-distance commuting of unemployed Windsor workers to jobs in Alberta and Saskatchewan is better than a Buy Ontario policy for manufacturing jobs in Windsor?

Hon. George Smitherman: To the Minister of Economic Development.

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: I think it's really important for people to know what the people of Windsor understand: We build great cars in my town and in this province. Ninety percent of all of our vehicles—90% of them—go to the United States. We are an export jurisdiction and we're proud of it.

Not only that, the people in Windsor know that for many years they have been leading the nation in terms of productivity. We are the first ones to understand the challenge that we're having right now. That's why this government has come forward in just these last four years with a billion and a half dollars, far more than any of you on the other side of this House could ever envision, in investment in the city of Windsor; basic infrastructure. But I will remind, people of Windsor, every member on that side of the House—

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

Mr. Howard Hampton: The sad reality is that the McGuinty government has been so effective that 19,000 manufacturing jobs have disappeared from Windsor. The McGuinty government has been so effective that $825 million in manufacturing wages has been ripped out of the Windsor economy. The two Windsor cabinet ministers in the McGuinty government have been so busy twiddling their thumbs that the mayor of Windsor is now saying that workers from Windsor should seriously consider commuting to jobs in Alberta and Saskatchewan because there aren't any jobs in Windsor.

I ask again: If that is your economic policy for unemployed workers in Windsor, that they should commute to jobs in Alberta and Saskatchewan, stand up and tell the people of Windsor that that's a better option than a Buy Ontario policy that would help to sustain and create manufacturing jobs in Windsor.

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: The people of Windsor are in partnership with the government of Ontario, and we would like to think the federal government, who are not on the page yet, but we hope to bring them onside. What we know is, we've invested in Valiant, we've invested in Chrysler; we hope to invest in Ford along with the federal counterpart. What we hope is that our new medical school will bring new jobs; our new engineering school will bring new jobs. The $400-million investment in our casino is bringing new jobs. We have invested in the city of Windsor and we will continue to do so.

MANUFACTURING JOBS

Mr. Howard Hampton: Again to the Deputy Premier: The McGuinty Liberals could help sustain and create thousands of jobs in hard-hit communities now by implementing a meaningful Buy Ontario transit policy that would ensure that 50% of the work that goes into the building of transit vehicles is done here in Ontario. Will the Deputy Premier admit that anything less than 50% in a Buy Ontario plan will only further compromise Ontario's manufacturing jobs?

Hon. George Smitherman: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Transportation.

Hon. James J. Bradley: I appreciate the question from the leader of the third party, who refused to agree that the extension of the subway to York University, which would have created thousands upon thousands of jobs in the province of Ontario, should proceed. I appreciate that.

I know that some of his colleagues behind him were flabbergasted when he happened to come forward with the policy of opposing that extension, because that in itself, of course, would provide the opportunity for the stock associated with it to be produced in Ontario.

I can tell the member that we are working hard to ensure that when these projects are undertaken, the overwhelming amount of money spent on those projects—for instance, 82% in the Move Ontario program—will be spent in the province of Ontario. We look for any other opportunities we can to ensure that we have a fair opportunity to access—

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

Mr. Howard Hampton: I listened carefully for an answer to the question, but there was no answer. It's a no-brainer: If the construction work is going to happen here, the construction jobs will be here. But this is about manufacturing jobs. This is about ensuring, if we're going to spend money on urban transit, that manufacturing jobs happen here in Ontario.

The McGuinty government is missing in action on this. Meanwhile, municipal leaders have convened manufacturing summits with labour leaders and business leaders. The Ontario Chamber of Commerce has endorsed our Buy Ontario plan. Workers at the Bombardier plant in Thunder Bay have endorsed the Buy Ontario plan. We offer a Buy Ontario plan for this government to adopt.

My question is, when will the McGuinty government show some leadership and adopt a Buy Ontario plan that will sustain at least 50% of the manufacturing jobs in Ontario?

Hon. James J. Bradley: You can tell that the member has his usual simplistic answer to every challenge that's out there. I appreciate that his colleague, the member for Timmins—James Bay, who has been a good friend for a number of years, is, I think, sincere in the goal he sets. I think that what we have to look at, when we develop a policy of this kind, is the impact it would have overall on plants in the province of Ontario.

The member for Windsor, for instance, stated earlier today that in terms of exports, 90% of the vehicles produced in Windsor, in the instance she gave, were in fact exported. We want to ensure that the export markets that are available to those who produce transit equipment in Thunder Bay and elsewhere continue to be available. So we want to be cautious when we proceed with a plan to assist our people—

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

Mr. Howard Hampton: The McGuinty government's response seems to be that the United States is wrong in adopting a Buy America policy in terms of transit equipment, which results in 60% of the manufacturing work being done in that country. The McGuinty government seems to be saying that Germany is wrong, when it results in 98% of the manufacturing work being done in that country, and France is wrong, and Belgium is wrong—except, all of these countries have successfully built an industry around the manufacture of various kinds of transit vehicles.

Toronto reasoned that if they purchased from Thunder Bay, some 70% of the work would actually be done in parts plants around the greater Toronto area. Everybody else seems to see the logic. Where is the McGuinty government? Why are you on a different page from virtually every other transit manufacturing jurisdiction in the world?

Hon. James J. Bradley: Again, I appreciate this question coming from the individual who opposed the extension of the subway in Toronto to York University and all the jobs it would produce. He can smirk and smile over there about that, but his own members feel very uncomfortable about that—they disagree with him—and they should be.

May I say that our government is looking at every opportunity it can to be of assistance to all of those who are involved in any of these transit projects. He will note that the TTC, which has members on it who are members of the New Democratic Party—but they are members of the New Democratic Party who face the reality of being in office and having to come up with practical solutions—did not choose the 50% solution. In fact, they stipulated 25% Canadian content as part of their proposal. So I think the member should speak—

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

SMALL BUSINESS

Mr. Norm Miller: I have a question for the Minister of Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Minister, have you been working with the Minister of the Environment to reduce regulatory red tape for small and medium-sized businesses?

Hon. Harinder S. Takhar: Let me thank the member for asking this question. Last year alone, we were able to reduce the paper burden impact on our small and medium-sized businesses by about 24 percentage points. When we release the number by the end of March this year, you will see similar progress made again this year. So there will be sufficient progress made on the small and medium-sized businesses because we think small and medium-sized businesses are critical to our economy. They employ 50% of the total workforce, and they are about 99% of all corporations in Ontario.

That's why we are working very closely with them to reduce the paperwork burden and, at the same time, making other reforms as well, so that we can move forward and make them more competitive in this competitive environment.

Mr. Norm Miller: Minister, let me tell you about a new form—because you didn't really answer the first part of my question—that was introduced in August 2007 for the generation registration report requiring new and more detailed information and reporting. I've heard from some frustrated small business operators. Here's what one that uses a product to clean out pump bearing houses in their shop had to say:

"Why in heaven's name am I considered the producer of the cleaning fluid when in fact we only contaminate it with the product of our cleanings? You must think that all companies, no matter what size, employ chemical engineers and corporate lawyers to defrag the crap you write into your applications. There are thousands of small generators throughout Ontario (auto mechanics, pump/motor/fan/etc.) that are repair depots whose only waste is greases and oils and yet we are placed amongst the major chemical users insofar as waste generation is concerned.

"Give us a break, ease up and simplify this ludicrous yearly event."

Minister, will you follow this business person's advice and simplify this reporting process?

Hon. Harinder S. Takhar: Our government has paid a lot of attention to making sure that there is a regulatory reform for the small and medium-sized businesses when we reduce the burden on our small and medium-sized businesses. All of our ministries have been working very closely together to make sure that that happens, and the Premier is providing strong leadership on that front to ensure that our environment becomes competitive and becomes the leader, not only in this country but in North America as well, in making sure that the environment is a great environment for small businesses to survive, succeed and start in this province.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): New question. The leader of the third party.

ABORIGINAL RIGHTS

Mr. Howard Hampton: A question for the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs: Yesterday, the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs tried to indicate that the NAN northern table discussions between the McGuinty government and Nishnawbe-Aski Nation were continuing. In fact, he said that directly to the media. I want to read a letter of today's date from the grand chief:

"As NAN grand chief, I suspended the participation of NAN leadership at the northern table Monday following a caucus of NAN chiefs who were in Thunder Bay for the court proceeding. This bilateral partnership with NAN leadership will remain suspended until further direction by chiefs-in-assembly."

Does the McGuinty government still want to tell this House and tell the media that the northern table discussions are continuing?

Hon. Michael Bryant: Only the New Democratic Party would celebrate the idea that discussions would discontinue. In fact what is happening is that I'm continuing to have discussions with Grand Chief Stan Beardy. I spoke to him yesterday at some length; I'm speaking with him today; I spoke with him earlier in the week.

I'm speaking with him, national Chief Phil Fontaine, Grand Chief Angus Toulouse and others, as well as reaching out to the acting chief in KI and the vice-chief and co-chief at Ardoch as we continue discussions to try to ensure that we continue to make agreements and find solutions that will allow for First Nations in the north and in the south to see more jobs and more prosperity for their communities. That's what we're fighting for.

Mr. Howard Hampton: I can tell members of the McGuinty government that misrepresenting the position of NAN chiefs is not going to be—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I would just ask that the member withdraw that comment, please.

Mr. Howard Hampton: I withdraw.

I can say to the government that stating that the northern table discussions are continuing when in fact the chiefs have suspended them is not helpful. Nor is it helpful when the minister tells the media that he has offered to pay the legal expenses of Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation, when we then find out that he has offered $200,000 when in fact the legal expenses are over $700,000.

It seems to me that if the McGuinty government wants to proceed, there has to be some authenticity. When is the minister going to admit that it's the McGuinty government that is responsible for the conflict that has arisen? You're responsible because you've failed to meet your constitutional duty to accommodate and—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Minister?

Hon. Michael Bryant: Yes, we have said that we'll pay the legal fees of KI. We've said that we will assess the fees above $200,000. Only the leader of the NDP would think that $700,000 in legal fees is something that the government of any province should just pay, sight unseen. You'll excuse us for trying to assess the fees over and above $200,000.

It's just part of an attempt by this government to try to come to a solution. But the member really disrespects all of those First Nations that have come to agreements with the mining industry across this province to build more jobs and build more revenue. I'm talking about Sagamok First Nation, Timiskaming First Nation, Webequie, Attawapiskat, Moose Cree—the list goes on and on. There are far, far more First Nations working with the mining industry and working with the government to the benefit of First Nations than the leader of the NDP would have us believe.

WALKERTON TRAGEDY

Mrs. Carol Mitchell: My question is for the Attorney General. As you know, the terrible contaminated water tragedy in Walkerton which occurred in May 2000 resulted in a compensation plan that was to provide financial support and compensation for those who became sick, lost loved ones or incurred other losses. Minister, can you provide this House with a status update on this compensation plan?

Hon. Christopher Bentley: I'd like to thank the member for Huron—Bruce for her determination and advocacy in this area.

As a result of the terrible tragedy in Walkerton that occurred in May 2000, the government reached a settlement with claimants in 2001. That settlement provided that the government fund compensation for those affected through an independent, court-overseen process. There is a court monitor; there are those specifically required to assess these claims. Bringing us up to date, over 9,000 cases have been settled. Over $65 million has been provided to provide everything from compensation for the terrible loss to compensation for simple living expenses. It has been a very difficult time, but the court process has moved with—

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

Mrs. Carol Mitchell: Minister, I do want to thank you for sharing the information. I can tell you that it is reassuring that this plan has been able to offer some help to those who have suffered so much. However, there are concerns, and they have been raised in the Walkerton area, about a number of claims that still remain outstanding. Can you assure the people of Walkerton that their claims will be dealt with in a fair and a timely manner?

Hon. Christopher Bentley: As I said, 9,000 cases have been resolved. There are approximately 101 cases remaining, all of which will be dealt with by government funding through an independent court-monitored process. So this means that the court monitor and the adjusters are working with every single one of the claimants, assisting them in assessing the claims, determining what additional information is required, determining how best to move forward. Every single one, I understand, knows the process, knows the next steps, has the options available.

As a government we are absolutely determined to ensure that the necessary funding is in place to make sure that all claims, as assessed by the independent process, are resolved. We'll see this through to its conclusion. There are 101 left. I'm hoping for as expeditious a resolution as possible. Again, I thank the member for Huron—Bruce for her determined advocacy.

MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE

Mr. Tim Hudak: A question to the Deputy Premier: The Minister of Finance's so-called Investing in Ontario Act, introduced yesterday, is not exactly what he claimed it would be. In fact, the bill defines an eligible recipient as "a person or entity, other than an individual but including a partnership whose members may be individuals, that does not carry on activities for the purpose of gain or profit." The word "municipalities," which he claimed, is nowhere to be found as an eligible recipient. Minister, isn't it true, then, that under that definition, a hall-of-fame Liberal slush fund recipient like the Ontario cricket association would qualify under this bill?

Hon. George Smitherman: I want to thank the honourable member for his question. I think that all of us were very enthusiastic to see the response that came from noted municipal leaders like Hazel McCallion, the mayor of Mississauga. She's been one of those who has been waging a very aggressive and appropriate campaign to encourage the federal government to offer an appropriate level of support, recognizing the underlying circumstances for infrastructure.

As I had a chance in earlier questions from the leader, I would acknowledge that we really do believe fundamentally that investing in quality infrastructure is important. That's why, as this bill comes forward for debate, it will enjoy enthusiastic support from our side. We'll look forward to all the critiques and amendments that the honourable member might wish to offer, but for now we're delighted with the progress associated with the idea that our municipalities need further sustained investment.

Mr. Tim Hudak: I know it wasn't the deputy leader; it's obviously the Minister of Finance who tried to pull a fast one on municipal leaders and MPPs by suggesting that this was about a municipal capital program for future surpluses. If you look at the bill, Deputy Premier, that was introduced yesterday, you can see that what the minister claimed last week is not in keeping with the facts when you actually read the bill. For example, cabinet would be able to decide "to whom payments would be made, the purposes for which payments" are to be made and "the method of and basis for calculating the payments." Again, the word "municipality" is not part of that bill.

Minister, it's nothing but another Liberal slush fund trying to escape the scrutiny of the Provincial Auditor. Will you agree just to scrap this bill altogether, this back-door Liberal slush fund, and come forward with a real program that's transparent for municipal capital?

Hon. George Smitherman: The Minister of Municipal Affairs.

Hon. Jim Watson: It's a little rich, coming from that party, talking about funding to the municipal sector. They're the kings and queens of downloading over there, and the municipal community will never forgive them or forget the punishment they suffered as a result of downloading costs that should be at the provincial level.

Let me quote the president of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, Doug Reycraft, who said, after Minister Duncan introduced the Investing in Ontario Act, that it "is another significant step in the province's commitment to partnering with municipalities to help ease the infrastructure challenges they are facing." This is

an act that is going to help municipalities, and we're very proud of it. We call on that party to come forward and support this particular piece of legislation. We will then forgive you for all of the damage you did to—

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

SOINS DE LONGUE DURÉE /

LONG-TERM CARE

M me France Gélinas: Ma question est pour le ministre de la Santé et des Soins de longue durée. Quand M me Rachelle St-Amand visitait sa mère dans une maison de soins de longue durée de Sudbury, elle a trouvé d'autres résidants dans le lit de sa mère, des selles sur les meubles, des sous-vêtements souillés sur le plancher et des résidants complètement nus qui se promenaient dans les corridors.

Madame St-Amand told the Sudbury Star that they need more one-on-one, and they don't have the staff to do it. Does the minister think that our loved ones in long-term-care homes deserve a minimum standard of care of 3.5 hours?

Hon. George Smitherman: I appreciate the opportunity to answer the question. First off, I want to say that for anyone who is visiting a long-term-care home or has a resident there who doesn't think the care is at an appropriate level, their responsibility is to call the action line which is posted inside the door of all long-term-care homes. I give the honourable member and all Ontarians the assurance that those compliance cases are dealt with in a very timely way.

I'm pleased as well that we are moving toward the implementation of a regulation that will have the effect of establishing a much higher standard of care than the New Democratic Party had when they were in office. She calls today for 3.5 hours, but the legacy of that party was 2.25 hours. In the province of Ontario today we have 2.95 average hours of care per day for all residents of long-term care, and being added to as we speak.

M me France Gélinas: Minister, I'd like to read you a quote from the Sudbury Star dated March 11: "No one who talked to the Star blamed staff or management at long-term care facilities. The consensus is that they are overworked, doing the best they can with limited resources. The question each asks is: Why are resources so thin? Why is it so hard to treat our mothers and fathers, husbands and wives, sisters and brothers with dignity in their final years?"

These questions are ones that all Ontarians are asking. What is the minister's response?

Hon. George Smitherman: I want to say to the honourable member that no community has had a greater increase in the number of long-term-care beds in Ontario than the Sudbury community. To date, that increase represents 47% more beds added in the last several years. I want to say to the honourable member that I agree it's important to have higher standards in long-term care. That's why we're already 0.6 hours per day higher than when the NDP was in office; 9.55 million additional hours of care today, every year, in the province of Ontario's long-term-care homes than when the New Democratic Party was in office.

Those will be added to as we make further investments in both nursing and personal-support workers. Accordingly, I do want to say to the honourable member that we believe these individuals deserve a high level of care. That's why we're so fundamentally committed to it and that's why we've added an additional 9.55 million hours.

TOURISM

Mr. David Zimmer: My question is for the Minister of Tourism. The tourism industry is a vital part of Ontario's economy. We are all aware of the many challenges the tourism sector in Ontario has faced over the past few years: the high value of the Canadian dollar, higher gas prices, and the US proposal to increase border security through passport requirements. Tourism has increasingly become a more competitive industry, and we are competing on a global stage as never before. Would the minister inform members of the House about what the government is doing to confront these challenges?

Hon. Peter Fonseca: I want to thank the member for that question and for his clear understanding of how important tourism is to Ontario, to our economy and to strengthening our communities across this province.

I can tell you that Premier McGuinty and this government take tourism very seriously. Our government has been working closely with our tourism partners to address the challenges that, yes, are before us. That's why we're investing more in Ontario tourism today than ever before in our history. We continue to build those strong partnerships with our attractions, our festivals, our events, our restaurants and our associations.

At this critical time, the industry has asked for a comprehensive competitiveness study of the industry, to be led by someone who has this strong understanding of the public sector and enterprise. That's why I'm delighted that Greg Sorbara will be the chair of this most important study.

Mr. David Zimmer: The other day I was listening to the radio and I heard the leader of the official opposition say that there are no major attractions to get visitors to come to the city of Toronto and spend their money. As a member from one of the Toronto ridings, that was an appalling statement. In fact, the Royal Ontario Museum and the Art Gallery of Ontario have just undergone major renovations and are setting a world-class standard. The Toronto International Film Festival is world-renowned and attracted visitors from all over the world this year and every year.

I'd like the minister to expand on how the competitiveness study will look at how we can best leverage these great attractions that we have here in Ontario and particularly in the city of Toronto.

Hon. Peter Fonseca: Again, I would like to thank the member for Willowdale for that question. It's so unfortunate that the Leader of the Opposition would knock down the tourism sector with a glass-half-empty attitude, a sector that employs over 300,000 people in this province. However, like I said before, our government realizes the importance of tourism, and that's why we're investing in tourism, investing in our economy. This is the largest employer of our youth.

To make sure that happens, Greg Sorbara as the chair will be seeing what we're doing well in the province, where we've had some major successes, where we can improve and where we can take advantage of the many opportunities in this industry that is experiencing such phenomenal growth.

DEVELOPMENT FEES

Mr. Toby Barrett: A question for the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs: Work on the Hampton Hotel in Brantford has now been shut down on eight separate days by the Haudenosaunee Development Institute demanding payment. This is just one of several construction sites in Brantford shut down by protesters demanding extortion fees. Aside from the Hampton Hotel, there are the Mission Estates on Garden Avenue, First Urban at Gretzky and Henry, and the Grand River Avenue site of home builder Mike Quattrociocchi.

Yesterday, you said you are "going to work" with Six Nations, municipalities and developers. We've had two years of construction shutdowns. Minister, when will you start working with area home builders?

Hon. Michael Bryant: Yes, we'll continue to work with area home builders, and we'll continue to work with municipal leaders and, yes, we will continue to work with Six Nations leadership. I've never heard the official opposition talk about any of those members working with Six Nations leadership. We're not going to pick and choose who in that community we're going to work with to try to make progress. I've expressed to band council at Six Nations, I have expressed to the confederacy in the Haudenosaunee Six Nations that obviously we all need to treat each other with mutual respect on all sides as we work through these issues, and I will continue to do so.

Mr. Toby Barrett: Well, Minister, the home builders do have questions. They obviously have questions on the land dispute negotiations and progress or lack thereof, the demands of HDI and the status of property rights in the province of Ontario. They want to meet with you face to face; your YouTube publicity stunts just don't cut it with the business community. What options do they have?

Mr. Quattrociocchi has a question. If he were to bring his backhoe to Queen's Park, would the police stand by in the same fashion as in Caledonia and as in Brantford? On policing, Minister, Brantford Police Services need help. When are you going to stop blaming Ottawa, step up, fund and resource the extra policing required as a result of these confrontations in the city of Brantford?

Hon. Michael Bryant: Well, there you go, Mr. Speaker. You heard it pretty clearly right there. There's a difference between Premier McGuinty's approach on this side of the House and the John Tory approach on that side of the House. On this side of the House, we understand that the police are independent of the government. It's not the Premier's police or the executive's police; it's an independent police force. It's a civil society.

Over there, the former Premier and leader of their party—we know what his approach to this was: "Get those Indians out of the park," he said. That is not our approach, and that will never be our approach. We will continue to follow recommendations of the Ipperwash commission and not take any so-called leadership from the official opposition. Shame on you.

DIET SUPPLEMENTS

Mr. Michael Prue: My question is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. Does the minister support best nutrition practices for recipients on ODSP?

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur: This government is very serious about the quality of life of those on ODSP or social assistance. Of course we support diet being part of good nutrition and a good way of life. That's why we have seen an increase in the diet budget and the number of people who are receiving supplements for a special diet.

Mr. Michael Prue: If that is the case, perhaps the minister can explain to this House why someone like Brian Woods of Lindsay, who has diabetes, had to have his food allowance reduced and his leg subsequently amputated; or why a person like Julie Sauvé of Bracebridge, who has multiple sclerosis, has been denied the high-protein, high-calorie diet she needs to maintain weight and muscle strength. Perhaps the minister will know. In both cases, your ministry decimated their special diet allowances.

My question back to you again: Is it the minister's intention to defend these reprehensible actions now that the case is before the Human Rights Commission?

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur: I'm sure the member of the opposition party knows that I cannot comment on specific cases. But the thing that I can assure the member is that we are very serious about improving their quality of life and also their nutrition. That's why for the past five years the number of people receiving a special diet has more than doubled; I would say that it has tripled. The budget went from $5 million to $128 million.

I cannot comment on specific cases, but every case is being reviewed. If the case is before the Human Rights Tribunal, let's wait for the decision of the Human Rights Tribunal.

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT

IN EDUCATION

Mr. Phil McNeely: My question is for the Minister of Education. This government believes that the best way to build a strong, publicly funded education system is to involve our educational partners, including and especially the parents.

In January, this government announced continued funding for Parents Reaching Out grants. More than 1,300 projects are being funded through a $2.3-million investment across the province in 2008-09. This funding will go to local school councils and also to regional parent engagement projects. Minister, what specifically does this mean for children and families in Ontario?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: The first and most important thing this means is that students will do better in school, because what the research says is that if their parents are involved in their education, they are going to achieve higher success. That is the fundamental of our parent involvement policy.

We're recognizing the vital role that parents play in the school community and in their children's lives. We've invested $2.3 million, and that's $1.1 million for individual school council projects and $1.2 million for regional-provincial projects.

Some of the examples of the kinds of things that parents are doing with this money are workshops for parents to increase their engagement in their children's education. We know that there are some parents who are less comfortable coming into the school, and we need the parents in the school, to reach out to those parents, to bring them in and help them to be comfortable. Whether it's a language issue or whether it's just a familiarity issue, we need those kinds of workshops to help parents come into the school.

Mr. Phil McNeely: Minister, thank you for that information. I know that in my own riding, parents put a lot of time, energy and creativity into their applications for these projects. People in my riding are extremely pleased that we are able to support innovative projects in the Ottawa area that will encourage more parents to become engaged. People in the Ottawa area will benefit from over $70,000 provided for school councils, for initiatives including parent seminars, speaking engagements and school events that involve families.

As well, I understand that the Ottawa area has received almost $82,000 in parent-driven regional initiatives, such as projects encouraging partnerships between the home and school through web-based communications and a parent-led student nutrition project.

Minister, I also understand that these Parents Reaching Out grants are one part of our plan to it make it easier for all parents to participate in their child's education. Could you please enlighten us on what else our government is doing in this regard?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: On top of those projects that bring parents into the school, those outreach projects, we've funded local school councils. We've provided money to school councils. We've provided money to regional parent bodies, and also we've created a provincial parent board. The purpose of all of those bodies is to enhance parent involvement and make sure that we get the best advice on what parents need to be involved.

We've also put in place 89 parenting and family literacy centres in high-needs neighbourhoods across the province. Those parent and family literacy centres are extremely important. They get young kids used to a school environment and some of the routines of early childhood education—ready for kindergarten—but they also bring parents into the school and allow the parents to understand what the routines of the schools are. So those are related issues—as well as a website, abc123, that allows parents to look for tips to help their kids with homework.

MANUFACTURING JOBS

Mr. John O'Toole: My question is to the Deputy Premier. Day after day in the House we've been hearing of the pressure of 180,000-plus jobs lost, mostly in manufacturing in Ontario, but all we're hearing from you is a response not recognizing the drag on the economy of high taxes, high energy prices, as well as red tape. In fact, Deputy Premier, you're stifling the opportunities in the province of Ontario. What we hear generally is the typical Liberal response of, "Don't worry, be happy."

In an

article today in my riding of Durham there is a response from April Cullen, and I'm going to quote here. It says, "I suspect we'll see aftershocks of the layoffs down the road when people start to exhaust their savings and exhaust other benefits...."

Deputy Premier, what is your plan to deal with not just the aftershock but with the dismal state of the economy, not just in Durham but in the province of Ontario?

Hon. George Smitherman: To the Minister of Economic Development.

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: Actually, I had an opportunity to be in Durham and speak with the chamber of commerce there. I will tell you it was one of the warmest receptions I've received, in particular when I spoke about the requirement for the federal and provincial governments to work together when we face such challenging times in the manufacturing sector.

On that same day that I was in Durham, General Motors actually spoke of the potential of an investment in Oshawa very much related to this area. As this member knows well, we are specifically asking the federal government to join us, to help these companies make major investments. A company the size of General Motors, for example, would benefit from the tune of about a $10-million corporate tax cut, just based on our finance minister's last economic update. That's the kind of initiative that they see the Ontario government coming forward with, not to mention the level of support that we have shown so far.

Mr. John O'Toole: Well, that is the minister who comes from a riding where they're giving advice to send people out west to get a job. To have her in charge of anything in the economy is an absolute shame. In fact, I can't imagine I hear—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I'm going to leave the clock running. I just ask that we have some respect for the individual members. In your initial question, you talked about laughing at the ministry, and you've just taken another jab at the minister. I just ask that we at least have some respect for one another.

Mr. John O'Toole: With all due respect, I think what I'm looking for is a little respect from the opposition. I'm asking the question not on behalf of the opposition party, but on behalf of the staff and the councillors of Durham region. They're concerned here, Minister, about the aftershock of your failed plans in the economy. Your plans have been high taxes, high energy and more red tape, and job losses are the result.

The question I have for you, Minister, is very simple: What's your plan to deal with the impending disaster in the economy and the impact on social welfare rolls in the region of Durham and the province of Ontario?

Hon. Sandra Pupatello: I think that I would take my cues, rather, from the Durham economic development commission, which works very closely with my ministry. In fact, next week they will be joining us in Alberta, along with 208 delegates from the manufacturing sector here in Ontario, because we are an activist government. We understand the challenges that manufacturers are facing in this province. We are the largest manufacturing jurisdiction anywhere in North America, second only to California. So when there's a challenge, we recognize how large that challenge is.

That's why we're coming to the table with programs like our Next Generation of Jobs Fund, the largest investment package ever in the world: $1.15 billion, along with a 45-day service guarantee.

The people in Durham know full well how active we are. Big companies and small companies also see the work we're doing to discover new markets, new products, and bring innovation. Ontario has a future, and it will have a future under this government.

PETITIONS

LORD'S PRAYER

Mr. Jerry J. Ouellette: "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the current Liberal government is proposing to eliminate the Lord's Prayer from its place at the beginning of daily proceedings in the Legislature; and

"Whereas the recitation of the Lord's Prayer has been an integral part of our spiritual and parliamentary tradition since it was first established in 1793 under Lieutenant Governor John Graves Simcoe; and

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer's message is one of forgiveness, of providing for those in need of their 'daily bread' and of preserving us from the evils that we may fall into; it is a valuable guide and lesson for a chamber that is too often an arena for conflict; and

"Whereas recognizing the diversity of the people of Ontario should be an inclusive process, not one which excludes traditions such as the Lord's Prayer;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to preserve the daily recitation of the Lord's Prayer by the Speaker in the Legislature."

I affix my name in full support.

HOME CARE

M me France Gélinas: "Whereas the Ontario government has continued the practice of competitive bidding for home care services; and

"Whereas the competitive bidding process has increased the privatization of Ontario's health care delivery, in direct violation of the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act, 2004; and

"Whereas competitive bidding for home care services has decreased both the continuity and quality of care available to home care clients; and

"Whereas home care workers do not enjoy the same employment rights, such as successor rights, as all other Ontario workers have, which deprives them of termination rights, seniority rights and the right to move with their work when their employer agency loses a contract;

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

"We call on the government of Ontario:

"(1) to immediately stop the competitive bidding for home care services so home care clients can receive the continuity and quality of care they deserve; and

"(2) to extend successor rights under the Labour Relations Act to home care workers to ensure the home care sector is able to retain a workforce that is responsive to clients' needs."

That comes from Toronto. I support this petition and affix my name to it.

PUBLIC WASHROOMS

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti: I have a petition, again presented by my community. Mr. Ed Green is spearheading this petition. It's the third day in a row now that I've been reading this same petition, with different signatures. It's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the Toronto and greater Toronto area has the highest rate of Crohn's and ulcerative colitis in Canada;

"Whereas this disease requires patients' fast access to public washrooms;

"Whereas there is a lack of public washrooms on the current TTC subway system and lack of access for these patients;

"Whereas the Ontario building code only requires the TTC to build public washrooms at the end-of-line stations;

"Whereas the York subway line is about to be built with provincial dollars;

"We, the undersigned, therefore request the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to amend the Ontario building code to provide public washrooms at every station on the York subway line."

I agree with this petition. I affix my signature to it and give it to page Michael, who is here with me today.

NON-PROFIT HOUSING

Mr. John O'Toole: The petition that I would like to present on behalf of constituents and the people of Ontario reads as follows.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas every citizen of Ontario should have a safe, healthy and decent home; and

"Whereas thousands of individuals and families are denied this basic right when the province of Ontario downloaded affordable housing to the city of Toronto but refused to pay for the hundreds of millions of dollars in deferred capital repairs; and

"Whereas poor living conditions undermine the safety and security of communities, harming children, youth and families living in affordable homes; and

"Whereas failure to invest in good repair undermines the values of the province's affordable housing as the condition of the housing stock deteriorates; and

"Whereas poor living conditions have a damaging impact on the health of communities, costing Ontarians millions in health costs; and

"Whereas investment in housing pays off in better residences and in stronger, safer, healthier communities; and

"Whereas residents of Toronto Community Housing have waited five years for the province to pay its bills and bring affordable housing to a state of good repair;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

"Accept its responsibility and invest $300 million to ensure that all residents of Toronto Community Housing have a safe, decent and healthy home."

And I'm pleased to present this petition on their behalf.

HOME CARE

Mr. Paul Miller: "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario government has continued the practice of competitive bidding for home care services; and

"Whereas the competitive bidding process has increased the privatization of Ontario's health care delivery, in direct violation of the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act, 2004; and

"Whereas competitive bidding for home care services has decreased both the continuity and quality of care available to home care clients; and

"Whereas home care workers do not enjoy the same employment rights, such as successor rights, as all other Ontario workers have, which deprives them of termination rights, seniority rights and the right to move with their work when their employer agency loses a contract;

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

"We call on the government of Ontario:

"(1) to immediately stop the competitive bidding for home care services so home care clients can receive the continuity and quality of care they deserve; and

"(2) to extend successor rights under the Labour Relations Act to home care workers to ensure the home care sector is able to retain a workforce that is responsive to clients' needs."

I hereby affix my name to this petition.

EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

Mr. Tony Ruprecht: This petition has to do with fairness for Ontario workers. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the federal government's employment insurance surplus now stands at $54 billion; and

"Whereas over 75% of Ontario's unemployed are not eligible for employment insurance because of Ottawa's unfair eligibility rules; and

"Whereas an Ontario worker has to work more weeks to qualify and receives fewer weeks of benefits than other Canadian unemployed workers; and

"Whereas the average Ontario unemployed worker gets $4,000 less in EI benefits than unemployed workers in other provinces and thus, unemployed are not qualifying for many retraining programs;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to press the federal government to reform the employment insurance program and to end this discrimination and unfairness towards Ontario's unemployed workers."

Since I agree with this petition, I'm delighted to sign my name to it.

LORD'S PRAYER

Mrs. Julia Munro: "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the current Liberal government is proposing to eliminate the Lord's Prayer from daily proceedings in the Ontario Legislature; and

"Whereas the recitation of the Lord's Prayer has opened the Legislature every day since the 19th century; and

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer's message is one of forgiveness, of providing for those in need of their 'daily bread' and of preserving us from the evils that we may fall into; it is a valuable guide and lesson for a chamber that is too often an arena for conflict; and

"Whereas recognizing the diversity of the people of Ontario should be an inclusive process, not one which excludes traditions such as the Lord's Prayer;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, ask the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to preserve the daily recitation of the Lord's Prayer by the Speaker in the Legislature."

I have affixed my signature to this as I am in agreement.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Andrea Horwath): The member for Peterborough.

ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION

Mr. Jeff Leal: Thanks very much, Madam Speaker. It's nice to see you in the chair.

We have a petition regarding children and smoke-free cars, in support of Bill 11.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas children exposed to second-hand smoke are at a higher risk for respiratory illnesses including asthma, bronchitis and pneumonia, as well as sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) and increased incidences of cancer and heart disease in adulthood; and

"Whereas the Ontario Medical Association supports a ban on smoking in vehicles when children are present, as they have concluded that levels of second-hand smoke can be 23 times more concentrated in a vehicle than in a house because circulation is restricted within a small space; and

"Whereas the Ipsos Reid poll conducted on behalf of the Ontario Tobacco-Free Network indicates that eight in 10 (80%) of Ontarians support 'legislation that would ban smoking in cars and other private vehicles where a child or adolescent under 16 years of age is present'; and

"Whereas Nova Scotia, California, Puerto Rico, and South Australia recently joined several jurisdictions of the United States of America in banning smoking in vehicles carrying children;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to approve Bill 11 and amend the Smoke-Free Ontario Act to ban smoking in vehicles carrying children 16 years of age and under."

Madam Speaker, I support this petition and will affix my signature to it.

LORD'S PRAYER

Mr. Gerry Martiniuk: I have a petition provided to me from Bethel Tabernacle of Preston and Knox Preston Presbyterian Church:

"Whereas Premier Dalton McGuinty has called on the Ontario Legislature to consider removing the Lord's Prayer from its daily proceedings; and

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer has been an integral part of our parliamentary heritage that was first established in 1793 under Lieutenant Governor John Graves Simcoe; and

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer is today a significant part of the religious heritage of millions of Ontarians of culturally diverse backgrounds;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to continue its long-standing practice of using the Lord's Prayer as part of its daily proceedings."

As I agree with the petition, I affix my name thereto.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Bob Delaney: Madam Speaker, congratulations on assuming the chair.

My petition is to the Ontario Legislative Assembly. It was provided to me by Meadowvale secondary student Brianne Westland. It reads as follows:

"Whereas wait times for access to surgical procedures in the western GTA area served by the Mississauga Halton LHIN are growing despite the vigorous capital project activity at the hospitals within the Mississauga Halton LHIN boundaries; and

"Whereas 'day surgery' procedures could be performed in an off-site facility, thus greatly increasing the ability of surgeons to perform more procedures, alleviating wait times for patients, and freeing up operating theatre space in hospitals for more complex procedures that may require post-operative intensive care unit support and a longer length of stay in hospital;

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

"That the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care allocate funds in its 2008-09 capital budget to begin planning and construction of an ambulatory surgery centre located in western Mississauga to serve the Mississauga-Halton area and enable greater access to 'day surgery' procedures that comprise about four fifths of all surgical procedures performed."

I am pleased to affix my signature and to fully support this petition and to ask page Fatima to carry it.

ONTARIO DISABILITY

SUPPORT PROGRAM

Mr. Ernie Hardeman: I have a petition here to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It was signed by a lot of my constituents, but it primarily came from the Community Living Tillsonburg folks. We'd like to thank them for circulating the petition. It's to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"To the Legislature of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario disability support program is designed to meet the unique needs of people with disabilities who are in financial need, or who want and are able to work and need support; and

"Whereas it is appreciated that the McGuinty government increased the maximum monthly rates in 2004, 2006 and 2007;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of Ontario to establish an independent commission to make recommendations for setting social assistance rates. These rates need to be raised to provide for the real cost of living."

I'd like to thank you, on behalf of all the people who signed it, for letting me read this petition.

NON-PROFIT HOUSING

Mr. Mario Sergio: I have received a petition signed mostly by residents of my own riding. It is addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. I'd like to read it and have it included in the record.

"Whereas every citizen of Ontario should have a safe, healthy and decent home; and

"Whereas thousands of individuals and families are denied this basic right when the province of Ontario downloaded affordable housing to the city of Toronto but refused to pay for the hundreds of millions of dollars in deferred capital repairs; and

"Whereas poor living conditions undermine the safety and security of communities, harming children, youth and families living in affordable homes; and

"Whereas failure to invest in good repair undermines the values of the province's affordable housing as the condition of the housing stock deteriorates; and

"Whereas poor living conditions have a damaging impact on the health of communities, costing Ontarians millions in health costs; and

"Whereas investment in housing pays off in better residences and in stronger, safer, healthier communities; and

"Whereas residents of Toronto Community Housing have waited five years for the province to pay its bills and bring affordable housing to a state of good repair;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

"Accept its responsibility and invest $300 million to ensure that all residents of Toronto Community Housing have a safe, decent and healthy home."

I want to thank the residents of my area. I'd like to supply the petition and have it be recorded as well.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE

Resuming the debate adjourned on March 18, 2008, on the amendment to the motion for an address in reply to the speech of His Honour the Lieutenant Governor at the opening of the session.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Andrea Horwath): Questions and comments? The member for Beaches—the member for Toronto—Danforth.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I thank you, Madam Speaker. I'm just a bit to the west. It's very good to see you in the chair.

It's been more than eight months since the leader of the Liberal Party made a commitment, a promise, that he would be taking action on climate change in this province, that he would produce a plan, provide a plan, would put it on the table, that he would provide transparency in action, so that in fact we would see movement in Ontario, we would see action taken to deal with climate change and also to reshape our economy so we'd have a green economy, one that would provide us with the jobs that we know are going to be in demand in the 21st century. That plan didn't hit the table.

On November 30 we had the speech from the throne. There was a statement in that speech from the throne about the government's ongoing commitment to climate change action, about the targets that had been set, about the need to meet those targets. Frankly, it is now three months later, there's no legislation before us, there's no plan before the House and there's no concrete material for us to critique. If we look at Quebec, if we look at British Columbia, we see that they have climate change plans. The one in Quebec is funded at $200 million a year. It's set to meet the Kyoto targets.

The one in British Columbia is a far weaker document, but at least there is a plan, something that people can look at, that they can criticize, analyze and maybe, in the course of time, something that could be improved. We don't have even that.

This is a government that has decided that climate change is a tremendous marketing opportunity but not an area where they really want to do the fundamental work necessary to come to grips with the issue.

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti: It's a pleasure to have an opportunity to respond to the comments made yesterday by the member from—I want to get his riding correct; I know his name very well—Niagara West—Glanbrook. I was here for your comments yesterday, and I just wanted to comment briefly, in the short time that I have.

I guess what we are concerned about, as a provincial government, is the disparity between the federal government and the provincial government, and especially the equalization clawback. Ontario is giving money to the federal government and we're not getting back our fair share when it comes to, just for example, unemployment, because I think there's a $4,000 disparity in terms of what we get back here in Ontario and what the federal government provides, or at least collects and provides elsewhere in Canada. So we will continue here on this side of the House, as the government, to try as much as possible to fight for Ontario and to fight for the people of Ontario.

In the comments yesterday, we were talking about the throne speech and the importance of what the government here plans to do in the next four years. We're going to continue to put our message out, that Ontario requires its fair share, and we'll continue to fight for its fair share in terms of what we put out in money to the Ottawa government and what we get back. We want to be able to be on a level playing field. I think that's the number one issue here, one of the key issues this government is going to continue to fight for, led by our Premier, Dalton McGuinty. He's obviously made that a high priority. I support that as well, and many others do.

Mr. John O'Toole: I also want to compliment the member from Niagara West—Glanbrook because I know that as our finance critic he has a very firm grasp of the dilemma that faces Ontario, all of which was kind of omitted from the throne speech. In fact, I heard a trace comment from the member who has just spoken here, kind of blaming Jim Flaherty. That's kind of what I heard; it's sort of like the equalization stuff and the transfer payments.

They should realize that their own purpose spending has gone up inordinately, and one has to ask oneself, as our critic does regularly, "Are we any better off?" The real test of this is, we're spending more, but are we any better off? There's homelessness that we've seen today brought about. There are almost 200,000 people without jobs. The economy is struggling. And yet, "Don't worry; be happy." It's tragic, quite honestly.

I have just visited about six or seven nursing homes in my riding, and they gave me this card which says, "Long-term care needs more than a Band-Aid." You know yourself, Madam Speaker, that they're asking in this province—I'm going to read this. It's to Dalton McGuinty, the Premier of Ontario. It says: "Please tell government to provide the $513 million required in this budget for the necessary additional staff and supplies, so that:

"—residents aren't rushed to meals or left waiting for help to go to the bathroom;

"—homes can provide more weekend and evening programs, improve meal services, increase the average number of daily incontinence changes..."—we know what the Minister of Health has said about that; it's shameful;

"—homes can maintain housekeeping, laundry and related services."

There simply isn't enough for anybody in Ontario, and they think it's okay. I'm waiting for the response from the member from Niagara West—Glanbrook.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Andrea Horwath): Questions and comments? The member for Hamilton East—Stoney Creek.

Mr. Paul Miller: Excuse me, Madam Speaker. I was going to do another situation, so I'm going to discuss it with my colleague—just a second.

Mr. Tim Hudak: On a point of order, Madam Speaker: The rotation began with the NDP and then the government and the official opposition. I'm just checking with you—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Andrea Horwath): Yes, and there are four rotations.

Mr. Tim Hudak: So the NDP, if they wanted to have one—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Andrea Horwath): They have another rotation.

Mr. Tim Hudak: A two-minute rotation on the throne speech.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Andrea Horwath): Yes, they do. Responses?

Mr. Tim Hudak: I thank all my colleagues for their comments on my speech last evening.

Interjection.

Mr. Tim Hudak: I'm doing responses.

To my colleague from Scarborough Southwest: He talks about equalization payments. I understand that if you observed the economic policies, the misguided economic policies, of the McGuinty government of going to the highest tax rate on business investment, the high-energy policies and increasing the red tape burden on businesses, you may observe that they have pushed Ontario closer to actually being have-not status. A rather bizarre way—if that's their intention, and I hope not—of addressing the equalization issue would be for Ontario to become a have-not province.

Frighteningly, we're getting increasingly close to that. It's hard to contemplate: an Ontario that we've always known as the engine of growth in all of Canada, and a place that attracted others to come and work and raise a family, being a have-not province and getting equalization from the rest.

Don Drummond, for example, the chief economist at TD, said, "Ontario is not so far from being an equalization province." Douglas Porter, the deputy chief economist at the Bank of Montreal, says, "While the arcane equalization calculations may still peg Ontario officially as a 'have' province, the reality is far less friendly for the provincial economy—Ontario is becoming relatively poorer each year."

My understanding is that initially when the McGuinty government took office, our per capita GDP was about $400 above the equalization bar, and now it is barely treading water above that bar. I think it's frightening to contemplate that Dalton McGuinty's harmful economic policies have done so much damage to our economy, to job creation and to the expectations of working families and seniors in our province that we would be t