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

December 18, 2006

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2006-Dec-18 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 18 December 2006 Lundi 18 décembre 2006

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HIGHWAY 6

DARREN COOGAN

CHRISTMAS TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY

NATIONAL CHILD BENEFIT SUPPLEMENT

ONTARIO YOUTH APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM /

PROGRAMME D'APPRENTISSAGE

POUR LES JEUNES DE L'ONTARIO

DRESS THE PART

HIV/AIDS IN AFRICA

AMBULANCE SERVICES

RURAL ONTARIO

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

MUNICIPAL AMENDMENT ACT

(BY-LAWS RE ABSENTEE LANDLORDS), 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES MUNICIPALITÉS (RÈGLEMENTS MUNICIPAUX

CONCERNANT LES LOCATEURS ABSENTS)

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

HOUSE SITTINGS

DEFERRED VOTES

ELECTORAL SYSTEM

REFERENDUM ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LE RÉFÉRENDUM

RELATIF AU SYSTÈME ÉLECTORAL

ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

VISITOR

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING

NATIVE LAND DISPUTE

HYDRO OPERATIONS

HEALTH PREMIUMS

SCHOOL BOARDS

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

LANDFILL

HEALTH CARE

EDUCATION

HYDRO OPERATIONS

PAPER MILL

FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

PETITIONS

MACULAR DEGENERATION

CENTENNIAL OF STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONSHIP

CHILD CUSTODY

LANDFILL

FETAL ALCOHOL SPECTRUM DISORDER

EDUCATION FUNDING

FREDERICK BANTING HOMESTEAD

LONG-TERM CARE

MACULAR DEGENERATION

PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY

LONG-TERM CARE

FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

ORDERS OF THE DAY

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE

L'ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HIGHWAY 6

Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): In my very first member's statement in this House, in November 1990, I called upon the government of the day to move forward with improvements to Highway 6

through the county of Wellington, including the construction of passing lanes. The need for repairs to Highway 6 was identified by my predecessor as the MPP for Wellington, Jack Johnson, in the late 1980s.

Highway 6 is the most important north-south corridor in the county of Wellington, from Wellington North to the Puslinch township. It is our main route to the city of Guelph, our pathway to the 401 and our

gateway to the markets of the world. Highway 6 is critical to the continued economic success of our county.

In 2003, it appeared to me that we needed to redouble our efforts to improve our transportation infrastructure. Working with our municipal councils, we developed the Waterloo-Wellington Transportation Action

Plan. Improvements to Highway 6 were a key component of our plan, and I'm pleased to inform the House that the Ministry of Transportation has recently called for tenders to rebuild Highway 6 from Fergus north to Arthur. The work will include

repairs, bridge repair and new passing lanes and is estimated to be a $20-million job.

We should express our appreciation to the Honourable Donna Cansfield, Minister of Transportation, staff at MTO's southwest regional office in London, and Wellington county council and staff, especially

Councillor Lynda White.

I continue to advocate for all the projects in the Waterloo-Wellington Transportation Action Plan that are outstanding to make our roads safer, support local economic development and improve our transit for the

21st century.

DARREN COOGAN

Mr. Vic Dhillon (Brampton West-Mississauga): I'm pleased to rise today to inform the House of a ceremony held recently at the Sikh Spiritual Centre in Rexdale to honour Darren Coogan and

Satwinder Bajwa, which I had the pleasure to attend with several of my constituents. The event garnered a full-page picture and an

article in the GTA

section of the Toronto Star. A picture is worth a thousand words, as the saying goes.

On November 11, Mr. Bajwa was involved in a serious collision in which the utility van he drove for work crashed and erupted into flames after hitting a deer. Mr. Bajwa was trapped inside with a broken hip as

the chemicals he uses for his employment as a bus mechanic quickly caught on fire, turning the van into a deadly inferno. In a totally selfless act, Mr. Coogan broke the window with only his elbow, pulling Mr. Bajwa out and undoubtedly saving his

life.

Please join me, along with my constituents of Brampton West-Mississauga, in commending Mr. Coogan for his heroic act and to wish Mr. Bajwa a full and speedy recovery. Thank you, Darren, for your selfless act,

and thank you, Mr. Bajwa, for recognizing him in one of the most beautiful ways possible.

CHRISTMAS TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): It was quite an evening on Saturday, December 9 at Logos Land, just outside of Cobden, in my riding of Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke, when Canada's

tallest Christmas tree was switched on. The tree is a whopping 80 feet tall and is illuminated by 13,000 LED bulbs. This year's celebration was attended by nearly 5,000 people, who came to dedicate the lighting to the brave men and women of our

armed forces serving in Afghanistan and their families.

Special guests at the ceremony were none other than our Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, and his daughter, Rachel. Joining the Prime Minister and Rachel on the stage were

Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke MP Cheryl Gallant; Colonel Denis Thompson, commander of 2 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group; and two elementary school students, Megan Gruhl and Nathan Layman, who, along with Colonel Thompson, tripped the switch to

light the tree. I was honoured to be asked by event co-ordinator Bruce McIntyre to sing our national anthem for this very special occasion.

It is never an easy time to be serving in our armed forces as they work to bring peace, order, democracy and freedom to the people of Afghanistan. To be separated from their families at this special time of year

makes it even harder. The people of Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke wanted to let them know how much we appreciate the noble work they do and how much we support them in their mission. To have the Prime Minister there to help deliver that message,

broadcast live to the troops, was just fantastic. To the organizers of the event, a big thank you. To our troops, Merry Christmas, God bless you, and we pray for a successful mission and a safe return to your families.

NATIONAL CHILD BENEFIT SUPPLEMENT

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce Jim MacDonald. Jim MacDonald lives on Manitoulin Island, in your very own riding of Algoma-Manitoulin. I have spoken

about Mr. MacDonald in this House before, and he honours us all with his presence here today.

Jim lives with cancer and is a recipient of ODSP benefits. He is the father of five children, ages seven to 17. His wife used to work, until she found out that the policies of this government have made it nearly

impossible. She realized that ODSP's incentives for employment were costing the family more than she actually earned. Jim is confused as to why you have decided to benefit yourselves and ourselves financially during this season of goodwill instead

of honouring your commitment to end the clawback and give social service recipients a decent increase. Jim's children lose about $350 each and every month that you continue to claw back the NCBS that the federal government provides. During this

holiday season, Jim is hoping for word that, along with yourselves, you will start caring for our lowest-income kids by honouring your promise to them to end the clawback.

He is also hoping against hope that this government will develop policies that reward those like his spouse for trying to provide for their family rather than take every single penny she is able to earn back to

yourselves.

ONTARIO YOUTH APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM /

PROGRAMME D'APPRENTISSAGE

POUR LES JEUNES DE L'ONTARIO

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): Last week, I had the pleasure of making an announcement on behalf of the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Last Monday, Minister Bentley

announced an extra $8.25-million investment in the Ontario youth apprenticeship program.

Le programme d'apprentissage pour les jeunes de l'Ontario est un programme de transition de l'école au travail offert dans les écoles secondaires de la province. Les élèves à plein temps

des 11 e et 12 e années obtiennent des crédits d'éducation coopérative en faisant des stages dans des métiers spécialisés.

The Ottawa-Carleton District School Board received $153,000; the Ottawa-Carleton Catholic District School Board received $118,000.

Le gouvernement octroie aussi 97 000 $ au Conseil scolaire de district catholique de l'Est ontarien. Finalement, le Conseil des écoles publiques de l'Est de l'Ontario a reçu

96 000 $.

There is a record number of students participating in the OYAP program to date. In Ottawa alone, it is projected that in 2006-07, about 3,125 Ottawa-area students will benefit from this program.

Le nombre grandissant d'élèves qui participent au PAJO rapproche le gouvernement de son objectif de porter à 26 000 le nombre d'inscriptions annuelles à la formation en apprentissage en

2007-2008.

OYAP gives students more options and opportunities so that they are encouraged to stay in school, to learn a new skill and to pursue a field of study that interests them most. Once again I would like to thank

the Premier and the minister for this wonderful investment in our youth.

DRESS THE PART

Mrs. Christine Elliott (Whitby-Ajax): I'm very pleased to have the opportunity to rise today in recognition of a great event that I attended last week in Oshawa called Dress the Part, a half-day

workshop targeted to low-income women looking to re-enter the workforce. The event, organized by Avocation, a non-profit organization that helps Durham residents overcome barriers to employment, provided a forum to connect job-seeking women with

image professionals, makeup artists and free, gently used business clothing donated by local businesses and residents of our community.

Women attending Dress the Part had the opportunity to listen to many different information sessions throughout the morning, such as the Power of Women and Dress Right 4 Your Body Type, each dealing with the

aspects of readying themselves for the task of searching for a job. After the various presentations, women then received one-on-one consultation sessions with image professionals.

Equipping women with the tools they need to create the image they want is vital to bolstering the most important quality of all when seeking employment, which is, of course, a healthy level of self-confidence.

As the founder and executive director of Avocation, Faelyne Templer, stated at the event, "We all know that when we look good, we feel good, and are therefore more confident to achieve the goals we want." She also noted how difficult it can be to

put together a wardrobe on a budget.

Re-entering the workforce takes courage and persistence, and I would like to take this opportunity to applaud all the women in Durham region and across this province who are currently undertaking this task. I

would also like to thank Ms. Templer and all those involved with Avocation for organizing such an important event.

HIV/AIDS IN AFRICA

Mr. Dave Levac (Brant): I rise in the House today to bring your attention to a project that is being undertaken by students from an interdisciplinary class at M.M. Robinson High School in

Burlington. Why Burlington? These fine young people are working exceptionally hard to raise awareness of the crisis created by HIV/AIDS in Africa.

Recently, we celebrated World AIDS Day, and this past summer the 16th International AIDS Conference took place right here in Toronto. While watching some of the conference on TV, let me tell you what I remember

most about this conference that was important to me. It wasn't the celebrities and it wasn't even the researchers, although I support both; it was the grandmothers from Africa and their stories that I will always remember and keep close to my

heart.

Most of us cannot imagine what it's like to raise your children and helplessly watch them die; to see your grandchildren orphaned because of a disease out of control unnecessarily and to see these children

stigmatized because of the disease -- in some cases no grandparents are available, so as young as 11-year-olds are raising families the best they can; to know that the spread of AIDS/HIV in Africa threatens to wipe out an entire generation of

children.

But, Speaker, I don't need to tell you or the members of this House about this epidemic and the devastation that it leaves behind. So with this sad story, let's all hear the story of hope. One of these stories

is the class from MMR. They have taken up the cause to raise awareness of the devastation taking place in Africa, many children dying in Africa, those younger than themselves. These students are a reminder and set a wonderful example for all of

us. Their actions will make a difference. We thank them.

AMBULANCE SERVICES

Mr. David Zimmer (Willowdale): I rise to speak about an investment that the McGuinty government is making in Ontario. It will be an important boost in the areas of health and health care

services for all Ontarians.

Unlike the previous government that forced years of downloading onto the municipalities, the McGuinty government has announced that it is investing $300 million between 2006 and 2008 in order to move towards a

50-50 sharing cost for land ambulance services.

What does this mean? It means that finally municipalities will have access to the resources and the funding that they need. It means an additional $50 million in investments in 2006.

The need to safeguard the health of Ontarians is a number one priority for this government. As a result we have made our Ontario municipal partnership fund flexible enough to respond to the needs of local

community programs, which are necessary to the overall health of the community. While other parties cut valuable resources and funding to health care services, this government has been looking for new ways to not only help cash-strapped

municipalities but to ensure that all Ontarians have access to the services they require and they deserve.

RURAL ONTARIO

Mr. Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): I'm quite aware that this is the time of year when Santa reviews whether we've been naughty or nice. I know that statement probably sends shivers

through my colleagues across the floor, but I also think that at this time of year it's time to quickly review the great things that are happening in rural Ontario because of the McGuinty government.

We all know that the health of our loved ones is perhaps the most important thing in our society. As a result, health investments have been a priority for this government. We are creating 150 new family health

teams, with more than half being put in underserviced communities that are in need of health care professionals.

We also know the importance of financial security around this time of year. While the previous government slashed $80 million from the agricultural budget, the McGuinty government has provided $910 million over

the past three years for farm income stabilization and support programs, including $125 million announced last spring and $110 million announced at this year's international plowing match.

We also recognize that our rural community deserves valuable economic supports. That is why we've invested $22.9 million into our rural communities through the rural economic development program.

I am proud of my constituents, and it's important to recognize that these individuals and others like them in the rural sector have provided many of the goods and services that we enjoy in this holiday season. I

want to thank them again and remind them that the McGuinty government is on their side.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

MUNICIPAL AMENDMENT ACT

(BY-LAWS RE ABSENTEE LANDLORDS), 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES MUNICIPALITÉS (RÈGLEMENTS MUNICIPAUX

CONCERNANT LES LOCATEURS ABSENTS)

Mr. Tabuns moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 176,

An Act to amend the Municipal Act, 2001 / Projet de loi 176, Loi modifiant la Loi de 2001 sur les municipalités.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

The member may wish to make a brief statement.

Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto-Danforth): This bill amends the Municipal Act to allow municipalities to put in place bylaws to regulate absentee landlords within their jurisdiction. It gives them the

authority to set up a system to track absentee landlords and to require deposits or bonds for property upkeep.

This bill arises out of an ongoing problem in my riding and many downtown ridings with crack houses. This will give cities the authority to deal with them far more vigorously than they have in the past.

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding private members' public business.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Agreed? Agreed.

Hon. Ms. Wynne: I move that, notwithstanding standing order 96(g), notice for ballot items 69 and 70 be waived.

The Speaker: Shall the motion carry? Carried.

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): I move that, pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Monday, December 18, 2006, for the purpose of

considering government business.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Ms. Wynne has moved government notice of motion number 279. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour will say "aye."

All those opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1349 to 1354.

The Speaker: Ms. Wynne has moved government notice of motion number 279. All those in favour will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Broten, Laurel C.

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Elliott, Christine

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Jeffrey, Linda

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Mauro, Bill

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Munro, Julia

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

DiNovo, Cheri

Hampton, Howard

Horwath, Andrea

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Prue, Michael

Tabuns, Peter

The Deputy Clerk (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 55; the nays are 8.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

DEFERRED VOTES

ELECTORAL SYSTEM

REFERENDUM ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LE RÉFÉRENDUM

RELATIF AU SYSTÈME ÉLECTORAL

Deferred vote on the motion for second reading of Bill 155,

An Act to provide for a referendum on Ontario's electoral system / Projet de loi 155, Loi prévoyant un référendum sur le

système électoral de l'Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1357 to 1402.

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

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Broten, Laurel C.

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Jeffrey, Linda

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Mauro, Bill

McGuinty, Dalton

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Munro, Julia

Orazietti, David

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Runciman, Robert W.

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

DiNovo, Cheri

Dunlop, Garfield

Elliott, Christine

Horwath, Andrea

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Prue, Michael

Sterling, Norman W.

Tabuns, Peter

Yakabuski, John

The Deputy Clerk (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 58; the nays are 11.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Shall the bill be ordered for third reading?

Hon. Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): I'd ask that the bill be referred to the standing committee on the Legislative

Assembly.

The Speaker: This bill is referred to the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly.

ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: Under standing order 97(d), I'd like to bring to your attention overdue order paper questions 235, 236, 237, 238,

239, 240 and 241 in the name of the member for Leeds-Grenville and 254, 255, 256, 257 and 258 in the name of the member for Simcoe North. Interim answers were tabled on November 21; they reported they would provide a full answer in the

neighbourhood of December 15, 2006, which we think is an avoidance mechanism.

For order paper questions 260 and 261 in the name of the member for Leeds-Grenville, again we had an interim answer indicating that the full answer would be available last week. For question 287 in the name of

the member for Oxford and question 309 in the name of the member for Haliburton-Victoria-Brock -- these are all clear violations of the standing order.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Ministers, I want to remind you that you are required, under standing order 38(i), to file a response to a petition within 24 sitting days of its

presentation. Your responses are now overdue. I would ask you to give the House some indication as to when the response will take place. Chief government whip?

Mr. Dave Levac (Brant): They will be dealt with as quickly as possible.

VISITOR

Mr. Bill Mauro (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I'd like to welcome to the Legislative Assembly, in the members' east gallery, visiting from Thunder Bay, my son Dustin

Mauro.

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): To the Premier: As the Premier is aware, on December 5, 2006, the Auditor General stated in his report that the data contained in the McGuinty

Liberals' wait time website was -- I'm quoting -- "misleading" and needed -- again quoting -- to be "taken with a grain of salt."

At the same time, Advertising Standards Canada found that the recent taxpayer-funded $2-million ads claiming that people could reduce their wait times by calling a number or visiting a website -- ads that were

based on data found by the Auditor General to be "misleading" -- raised expectations that remained unsatisfied, made inaccurate claims and omitted relevant information, contrary to the code.

Premier, given this set of facts, are you prepared to stand in your place and admit that the ads were wrong and apologize for this misuse of taxpayers' dollars in an obvious bid to buy votes?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): A few facts I think would be helpful in this regard: First of all, the ad that ran on TV was approved by the Auditor

General. The member opposite will know that we have now in place a new regime which requires that the taxpayer dollars that are going to be used to advertise government policies -- those ads have to first be subjected to the review of the Auditor

General. He did, in fact, review that ad and he did, in fact, approve it.

Secondly, it doesn't matter how you slice it or dice it: Wait times in the province of Ontario are coming down. Whether you look at median times, average times or 90th-percentile times, wait times are coming

down in the province of Ontario.

We have embarked upon something that is not without some challenges -- there's no doubt about that -- but we are proud to be pioneers in this regard. We're collecting information that was never collected

before. We're making it public for the very first time, and we're pleased and proud to be able to do that to better inform the people of Ontario.

Mr. Runciman: As the Premier well knows, the Auditor General looks at the issue of partisanship. The advertising council exists to ensure truth, honesty, fairness and accuracy in advertising.

They found that you violated sections 1(

a) and (

b) of the Canadian code of advertising standards with your ads on wait times. They deal with accuracy and clarity.

Section 1(

a) says, "Advertisements must not contain inaccurate or deceptive claims

... either direct or implied."

Section 1(

b) says, "Advertisements must not omit relevant information in a manner that, in the result, is deceptive." Those are the clauses your ads were found to violate.

Will the Premier admit today that he was wrong to run the ads, will he apologize to the taxpayers, and will he commit to have the Ontario Liberal Party repay the $2 million spent on these ads to the public

treasury? Will you do that?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: It's becoming apparent, as we pioneer in this area and embark on a journey which all other governments were afraid to embark upon, that from time to time you'll run into

conflicting opinions from various experts. The Auditor General said that this was a good ad; he gave it the thumbs-up and so we ran with it. Now we hear from another body that they take issue with that.

We are also relying on the medical experts who put forward information and presented it in a very specific way on our wait times website, which is a very popular website; in fact, we've had more than 2.1

million hits on that website. The Auditor General takes issue with the way in which that information is being presented, even though it was approved by medical experts. So what we've done is asked former Senator Kirby to take a look at it, to give

us his best advice as to how we reconcile the conflicting opinions we're getting from the Auditor General and our medical experts. But our intention remains the same: to collect this information and to present it in the very best way possible to

Ontarians.

Mr. Runciman: This is an old shell game the Premier likes to play: He's comparing apples and oranges. The Auditor General looks at a different set of standards. We've pointed that out, and the

Premier is refusing to take this seriously.

Premier, may I remind you that the advertising council includes approximately 170 leading advertisers, advertising agencies, media organizations and suppliers to the advertising sector? Through their

membership, they communicate their commitment to responsible advertising. You should take their finding seriously, not only because they are serious but because I have here a list of the members of the council and one of those members is the

government of Ontario.

The ads were found to be in violation of the Canadian code of advertising standards. They made inaccurate claims. They omitted relevant information.

You should apologize. The Ontario Liberal Party should repay $2 million to the taxpayers and pay for public retractions of the ads. Will you commit to those three things today?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: No, I won't. The ad was approved by the Auditor General. The ad said that there are more nurses; in fact, we're now funding 4,300 more full-time positions. The ad said that

there were more doctors, and there are, because we've increased medical school spaces by 23%; there are 104 new spaces. There are 750 new international graduates working in Ontario and 470 more in assessment. There are more MRI technologists.

Angiography waits are down by 39%. Angioplasty waits are down by 18%. Cataract surgeries are down by 27.7% in terms of wait times. Hip replacement wait times are down 20%; knee replacements, 20%; MRIs, 13%; and CT scans, 2.5%.

Again, we are doing something that's never been done before. It's not easy, and we will work our way through it. We're collecting information. We're making it available to the public. We'll work with all the

experts involved to make sure we do it in the best way possible.

NATIVE LAND DISPUTE

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a question for the Premier. The occupation of the Douglas Creek Estates in Caledonia is now in its 294th day. Tensions and frustrations on both

sides of this dispute remain high. There was an ill-advised protest this past weekend that those of us on both sides of this House tried to discourage. And then came reports that someone broke into and vandalized the home of a family whose house

backs onto the disputed land. Residents are worried that these tensions will go on indefinitely. Last week, a protest spokesperson noted, "We are here indefinitely. We are here to stay."

The province has given the occupiers the green light to remain throughout the winter, a situation that is causing obvious tensions that put the aboriginal protesters and nearby residents at ongoing risk of

inflammatory incidents. Premier, has the government at least asked the native protesters if they would, as a goodwill gesture, leave the occupied site while negotiations continue, or will you completely abandon your principle that the protest

should not continue throughout the winter?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): To the minister responsible for aboriginal affairs.

Hon. David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources, minister responsible for aboriginal affairs): Around the main table of negotiations that the province set up, at which the federal government

now has the lead role, from the very beginning it was made clear by the government of Ontario and the federal government that the object of the negotiations was not only to settle the outstanding disputes in the area but also to find an end to the

occupation. That is one of the main goals of the main table. There is a side table, a technical table, that works on issues directly related to the Douglas Creek Estates property, and that is one of the main goals of this government: to end that

occupation.

Mr. Miller: On June 16, 2006, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing promised compensation for homeowners. These are people caught in the middle of the dispute who are having to pay a

huge price for the failure of the government to keep its word. The press release, which I have here, says, "The McGuinty government is providing emergency financial assistance to residents in Caledonia directly affected by the continuing

blockade." Six months and two days later, the homeowners have seen no compensation. Why is the Premier breaking this important promise to the people of Caledonia?

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: I would say to the member that we are continuing to work, and in fact Mr. Gerretsen's staff is working with residents in Caledonia and other representative groups in Caledonia

to make sure that the package we have promised, when delivered, is exactly the right package for the people in need. We continue to work with those people to discuss what their concerns are and what expenses they have incurred, to make sure we get

the compensation package exactly right so that it fits the need of the people there.

Mr. Miller: That the Premier refuses to answer this simple and direct question is very telling. We have a situation in Caledonia that has seen innocent people caught in the middle, innocent

people who are frightened for their safety and who have seen their property values dropping. We have a situation where the government of Ontario hastily moved to buy the disputed land, compensated businesses and promised to compensate homeowners.

We have a situation where the McGuinty Liberals claim that all is well in Caledonia, but that characterization doesn't match up with the reality experienced by residents on a daily basis.

Six months ago, Dalton McGuinty promised to compensate homeowners. Six months have passed and nothing has happened. We are a week away from Christmas. Will the Premier keep his promise before Christmas?

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: The government is going to keep its promise. As I have said, officials from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs have been working with the homeowners and others in the community

to make sure that we do get it right. We want to make sure that, when announced, the package is well accepted by the people who have that need.

I would say to the member that nobody has ever said everything is just well in Caledonia. What we have said is that, as we have been able to lower the temperature since the beginning of that occupation, we are

now focused at the negotiating table and not on the occupation. But what happens from time to time is that, when we get these outside influences, incidents arise again. But what we've done all along is to focus on negotiation. Of course, when

other things happen, the police are doing their proper job.

HYDRO OPERATIONS

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): To the Premier: last week, I listened intently when you said that you were going to do something to ensure that Hydro consumers were respected. That

was last week. This week, we find out from the Globe and Mail that under the McGuinty government, the costs associated with the operation of Ontario's hydroelectricity agencies have soared. Operation, maintenance and administration costs under the

McGuinty government have increased by $1.2 billion, and of course Hydro executive pay has skyrocketed.

My question is this: Premier, how does the McGuinty government justify this $1.2-billion increase in operating costs and the skyrocketing salaries of Hydro executives?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): To the Minister of Energy.

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy): There is no question that the undertakings in 1998 around the breakup of the old Ontario Hydro have not come to pass. We have been delighted to apply

the auditor to Hydro One and OPG as well as other agencies of the government. The kinds of findings that have come about as a result of the auditor's most recent report have led to, I think, a rather quick response.

It is always in the interests of ratepayers to look at costs. To that end, we will continue to work with the boards of all the affected agencies to ensure that costs are managed in as effective a manner as is

possible.

Mr. Hampton: It didn't surprise me that the Premier doesn't want to answer this question, because this leads back to him. The fact is, when most ordinary Ontarians look at their hydro bill, it

has now doubled, and there are literally tens of thousands of workers in the province who know that their job has been destroyed as a result of skyrocketing electricity rates. Meanwhile, the Premier has created yet another hydroelectricity agency,

the Ontario Power Authority, and he has put his former Bay Street bag man, Mr. Jan Carr, in charge, giving him a $600,000-plus salary. But it's even worse than that, because at the Ontario Power Authority the operating costs under the McGuinty

government have quadrupled, exceeding all forecasts.

My question to the Premier: Since he wanted to speak about this last week, can he tell hard-pressed hydro consumers across the province: What exactly is the McGuinty government's plan to ensure that hydro

consumers are respected?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: First of all, the first step to respect is to point out that the price of electricity is lower today than it was when we took office, so let's not forget that.

The second thing to point out is that, prior to the creation of the power authority, there was nobody in Ontario doing power planning. I read the comments of the old Hydro executive in the Globe and Mail about

how few people they did it with. Remember Darlington?

Planning is an important function of the power authority. Its budget has been appropriately used this year. The work it has undertaken is important to the future of our electricity system and important to the

people of Ontario. Their work will continue, their costs will be managed appropriately, but the work must go on, the planning must begin. We need a cleaner, greener, more reliable supply of electricity. This government is committed to that.

Mr. Hampton: The McGuinty government says that hydro rates are coming down. I invite any member of the McGuinty government to go to the Abitibi Mission mill in Thunder Bay, where they were

just told that workers there have three weeks of downtime. Why? Because the costs of producing in Ontario are too high. And the principal cost? Hydro rates.

Here is the real issue, though. The Premier likes to give speeches about respecting hydro consumers, but the McGuinty government, it is clear, doesn't have a plan to respect hydro consumers. The McGuinty

government has presided over the explosion in salaries and the explosion in operating costs.

I say to the Premier, if you really want to respect hydro consumers, if you really want to get to the bottom of what is going on, what I suggest we need is a public inquiry to look at the explosion in Hydro

executive salaries and to look at where the increase of $1.2 billion in operating costs went. Premier, will the McGuinty government take the issue of hydro costs seriously and call a public inquiry so we can get to the bottom of the problem

instead of hearing more speeches from the McGuinty government?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: This government takes hydro costs very seriously. That's why the steps we've taken have been undertaken.

The member referred to the power authority's increase in budget. I do think the public needs to know that 73% of that new funding was allocated to conservation, something that that member wouldn't have a lot

of understanding or sympathy for, because they cancelled all conservation programs when they were the government.

The reason the McGuinty government asked the Provincial Auditor to look at these organizations is to shine a light on how they are managed. That's why we applied freedom of information; that's why we applied

salary disclosure. The steps this government has taken are the appropriate steps. Over time, they will lead to greater confidence in the sector and in members of that sector.

We remain committed to and are delivering more affordable, greener, and more reliable electricity to the people of Ontario today and well into the future.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): New question.

Mr. Hampton: To the Premier: Premier, if you attacked Hydro fat cats and executive pay salaries over there with the same tenacity with which you attack a 31% pay increase for yourself, greed

at Hydro One, OPG and OPA would be ancient history. That's what people across Ontario can't understand. They see Hydro executive salaries skyrocketing, they hear the Premier give speeches, but nothing gets done.

My question is this: Why does the McGuinty government have the time and energy to spend literally a week and a half here forcing through a 31% pay increase for itself when you don't seem to have any time or

energy to address the skyrocketing costs and the skyrocketing salaries in the hydro system under the McGuinty government?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I think the leader of the NDP knows where I stand on this issue. He knows that I'll be voting in favour of this bill and

that I will be accepting the increase that comes with it.

I want to draw his attention to Bill 173. If you take a look at the explanatory notes, it specifically says, I say to my friend opposite, that this bill "enables a current member to choose to be bound by the

current provisions that govern his or her annual salary." It says, "Notice of the member's choice must be given to the Speaker within 60 days after the bill receives royal assent, and the notice is permanent and irrevocable."

That provision is in there to allow for members who choose to object on principle to avail themselves of that specific election. There's only one way for anybody to oppose this bill on principle -- it's

irrevocable, it is unequivocal -- and to make it permanent, and that is to opt out. I say to Mr. Hampton, will you opt out of this bill?

Mr. Hampton: I say to the Premier, if you showed half the energy --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Interjection.

The Speaker: The Minister of Economic Development and Trade will come to order. I won't warn her again.

Leader of the third party.

Mr. Hampton: I say to the Premier, if you showed half the energy in addressing the skyrocketing salaries that have happened in the hydroelectricity system under the McGuinty government, if you

showed half the energy and the tenacity in dealing with the $1.2-billion increase in hydro operating costs, maybe all those ordinary people out there who are having trouble paying the hydro bill would understand why you want to increase MPP

salaries. But when they can't pay the hydro bill and when many of them live on salaries of less than $31,000 a year, they take exception to your desire to increase the salary by --

The Speaker: The question's been asked. Premier?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The leader of the NDP gives every impression that he remains adamantly opposed to the consequences of this bill. I assume he's going to vote against it, but I have every

reason to believe that he will not avail himself of the option here. There's only one way to unequivocally, irrevocably, permanently and verifiably not take the pay hike and that is to say that he's going to sign on to that option. I think what

the people of Ontario want to know is, now that we're all being clear and straightforward -- I'm going take the raise and I'm going to vote for it. Mr. Hampton, I believe, is going to vote against the bill and take it anyway, unless he assures

this House now that he will in fact opt out.

Mr. Hampton: Premier McGuinty is wrong again. Premier, I'm going to give any increase that might come to me to charities. What are you going to do with yours, Premier -- put it in your

pocket?

I want to ask about Kelvin Shmeichel, who runs --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The Minister of Northern Development and Mines.

Order. The Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs will come to order. I will not warn her again. The Minister of Natural Resources. I won't warn him again.

Mr. Hampton: Premier, my question is about Kelvin Shmeichel. He runs one of the two community stores in the community of Pickle Lake. The transmission system which delivers electricity to his

community is so unreliable that he's lost $100,000 from his business, and he's afraid even to make any insurance claims. He sees the skyrocketing salaries at Hydro One. He sees the skyrocketing operating costs; he pays for them every month on his

hydro bill. What he wants to know from you is, with the skyrocketing hydro bill, the skyrocketing salaries at Hydro One and OPG, why isn't the delivery of electricity to his store any better under the McGuinty government?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Again, the leader of the NDP gives the impression that he remains adamantly opposed. He tells us that he might do something vis-à-vis charities; of what duration, we

have no understanding whatsoever. There's only one clear way to oppose this bill. There's only one way to do it that is verifiable, that is permanent, that is irrevocable and that is verifiable, and that's to avail yourself of the option. So I'd

ask Mr. Hampton on behalf of the people of Ontario, since he's so adamantly opposed to this pay increase: Will he in fact reject it now and forever?

HEALTH PREMIUMS

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): I guess we're going to get an annual filing from the leader of the NDP.

To the Premier: Premier, I want to call your attention to the issue of employers becoming liable to pay for the so-called health tax. The December 16 Toronto Sun reported the Toronto Transit Commission will

have to retroactively pay $12 million for its employees' health tax for the past two years. The TTC chair estimates that taxpayers will have to shell out between $5 million and $6 million annually going forward just for this specific

situation.

Premier, do you have any idea how many more cases like the TTC's there are in Ontario and what the total cost to taxpayers could be?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): To the Minister of Finance.

Hon. Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): I guess the first thing to say to my friend is that there are some 60 cases that were before arbitrators, and

in 51 of those cases, the ruling of the arbitrator was of the same view as we were when we introduced the Ontario health premium, and that is that the responsibility to pay the premium lies with individual taxpayers.

At the same time, I want to say to you that we understand that it is the responsibility of arbitrators to interpret collective agreements, and obviously we would not interfere with those

interpretations. The

final thing is to say that we are aware of the judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal and we are going to be reviewing that judgment very carefully.

Mr. Runciman: Once the precedent is set, I think you should be reviewing it very closely. As we told you back in 2004, the total cost could be in the neighbourhood of $500 million. That's $500

million that won't be available for hospitals, long-term-care facilities or classrooms.

On October 27, 2004, the Premier told the assembly that it has always been your government's intention that taxpayers would pay this and not employers, and that remains your intention; you've just reiterated

that. But the TTC case shows you've been caught red-handed, some might say, after saying, "Nobody will have to pay the health tax twice." Taxpayers will now foot the bill again, likely through a TTC fare hike, a property tax increase or perhaps

both.

Minister of Finance, you've had two years to correct this. You chose to do nothing. You could have avoided this if you'd kept your promise not to raise taxes. Can you give us some indication today: When will

you keep your promise and not force employers to pay this illegal health tax?

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: The member himself puts on the floor the information that makes his case so weak. He said a couple of years ago that this could cost the taxpayers some $500 million. The fact

is, as a result of matters being brought under collective agreements before arbitrators, of the 60 cases before arbitrators, 51 of those cases have confirmed the view of the government. We were waiting, as I said in this House several months ago,

for the deliberation of the Court of Appeal on this matter. That decision has now been rendered and we are studying that decision very carefully.

I reiterate: When we introduced the bill, after we introduced the bill and today, the liability for the Ontario health premium is an individual liability, not an employer liability.

SCHOOL BOARDS

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): The question is to the Minister of Education. Last week, the trustees of the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board ended the charade surrounding

your power grab at their school board. The local trustees voted unanimously not to participate in your provincially appointed management team and called on you to change the title of your agent from "chair of the co-management team" to

"supervisor." Will you admit that your so-called co-management chair is really the supervisor of a takeover team, one in a long line of takeover teams dating back to the Harris-Eves regime?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): First of all, I'd like to say that 71 of the 72 boards in Ontario have balanced their budget. It's a terrific record. I'm in a very good

dialogue with the boards moving into next year.

My answer to the member opposite is no; I will not admit that there has been any failure in the Dufferin-Peel Catholic board. What we're doing is we've got a gentleman, Norbert Hartmann, in place who is

working with the trustees, willing to listen to the trustees and has been meeting with the trustees. He has been meeting with them and talking with them. The fact that the trustees at this point are not taking the offer of being part of the

co-management team does not change the fact that we are open to conversation with them, we are collaborating with them, and that is why Norbert Hartmann is there doing the work in the way he is.

Mr. Marchese: If the minister was really interested in a co-management team, why did your appointee, Mr. Hartmann, unilaterally impose a 10% reduction in spending with no consultation from the

other members of the so-called co-management team? If the minister was really worried about prudent spending, she would stop wasting the $1,500 a day that she's paying Mr. Hartmann and the almost $140,000 that has been blown on advisers.

When will the minister return control of the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board to the duly elected trustees, provide the funding that is being denied and allow the local trustees to do the job they

were elected to do?

Hon. Ms. Wynne: I know that the member opposite was a school trustee at one point, but he has no idea of what it's like to be under supervision. When I was a school trustee with the Toronto

board, I was under supervision under the previous government. There was no communication with us as trustees. There was no interest in hearing what we had to say. In fact, the trustee supervisor came in and locked doors between the staff and our

offices. It was a shameless, shameless display of arrogance.

What we're doing in Dufferin-Peel Catholic is, we've put a person in place who is willing to talk and has been talking to school trustees and who is interested in what's going on in the community and what the

issues are and are not. I am absolutely confident that Mr. Hartmann is going to be able to work with the trustees. I'm also confident that the new trustees who have been elected are going to be interested in working with him.

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

Ms. Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): My question is for the Minister of Finance. As we near the end of this year, I know that Hamilton and municipalities across the province are beginning to

plan their budgets for the year 2007. I think it's fair to say that with growing populations and many of the pressures they face, municipalities will be counting on the stable funding the province has provided in past years. I know that for many

of them, including Hamilton, finding out how much funding will be received through the Ontario-municipal partnership fund is critical to their planning. Can you tell us when municipalities can expect to hear from you on 2007 OMPF funding

allotments and if there will be anything different in this year's funding?

Hon. Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): As it turns out, it's a timely question because the letters are going out, as we speak, to municipalities

concerning the Ontario-municipal partnership fund. More important than that, and even better news, is that we're providing this year some $824 million to the partnership fund. That represents an 8% increase over last year and a 33% increase over

what was being provided by the previous administration under a system that was chaotic, unfair and inequitable.

The very good news, because all politics is local, is that the city of Hamilton will be receiving an increase of some $3 million for funding of almost $36 million under the fund. Hamilton deserves it and we're

proud to provide it.

Ms. Marsales: Thank you, Minister. We are very happy to hear that good news, and thank you for the update.

I know that Hamilton will be glad to know that the McGuinty government has listened to their concerns, particularly with respect to the burden of social program costs on the property tax base. Despite our own

fiscal challenges, we have responded to the best of our ability to support our municipal partners. It's great news for Hamilton to see such an increase, but will this be true for all other municipalities in the province? Can you explain to us why

some municipalities will be seeing more funding than others, and if any municipality will be seeing a decrease in the funding this year?

Hon. Mr. Sorbara: The first thing to point out is that no municipality will see a decrease in 2007. The reason some municipalities get more and some get less is that the new formula is

designed to provide equitable funding, taking into consideration a wide variety of factors.

I would simply add that I am very proud of the work we have done with municipalities, particularly under the leadership of my colleague Mr. Gerretsen as Minister of Municipal Affairs. We are in the midst of a

consultation process looking at a wide variety of financial issues between municipalities and the provincial government. But this program, the Ontario-municipal partnership fund, has been a really important new foundation between the provincial

government and hundreds of municipalities around the province.

LANDFILL

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a question for the Premier. As you know, a little more than a month ago I tabled a resolution on the Green Lane landfill deal, which incidentally

is scheduled to close at some time this week. Allow me to refresh your memory about the content of the resolution. It asks the following --

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Stop the clock. The Minister of Labour will come to order.

Member for Parry Sound-Muskoka.

Mr. Miller: Allow me to refresh your memory about the content of the resolution. It asked for the following: proof that the region surrounding the Green Lane landfill is willing to take

Toronto's garbage; a guarantee that the landfill will not operate beyond its current scheduled closing in 2018; and a call to the city of Toronto to take the necessary steps to reduce their waste so the city can stop shipping garbage to the London

area by 2012. The resolution passed and received support from all parties.

Premier, could you tell this Legislature and the people of Ontario: In the month that has elapsed, who at the city of Toronto have you contacted to ensure that the goals of this resolution are being met?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): To the Minister of the Environment.

Hon. Laurel C. Broten (Minister of the Environment): I want to assure this Legislature that I very much value the input of the Legislature. All sides of the House had an opportunity to debate

that resolution during private members' time. Unfortunately, the members opposite seem to want to play politics with a very serious and important issue to the community in London -- and Southwold, in fact, where this landfill is located -- who are

working closely with the community around them and have done so for many, many years.

The role of the province is to undertake an environmental assessment, as we did; impose some very stringent standards and conditions, as we did; monitor the certificate of approval and, again, impose more

stringent standards; and provide municipalities right across the province with the tools they need to be able to better manage their waste. Those are the active steps we take every single day at the Ministry of the Environment to ensure that our

environment is protected.

Mr. Miller: Premier, one of your major promises to Ontario was that you would respect the role of MPPs and respect democracy. You also said that you would divert 60% of municipal garbage to

recycling. One thing has now led to another, and the fact is, you've broken both of those promises. Despite the fact that you insist on continuing to break your promises to hard-working Ontarians, you have an obligation to act on the will of this

Legislature.

When you were in opposition, you tabled a very similar resolution. You believed, or said you believed, that communities must be willing hosts to receive waste from other regions. Now, on the eve of the closing

of this deal, you are saying to the people of Ontario that you don't believe in the notion of a willing host and that you aren't prepared to at least work with the city of Toronto for the sake of all parties concerned. You have a moral obligation

that resolutions passed in this Legislature are acted upon. Will you follow up on the Green Lane resolution passed by the House on November 16?

Hon. Ms. Broten: I guess I find it passing strange that my friend is the one asking this question, because the municipality that he represents is one of the municipalities that currently send

their waste to Green Lane.

My friends opposite have a history of failing to respect the role and importance of municipalities and the importance of those political leaders at a municipal level, who are the ones responsible to manage

municipal solid waste. I would remind my friend that Mayor Miller has always indicated that he will work closely with the community of Southwold and that the mayor of the township of Southwold, in correspondence dated November 3, 2006, has said

that on behalf of his municipality, he welcomes the initiatives and looks forward to initial meetings and discussions with the city of Toronto.

So, municipal leaders right across this province: We respect them. They're working collaboratively together. The community of Southwold and the city of Toronto are currently in discussions and negotiations,

and they will undertake that. If they need --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question?

HEALTH CARE

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a question for the Minister of Health. Last week the Health for Life Medical Centre opened in Kingston. It's offering comprehensive health care to

people over the age of 50. The first-year membership fee is $2,500, and it's $2,000 each year after that. In addition to the non-insured wellness services, the website says, "Any medically necessary medical care, exams, investigations and

referrals can be performed at or through the centre as needed, or referred to the appropriate medical specialist. This medically necessary care is taken care of through the Ontario health insurance plan."

Minister, this sounds like "pay your way to the front of the line" health care to me. When are you going to put a stop to it?

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): To my honourable friend, this is an issue that we take seriously. It would have been great if the NDP had taken

it seriously when we had a bill before the House called the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act, which actually gave us very strong penalties and sanctions associated with exactly this kind of action.

The ministry is conducting an investigation into the operation of a clinic in Kingston, and we do so on this very, very simple and sound principle: We will not stand by and tolerate a circumstance where an

Ontarian is asked or obliged to pay a fee in advance of receiving an OHIP-funded service. The penalties associated with this are strong. They are embedded in the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act. Have no doubt whatsoever that, in a similar

way as we applied it to the Copeman model, we will be following this and taking action as is appropriate. And as I said, there's an investigation under way.

Ms. Martel: Bill 8 is working so well that this clinic is up and running. The Cleveland Clinic in Toronto, which also says you can get diagnostic services if you pay a fee, is still in

operation and has been all fall. So I say to the minister, if you're going to do something, I'd sure like to know when. For your $2,500 membership fee, the website also says, "... should you require a family physician, Dr. Kilpatrick can become

your family physician. Dr. Kilpatrick is willing to make house calls as necessary." Further, if you want more services from the allied health professionals who work at the centre, nurses included, then the centre "will make arrangements for such

services through our staff at the centre and will bill you for the services provided."

Minister, seniors in Kingston want to know that they'll have access to health care in their municipality even if they don't have $2,500 a year to pay for it. When are you going to stop this "pay your way to

the front of the line" operation?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: The seniors that the honourable member mentions in Kingston know the honourable member well, because they know that she was more involved than just about anybody else in

helping to create the current challenges that they have related to access. But I think our government's commitment to the people of Kingston can be found in the emergence of two very large family health teams, additional funding for the community

health centre and, indeed, an additional satellite of a community health centre, all of which are expanding access to universally accessible services in the Kingston community.

As I said on the earlier issue, we will use those powers in the bill that the honourable member voted against in order to be able to bring to heel any organization that we are able to substantiate a claim

about that they are acting that way. I remind all members in this House that research for the honourable member passes with a cursory view of a website. Instead, we think it's important to be on-site and to seek to address that. That's why an

investigation is under way.

EDUCATION

Mr. John Milloy (Kitchener Centre): My question is to the Minister of Education. As the minister is well aware, one of the major priorities of our government has been improving the quality of

education for our children and students in this province. We're lowering class sizes in the primary grades, we're increasing graduation rates for those in high school, and we're improving student achievement for all students while maintaining

peace and stability. We have the support of parents, teachers and our education partners, and even have support on the primary class size initiative from the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Tory, who said in a CP24 interview back in September that

he thinks it's "a good initiative."

We can speak of general success in education throughout the province, but the citizens of my constituency want to know how it's impacting our community. Can the minister please inform my constituents how our

priorities are making a difference for students in Kitchener Centre?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne (Minister of Education): I thank the member for Kitchener Centre for his advocacy. I want to talk about what's going on in primary class size reduction in the Waterloo

region board and the Waterloo Catholic board. When we came to office in 2003, 33% of students in kindergarten to grade 3 were in classes of 20 or fewer. Last year, 50% of those students were sitting in classes of 20 or fewer. In the Waterloo

Catholic board, when we came to office, only 27% of kindergarten to grade 3 students were in classes of 20 or fewer. Now, 58% of those students are sitting in classes -- so it's not surprising that the members opposite would agree with this

initiative, because we know it is good for students.

In the two boards combined, there are 274 more teachers. Some of those are for primary class size. Some of those are art teachers. Some of those are music teachers. It's been a good year for education in

Kitchener.

Mr. Milloy: One of the major accomplishments of the McGuinty government this session is to pass Bill 52, learning to 18, designed to help us meet our priority to help more students graduate.

Students will now be required to stay in school until they're the age of 18 or until graduation, and we're also providing students with more choice to help them on their path to success. The bill allows us to expand co-operative programs, develop

dual-credit courses, introduce more high-skills majors and engage in a deeper discussion around equivalent learning.

Recently, the minister came to my riding of Kitchener Centre to highlight three student success lighthouse projects at Forest Heights high school aimed to help struggling students to graduate through increased

support, extra guidance and unique learning opportunities. I'd like to ask the minister if she can tell this House how programs such as the ones at Forest Heights are helping high school students in Ontario.

Hon. Ms. Wynne: It was really a pleasure to visit with the teachers and the students at Forest Heights Collegiate a couple of weeks ago.

There are three lighthouse projects at Forest Heights Collegiate, and there are 400 students participating in these three programs. There's the reintegrating-engaging-connecting program, which gives students a

space where they can get connected back to the school and reclaim some credits. The new horizons immigrant youth program focuses on language and skill development, and the career explorations and integrated services model program gives co-op

education students an opportunity to explore other options.

I want to talk about Zeljka Stanivuk. Zeljka is a student in the career explorations and integrated services program, the third one. She nearly dropped out of school. She credits the school's integration

worker, Tanya Dale, for helping her to re-engage in learning. She says, "She's the type of person that you simply can't disrespect. Little by little she learned about me. She was the one I could turn to."

HYDRO OPERATIONS

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): My question is for the Minister of Energy. Minister, you once said that the Ontario Power Authority was going to be a virtual agency with very

few employees, maybe 10 to 15. We read on the weekend from Karen Howlett of the Globe and Mail that the budget of this agency has gone from $14.9 million to $31 million and next year will go to $57.4 million. All of this goes directly to the rate

base that the people of this province have to pay when they're paying their hydro bills. This agency is somewhat of an insulative agency to protect you from your flip-flops and your own incompetence when articulating energy policy in the province

of Ontario, Minister. I'm asking the minister: How can you justify this kind of increase when the head of this authority is paid $638,000 and is a personal friend of the Premier? It's only going to get bigger, it looks like. How do you justify

this to the people of Ontario? Tell us, please.

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy): When the previous government broke up the old Ontario Hydro and created five successor organizations, they forgot one thing: forward planning. It's

unfortunate that they did, because the electricity supply in Ontario actually decreased under the previous government's administration while demand for electricity went up. It left us in an untenable position, when we came to office, in terms of

supplying adequate amounts of electricity.

The OPA was the subject of a long debate in this House. It was established. It has acted on a number of directives, the most important of which so far have been conservation initiatives which account for 73%

of this year's budget increase. This planning authority, this planning body, is extremely important to the future of Ontario and to the future of our electricity supply.

Mr. Yakabuski: Minister, yes, this House by your majority did create the Ontario Power Authority. It was your doing, you created it, and you're also the one who had to approve these kinds of

unbelievable increases in its budget. That has to go through your office, Minister. In an era when we're seeing the CEO of Hydro One out the door with a $3-million severance because of questionable behaviour with regard to his spending on his

secretary's credit cards, because of the size of that bureaucracy, you want to create another one: $57.4 million directly to the rate base on your hand, Mr. Minister. You're allowing this kind of spending on something that is basically insulating

you to protect you from the real mess that you've created in the Ministry of Energy.

Minister, how can you justify these kinds of increases in an agency that is simply your own creation, your creation to protect you? I believe that $57.4 million is a bit expensive.

Hon. Mr. Duncan: It is essential that we have the ability to plan Ontario's energy future. The member will recall that this year we did the integrated power system plan. Seventy-three per cent

of that increase has gone to new conservation initiatives. We started at zero two years ago. There has been an increase in the last two years; there's no question. I expect that increase to moderate now that these things are up and running.

I would remind the member opposite that when his leader was asked what they would do with the power authority -- would they get rid of it? What would they get rid of? -- he said he didn't know. You need a

planning authority in this province, you need to fund it properly, and you need to make sure we have a plan and that we have adequate, reliable and affordable electricity going into the future. That's what Ontarians need, that's what Ontarians

want, and that's what this government is delivering.

PAPER MILL

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): My question is to the Minister of Natural Resources. Minister, you'll know that last Friday there was a protest in the town of Iroquois Falls in regard

to a meeting the town of Iroquois Falls had with the company directors from Abitibi. The people there in the community are worried that once you allow the company to sever off those dams away from the company, the company will therefore be in a

better position to make money from selling its hydro through those hydro dams to the grid than from providing cheap power to the paper mill in order to be able to keep that mill running.

The question that the community wants me to ask you is a very simple one: Will you stand today in this House and tell Abitibi that the public hydro dams must provide Iroquois Falls mills with electricity at

cost for the duration of those leases?

Hon. David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources, minister responsible for aboriginal affairs): Mr. Speaker, you know -- and he's my friend, the member across the way. We work together on many

issues, and he knows that the government of Ontario has neither the power nor the authority to stop such a business transition within a company operating in this country. You're making this an issue as if the government has the ability to step in

and have any influence. This company is reorganizing itself. Some people don't like what they're doing, some people support it, but the government has neither the power nor the authority to affect it. There's no permission they need to apply for,

so I don't know why you're asking the question.

Mr. Bisson: Minister, I'm asking the question for a simple reason: because there's something called a waterpower lease agreement that the province of Ontario has signed with Abitibi, and if

you read the lease agreement, it says, "The minister may terminate the lease with the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, if he deems the termination to be in the public interest." So you do have the authority under the power lease

agreement. Those power dams were built and licensed in order to produce electricity for those mills, not for the purpose of selling electricity to the grid, thus putting those mills out of commission when the electricity prices are going up.

You've seen the story across the north. We have paper mill after paper mill that has been in difficulty. We've had sawmills that have closed down -- we've had Smooth Rock Falls go down altogether -- and one of

the big issues is electricity costs.

The community is asking you, as their local member and as a minister of the crown, to be their champion. Will you do what is right and will you make sure that Abitibi does not use the electricity from those

power dams for anything other than what they were intended for; that is, to deliver electricity to the mills in Iroquois Falls?

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: Abitibi wants to make itself more profitable so it can sustain these paper mills and jobs in Ontario. I obviously take a very particular interest in this mill. This mill is in

my backyard, and we want to see those jobs staying in Iroquois Falls.

They are a strong company. They are strengthening themselves by doing this. They want to increase their revenues in order to keep sustainable, to sustain those jobs and keep our town sustainable. That's what

they are doing, and anything the companies can do to get through this rough period they are having, that many have described as a perfect storm of influences that have really impacted the paper industry, makes the company stronger, makes the jobs

sustainable and therefore makes our communities stronger.

FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

Mr. Peter Fonseca (Mississauga East): My question is for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Minister, last week we passed the Fair Access to Regulations Professions Act, 2006. It

received and passed third reading. As Debbie Douglas from OCASI stated this morning, "It is a decisive step forward in recognizing the skills and expertise of the many internationally trained individuals that come to Ontario."

Minister, I also have a letter here from the Islamic Foundation of Toronto, and it's signed off by Mr. S. Zain Khan, office of the president:

"I'm writing to you not only on behalf of the Muslim community of the GTA but immigrants in general at the passing of Bill 124, a progressive step of mammoth proportions. We salute you and herald the news as a

great event in our history as new immigrants."

Minister, now that Bill 124 has been voted on and passed in the Legislature, what does this mean and how will it help us break down the barriers faced by our newcomers?

Hon. Mike Colle (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): I want to thank the member from Mississauga East for his question. It's been very inspirational to see the amazing public support for

this groundbreaking legislation, the first of its kind in Ontario and Canada, which for the first time has oversight over 34 regulatory bodies -- unprecedented.

The positive thing is that now we are moving quickly as a government. This morning we opened up the first-ever access centre for the internationally trained, in partnership with the Minister of Health. It'll

be a mentorship centre, an internship centre and a resource centre for the internationally trained to get the help they need to succeed. For too long, too many people have talked about helping newcomers, and they've delayed and navel-gazed. Now we

are taking action to help newcomers become a brain gain for this great province and no longer a brain drain.

Mr. Fonseca: Minister, I couldn't be more delighted. I know that many people in my riding of Mississauga East have much hope. You've visited the riding. You've been throughout this province.

You've talked to all the many regulated professions and those that are waiting to become part of the regulated professions.

Now that Bill 124 has passed in the Legislature, it is so important to start on the implementation of what is proposed. Internationally trained individuals have been waiting for too long, as you said,

Minister. The barriers must be broken down now.

I have a quote here from Madina Wasuge, the executive director of Hamilton's Centre for Civic Inclusion. She says, "This bill represents one of the boldest attempts by a provincial government to address the

inequities that confront newcomers."

Minister, I commend you and Minister of Health George Smitherman on the official opening of Global Experience Ontario and HealthForceOntario, a new access and resource centre for internationally trained

individuals --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The question's been asked. Minister?

Hon. Mr. Colle: These are very, very good days for newcomers to Ontario. We passed the groundbreaking Bill 124, and on Friday announced with Mr. Solberg that the federal money we've been

waiting for for years -- I know the Premier's very interested in this -- the $300 million over the next two years, is flowing into community groups like SISO in Hamilton. All the groups across Ontario are getting the money they deserve for job

placement, for language training, for settlement services. They've never had this money. There's been a freeze for decades -- $300 million over the next two years coming in to help new immigrants.

We opened the access centre up. Bill 124 is coming. Finally, newcomers are getting the respect and investment they've been waiting for. It's about time.

PETITIONS

MACULAR DEGENERATION

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of blindness in the elderly and is present in some form in 25% to 33% of seniors over the age of 75. AMD has two forms: the more common

`dry' type and the `wet' type. Although the wet type occurs in only 15% of AMD patients, these patients account for 90% of the legal blindness that occurs with AMD. The wet type is further subdivided into classic and occult subtypes, based on the

appearance of the AMD on special testing. Photodynamic therapy, a treatment where abnormal blood vessels are closed with a laser-activated chemical, has been shown to slow the progression of vision loss in both subtypes of wet AMD;

"Whereas OHIP has not extended coverage for photodynamic therapy to the occult subtype of wet AMD, despite there being substantial clinical evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of this treatment in

patients with either form of wet AMD. Untreated, these patients can expect a progression in their visual loss, with central blindness as the end result;

"Whereas affected patients are in a position where a proven treatment is available to help preserve their vision, but this treatment can only be accessed at their own personal expense. Treatment costs are

between $12,500 and $18,000 over an 18-month period. Many patients resign themselves to a continued worsening of their vision, as for them the treatment is financially unattainable. The resultant blindness in these patients manifests itself as

costs to society in other forms, such as an increased need for home care, missed time from work for family members providing care, and an increased rate of injuries such as hip fractures that can be directly attributable to their poor vision.

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to fund the treatment of the occult subtype of macular degeneration with photodynamic therapy for all patients awaiting this service."

I am pleased to sign my name to this petition.

CENTENNIAL OF STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONSHIP

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas, on January 21st, 1907, the Kenora Thistles beat the Montreal Wanderers 8 to 6 to capture the Stanley Cup; and

"Whereas Kenora is the smallest community to have ever won the Stanley Cup;

"Whereas these Stanley Cup champions -- Si Griffis, Eddie Giroux, Art Ross, Roxy Beaudro, Tom Hooper, Tommy Phillips, Billie McGimsie, Joe Hall, Russel Phillips and trainer J.A. Link -- are remembered with

pride by the people of Kenora; and

"Whereas the city of Kenora will be celebrating the 100th anniversary of this important accomplishment on January 21st with an NHL Oldtimers game; and

"Whereas the city of Kenora will be celebrating the centennial throughout the year;

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

"We invite every member of the Legislature and every Ontarian to make your vacation destination Kenora, on beautiful Lake of the Woods, and witness the breathtaking scenery of northwestern Ontario, witness the

hospitality of the people, witness the aboriginal culture and share the pride as Stanley Cup champions."

This has been signed by several residents of northwestern Ontario; I affix my signature as well.

CHILD CUSTODY

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario that I'm going to read on behalf of my seatmate, the member for Niagara Falls, to whom I send my

greetings. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the people of the province of Ontario deserve and have the right to request an amendment to the Children's Law Reform Act to emphasize the importance of children's relationships with their parents and

their grandparents; and

"Whereas subsection 20(2.1) requires parents and others with custody of children to refrain from unreasonably placing obstacles to personal relations between the children and their grandparents; and

"Whereas subsection 24(2) contains a list of matters that a court must consider when determining the best interests of a child. The bill amends that subsection to include a specific reference to the importance

of maintaining emotional ties between children and grandparents; and

"Whereas subsection 24(2.1) requires a court that is considering custody of or access to a child to give effect to the principle that a child should have as much contact with each parent and their grandparent

as is consistent with the best interests of the child.

"Subsection 24(2.2) requires a court that is considering custody of a child to take into consideration each applicant's willingness to facilitate as much contact between the child and each parent and

grandparent as is consistent with the best interests of the child; and

"Whereas we support Bill 8 as introduced by MPP Kim Craitor;

"We, the undersigned, hereby petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to amend the Children's Law Reform Act to emphasize the importance of children's relationships with their parents and

grandparents."

I have affixed my signature to this petition and I'm going to ask page Or to carry it for me.

LANDFILL

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): "Whereas there is currently a proposal to more than double the size of the Carp landfill in west Ottawa; and

"Whereas this site has been in operation for some 30 years and had been expected to close in 2010; and

"Whereas the existing site in not in compliance with environmental regulations;

"Whereas the surrounding community has grown rapidly for the past 10 years and is continuing to grow; and

"Whereas this landfill site is at the western gateway to our national capital; and

"Whereas other options to an expanded landfill have yet to be considered; and

"Whereas the municipal councillors representing this area -- Eli El-Chantiry and Peggy Feltmate -- and the MPP, Norm Sterling, all oppose this expansion;

"We, the undersigned, support our local representatives and petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to ensure the Minister of the Environment does not approve the expansion of the Carp landfill and

instead finds other waste management alternatives."

I've signed it.

FETAL ALCOHOL SPECTRUM DISORDER

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the Northwestern Ontario Fetal Alcohol Syndrome Disorder ... Diagnostic Clinic has been operating as a demonstration project since December 2004 with funds received through the Ministry of Health and

Long-Term Care;

"Whereas this funding expires July 31, 2006;

"Whereas there is an enormous need in northwestern Ontario for regional access and accurate diagnosis of FASD;

"Whereas, without the northwestern Ontario FASD clinic, services are only accessible through a clinic in Winnipeg, Manitoba, or St. Michael's Hospital in Toronto, for which there is a four-year wait;

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

"Be it resolved that the provincial government commit to provide ongoing funding for the maintenance of the regional FASD diagnostic clinic, with two sites in northwestern Ontario."

I agree with the petition. I affix my signature to it and send it to the table by way of page Ian.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario which reads as follows:

"Whereas investing in our children's futures through new literacy and numeracy initiatives will allow them to receive the education they deserve; and

"Whereas, through giving school boards access to innovative resources and providing individual attention to students, learning can become more specialized; and

"Whereas the new individual focus programs, such as the turnaround program, have been proven to dramatically see changes in the first phase of trials in 84% of schools that participated; and

"Whereas the McGuinty government has developed a unique, made-in-Ontario strategy that will provide $25 million to help increase student achievement;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to support the McGuinty government's efforts in increasing funding for the Ontario-focused intervention partnership in order to aid in the

development and enrichment of Ontario's children."

Since I agree, I'm delighted to sign this petition.

FREDERICK BANTING HOMESTEAD

Mr. Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Sir Frederick Banting was the man who discovered insulin and was Canada's first Nobel Prize recipient; and

"Whereas this great Canadian's original homestead, located in the town of New Tecumseth, is deteriorating and in danger of destruction because of the inaction of the Ontario Historical Society; and

"Whereas the town of New Tecumseth has been unsuccessful in reaching an agreement with the Ontario Historical Society to use part of the land to educate the public about the historical significance of the work

of Sir Frederick Banting;

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

"That the Minister of Culture endorse Simcoe-Grey MPP Jim Wilson's private member's bill entitled the Frederick Banting Homestead Preservation Act so that the homestead is kept in good repair and preserved for

generations to come."

Obviously I agree with that petition. I'll sign it and I'm going to give it to page Philip Spencer to bring it to the table.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas, in June 2003, Dalton McGuinty said Ontario Liberals are committed to ensuring that nursing home residents receive more personal care each day and will reinstate minimum standards, and inspectors will

be required to audit the staff-to-resident ratios; and

"Whereas Health and Long-Term Care Minister George Smitherman, in October 2004, said that the Ontario government will not set a specified number of care hours nursing home residents are to receive each day;

and

"Whereas Ontario nursing home residents still receive the lowest number of care hours in the Western world; and

"Whereas studies have indicated nursing home residents should receive at least 4.1 hours of nursing care per day; and

"Whereas a coroner's jury in April 2005 recommended the Ontario government establish a minimum number of care hours nursing home residents must receive each day;

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

"That the government of Ontario immediately enact a minimum standard of 3.5 hours of nursing care for each nursing home resident per day."

I've affixed my signature as well. Thank you kindly, sir.

MACULAR DEGENERATION

Mr. Bas Balkissoon (Scarborough-Rouge River): I'd like to present the following petition on behalf of my colleague from Niagara Falls, addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the government of Ontario's health insurance plan covers treatments for one form of macular degeneration (wet), and there are other forms of macular degeneration (dry) that are not covered,

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

"There are thousands of Ontarians who suffer from macular degeneration, resulting in loss of sight if treatment is not pursued. Treatment costs for this disease are astronomical for most constituents and add a

financial burden to their lives. Their only alternative is loss of sight. We believe the government of Ontario should cover treatment for all forms of macular degeneration through the Ontario health insurance program."

I support this petition, I put my signature to it and I send it with page Philip.

PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I've received more petitions to do with pedestrian access to the Mary Lake dam, and they read:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the dam at Mary Lake has historically provided a pedestrian walkway for use by the community and visitors since the dam's construction; and

"Whereas the walkway provides a vital link and a tourist attraction for the community of Port Sydney; and

"Whereas restricting access to the walkway would result in pedestrian use of the roadway, where motor vehicle traffic poses a danger to pedestrians; and

"Whereas closure of the pedestrian walkway across the dam is inconsistent with other provincial government programs, including Ontario's action plan for healthy eating and active living and the Trails for Life

program, both of which promote active lifestyles; and

"Whereas all ministries should strive to encourage and support healthy lifestyles;

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

"That the Ministry of Natural Resources continue to permit the use of the pedestrian walkway over Mary Lake dam indefinitely."

I support this petition.

LONG-TERM CARE

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition that's been sent to me by residents of London. It reads as follows:

"We, the undersigned, call upon the government to take action to ensure that residents in Ontario long-term-care homes are treated with dignity and respect. This sector has been underfunded, with increased

reliance on for-profit operators while resident health needs grow in complexity and scope. The residents of these homes are the most vulnerable within our communities, and they deserve no less. We call upon the government to immediately enact a

minimum staffing standard in Ontario long-term-care homes. Each long-term-care home must be both required by regulation and equitably funded to provide a minimum amount of nursing and personal care for each resident. US studies have shown a

staffing level in excess of four hours necessary to ensure optimal care. Studies indicate a direct link between quality care and staffing levels in nursing homes. To ensure optimal care for residents, funding enhancements for nursing and personal

care need to be directed to hiring front-line staff and not be used to reduce deficits or hire clerical staff, as has occurred in the past. Health care workers are providing care to as many as twice the number of residents common only a decade

ago."

I agree with the petitioners and I affix my signature to this.

FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I'm delighted to tell you that this petition is also in support of the MPP for Mississauga West, Mr. Delaney, and it has to do with access to trades and

professions in Ontario. It's addressed to the Parliament of Ontario and reads as follows:

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

pursue their livelihoods and careers; and

"Whereas newcomers to Canada who choose to settle in Ontario find frequent, arbitrary and unnecessary obstacles that prevent skilled tradespeople, professional and managerial talent from practising the

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

"Whereas action by Ontario's trades and professions could remove many such barriers, but Ontario's trades and professions have failed to recognize that such structural barriers exist, much less to take action

to remove them, and to provide fair, timely, transparent and cost-effective access to trades and professions for new Canadians trained outside Canada;

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

"That the Ontario Legislative Assembly urge the members of all parties to swiftly pass Bill 124, the Fair Access to Regulated Professions Act, 2006, and to require Ontario's regulated professions and trades to

review and modify their procedures and qualification requirements to swiftly meet the needs of Ontario's employers, Ontario's newcomers and their own membership, all of whom desperately need the very skills new Canadians bring working for their

organizations, for their trades and professions, and for their families."

Mr. Speaker, I'm delighted to sign this petition, and I'll pass it on to page Arianne to send it to you.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE

L'ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE

Mrs. Bountrogianni moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 173,

An Act to amend the Legislative Assembly Act, the MPPs Pension Act, 1996 and the Executive Council Act / Projet de loi 173, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'Assemblée législative, la Loi de 1996

sur le régime de retraite des députés et la

Loi sur le Conseil exécutif.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Mrs. Bountrogianni, you have the floor.

Hon. Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): Bountrogianni. Once you get it, you don't forget it.

I'm pleased to rise in the House today to begin second reading debate on Bill 173, the Legislative Assembly Statute Law Amendment Act.

There is currently a 40% gap between what MPPs earn at Queen's Park and what MPs are making on Parliament Hill. This legislation proposes steps to close this gap. The province's Integrity Commissioner, the

Honourable Coulter Osborne, recognized the need for reform in his recent report on provincial members' compensation. He also concluded that it is in the public interest to ensure that such compensation be fair, that it reflect the important

responsibilities of MPPs and that it not fall so far behind the compensation paid our federal counterparts as to risk having the provincial Legislature seen as a farm team for the House of Commons. The changes we are proposing are in keeping with

his recommendations.

The Integrity Commissioner observed that a provincial member's salary is $88,771, while a federal member is paid $147,700 -- a 40% gap. He called for provincial members' compensation levels to be linked to

federal members' salaries. We represent the same ridings and the same number of constituents as federal MPs, and, in his view, MPPs should not earn 60% of what their MPs earn. Our government agrees. So does Marilyn Churley, who used to sit with

the third party. She said on December 13:

"I think there are reasonable grounds, and have been for some time, for a salary increase, I really do, when you compare it to other jurisdictions, federally in particular, and in this case it was the

Integrity Commissioner who did a study. But I do agree ... that there should be a salary increase.... It has been going on for years and years and years where there has been no increase whatsoever, and I do know that MPPs do work very hard."

Just this morning another former MPP from the NDP caucus, David Christopherson, a good friend of mine, also was cited as saying:

"The constituency responsibility of provincial members is as great, if not greater, in terms of just the raw number of casework that comes in. Quite frankly, it's just upside down when you've got quality

councillors, say, in the city of Toronto who will not even think about running for the Ontario Legislature because they would have to take a pay cut."

Under this new compensation plan, an MPP would earn roughly $110,000 -- 75% of what federal members receive. This is only 14% more than city councillors in Toronto and Ottawa, who now earn $95,000 a year.

While the federal government contributes to the funding of health care, we deliver it. While they contribute to the funding of post-secondary education, we on the ground deliver education, from junior

kindergarten all the way through post-doctoral programs. We have the principal responsibility for care and management of our natural environment and for strengthening our economy.

What we are proposing is to move forward to reduce this gap from 40% to 25%. It is a measured and reasonable step, especially when considering, as the Integrity Commissioner did, that MPPs' salaries have not

kept up with inflation since 1996.

Cette question suscitera toujours un débat animé aussi bien de la part de ceux qui estiment que les politiciens ne devraient pas être rémunérés du tout que de tous ceux qui

aimeraient que les salaires des politiciens soient mis au diapason de ceux du secteur privé.

Cette proposition démontre notre leadership. Elle cherche concrètement à combler l'écart de rémunération par des mesures responsables et réfléchies.

We believe that the Integrity Commissioner's recommendations strike a balance between these extremes, and so we are following his recommendations. The Integrity Commissioner recommended in his December 7,

2006, report that MPPs' pension arrangements be reviewed.

If passed, the legislation would increase the contribution the province makes to a provincial member's registered pension plan from 5% to 10% of salary. This falls short of the Integrity Commissioner's

recommendation that MPPs' pension rights be, at minimum, equal to the pension rights of members of the Ontario public service. Even with these modest changes, this is still only about one quarter to one third of what federal members receive. As

with the proposed salary changes, we are doing this to bring MPPs' pension contribution levels more in line with other pension plans.

We're not going back to a gold-plated pension plan like the one that the federal MPs enjoy and one which was once in place in Ontario, prior to 1995. We are not proposing to rewrite the pension framework for

MPPs. We're simply increasing the province's contribution to the existing plan in order to narrow the gap between compensation of federal and provincial representatives.

The legislation, if passed, would also change the severance allowance for MPPs. The current severance allowance is one month's salary for each year of service, with a minimum payment of six months and a

maximum payment of 12 months. We are proposing that this be changed to create three levels of severance: MPPs with up to four years of service would be allowed six months' salary as severance; those with up to eight years of service would be

allowed 12 months' severance; and those with more than eight years of service would be allowed 18 months' severance. Again, this addresses the compensation gap in a reasonable way, respecting the contribution of long-serving MPPs.

We believe that as long as we continue to work hard and serve the best interests of the people of Ontario and the constituents we represent, every one of us deserves to be compensated at least 75% of what our

federal counterparts earn. But this legislation also shows our respect for the views of those in this House who do not agree. Upon passage, sitting MPPs within 60 days have the choice to permanently opt out of the new pay and benefits package and

continue to be compensated as they are now. Any new MPP -- not re-elected MPPs -- would be automatically covered by the new framework.

I know that members on all sides of this House did not run for office because of the compensation they would receive, but because of the contributions they could make. In fact, it is a tremendous privilege to

serve Ontarians. But at the same time, compensation should not be a deterrent to anyone considering making a contribution to the province as an elected representative. The Integrity Commissioner said that there's a real risk of this happening. He

said that if we stay within the current system, we run the risk of making Queen's Park a farm team for Parliament Hill in Ottawa. But Ontarians deserve the brightest and best, and we continue to attract the same calibre of talented individuals who

sit here today.

This is not an easy issue because in the end we, as members of the Legislature, must vote on our own compensation. Ontarians can't do that. This is why the Integrity Commissioner recommended that we pass a new

law linking our compensation to that paid to Ontario's representatives in the House of Commons. This is what we have done. This legislation is fair, it is in the public interest and I urge all members to support it.

The Deputy Speaker: Questions and comments?

Ms. Cheri DiNovo (Parkdale-High Park): It's a pleasure to speak, at least for a couple of minutes. I look forward to my leader's lead and then to speak longer on this bill, but suffice it to

say that there is a bill before this House that has passed second reading calling for a minimum wage -- I hesitate even to say "increase"; it's catch-up. In 1972, the minimum wage was $2 a day. Today, using the inflation calculator, that would be

just under $10, and we can't get committee hearings in January and February out of this government to even look at that bill. Here we have a government that very callously goes ahead and votes itself an increase of 31%, when we're asking for 25%

for the poorest of our working families. That's number one.

Number two: Of course, today we heard the very cynical response from Dalton McGuinty that the reason that people give to charities is because of the tax benefits. I find that appalling. I'm a United Church

clergy by trade. I know clergy, priests and social workers who are working as many hours a day as we are, who work at extremely difficult tasks and who rely on the charitable givings of others. That this government would suggest that charitable

givings are motivated by tax benefits is absolutely cynical to the utmost degree, but of course this is a cynical government. This is a government that will not rescind the clawback of the national child supplement. This is a government that will

not provide status-of-the-artist legislation and a liveable wage to artists, who are among the poorest in this province. This is a government that will not provide the housing that they promised -- 20,000 units -- and we have 122,000 families in

this province waiting for housing. This is a government that will not provide enforcement of the employment standards that we have now, so that one in three employers actually owe their employees money. This is a government that won't see any of

that happen, so why should we be surprised?

Mr. Dave Levac (Brant): The member from Hamilton Mountain, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and minister responsible for democratic renewal, has encapsulated the view of the Liberal

Party, and I want to thank her for doing so. Over the last 16 years, there's been a 5% increase, total, in our pay.

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): I feel it's unfair to mesh in this particular issue with all of the other ills and problems that we're having in our overall society. This issue is

about attracting people to this place who can make intelligent, reasoned decisions about those kinds of issues.

M. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-Baie James): Madame la ministre, j'ai une couple de questions faisant affaire avec le débat. Ne pensez pas pour deux secondes que je dis que le travail que font

les députés n'est pas un travail important, et il faut s'assurer, à la fin de la journée, qu'ils soient bien rémunérés.

Le point pour nous autres est très simple. Dans une société où il y a du monde qui regarde le gouvernement provincial pour avoir de l'assistance -- dans ma

partie de la province, comme dans

d'autres parties de la province -- il y a des travailleurs qui ont perdu leur emploi à cause de la fermeture de leur usine. Je regarde par exemple la compagnie Tembec à Timmins, Tembec à Smooth Rock Falls et Tembec encore à

Opasatika, et les autres qui ont perdu leur emploi. C'est pas mal difficile pour nous de dire, « Oui, on veut prendre une augmentation, » quand eux autres regardent le gouvernement pour avoir de l'assistance et ils ne voient

pas l'assistance qui leur revient. Comme mon amie M me DiNovo a dit, ceux qui sont les plus démunis de notre société, ceux qui travaillent pour un salaire minimum et d'autres qui reçoivent l'assistance sociale,

regardent le gouvernement et disent : « Aidez-nous. Nous, les plus démunis de la société, avons chaque jour le problème de garder le pain sur la table et garder les lumières allumées. Qu'est-ce que vous

allez faire pour nous assister? »

Vous savez que, dernièrement, le prix de l'électricité a augmenté encore, dans nos comtés, justement. J'imagine que vous avez eu chez vous, comme moi chez nous, des coups de

téléphone où ceux qui sont les plus démunis dans notre société disent, « Regardez, depuis les dernières années, le prix de tout garder sur la table a augmenté -- l'électricité, le

gaz, les taxes foncières municipales -- et nos pensions n'ont pas augmenté. » Ce monde-là veulent avoir de l'aide de leur gouvernement provincial.

Le point que je veux faire dans ce débat, c'est que je ne suis pas contré l'idée que nous soyons bien payés, mais je suis contre l'idée qu'on ne fasse rien pour assister ceux dans

notre société qui sont les plus démunis et qui font appel au gouvernement provincial pour de l'assistance. Quand le gouvernement dit, « Non, on ne vous donnera pas d'assistance, mais on va se donner une augmentation

salariale, » c'est difficile à prendre. Pour cette raison, je vais voter contre, et je me demande pourquoi vous ne cherchez pas à aider les autres.

The Deputy Speaker: Minister Bountrogianni, you have two minutes to reply.

Hon. Mrs. Bountrogianni: I thank my colleagues from Parkdale-High Park, Brant, Lanark-Carleton and Timmins-James Bay. I truly do thank the member from Timmins-James Bay for his honesty and

transparency on this issue.

It's never a good time to do this. There are people who think all politicians make too much money. There are people who think we make just as much as our federal counterparts. There are people out there who

think we have the pensions that our federal counterparts make. In fact, when I was with friends this weekend trying to explain the background of this bill, they too, and they've known me for 20, 30 years, didn't realize that our colleagues here

don't have a pension.

This is not an easy issue, and I understand that there's more to be done in the province of Ontario. I agree that there's more to be done, and we will continue to work for the people of Ontario. But this is

about the value of the work that we do here. We are no one's farm team here in the Legislature. We have good, intelligent members. And it's not just the members from the Liberal caucus who are being lobbied to go other places like the federal

government, or headhunters calling us for better jobs; it's across the House: Marilyn Churley, Mr. Baird, Mr. Flaherty and others; Mr. Christopherson, of course, who today came out and said that he thinks it's about time that we did this; and

Marilyn Churley last week as well.

Interjection: Gerard Kennedy.

Hon. Mrs. Bountrogianni: Gerard Kennedy, of course.

There's value. We represent the largest province in the country. We represent one of the largest jurisdictions in the world if you look at our GDP. Ontario matters; Ontario's important. The work we do here

matters. This bill begins to address the gap between what we do, very important work, and what our federal counterparts do.

I understand and respect the views of all members of this House. I respect the offers to donate the monies to charity. We can amend the bill very easily by having a trust fund for the increases for those who

want to donate it to charities. We can do that very easily and very quickly this week.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate?

Mr. Sterling: Having been a member of this Legislative Assembly for almost 30 years now, I have been through this debate before. I've been through this tangle before. I've been through this

difficult debate before. While I congratulate the Premier in bringing forward a bill to deal with this issue, I'm sure that it isn't all altruism on his part. It's from a practical need that he faces and a practical need that our leader, John

Tory, faces, and that's why he's supporting this bill. In order to attract good, reasoned people, leaders in the community, to come to this place, it's necessary to deal with the compensation issue.

In fact, I might add that the Integrity Commissioner, when he made his report, made it absolutely clear that he did not feel it makes any sense to directly or indirectly link provincial members' compensation

to the average wage paid to a worker. He then goes on to point out, however, that many police officers, teachers, tool-and-die makers, judges, bus drivers -- and the list goes on -- make more than the compensation that MPPs are presently paid.

Now, over this period of time that we've been talking about and as indicated in the Integrity Commissioner's report -- the Integrity Commissioner has a table in his report on page 6 which shows the benefits of

a member here in 1990. I think one of the things is that unfortunately, when we talk about pay or salaries, we don't talk about the total benefit package that a person receives. For me and for members of this Legislature, it's not the salary that

is perhaps the most important; it's the total benefit package that we receive as members here. When I was first elected back in 1977, the attraction of coming to the Legislative Assembly from a very successful law practice had nothing to do with

the salary -- in fact, the salary I accepted here was about 50% of what I earned in my last year practising law -- but it was the defined benefit pension plan where I could protect my family in the future which was the attraction here.

I think what we have to talk about here is, what is the total benefit package that members have been receiving here from 1990 to the present date? In 1990, members received three things from the Legislative

Assembly: They received a salary, which was $44,675; they received a tax-free allowance, which was almost $15,000; and they had a defined benefit pension plan that was very, very good. In fact, it was worth somewhere between 35% and 40% of their

salary, which means it was, in money terms, about $15,000. This was proven later when all of those schemes were transferred into a salary package in 1995-96. That package in 1990 was worth about $80,000. Right now, MPPs, before this bill is

passed, are receiving a total package of about $93,000. So the compensation package for MPPs has increased by $13,000 from 1990 to 2006. That is an increase of probably about 20%. The broader public sector has improved their salary and benefit

packages by over 50% over that period of time. What that has led to is this report by the Integrity Commissioner.

I also want to point out that federal MPs, who represent the same number of people in the same boundaries, who have the same constituencies as us, receive a benefit package of over $200,000 a year. Actually,

the benefit package that MPPs are receiving now is about 45% of what federal MPs are receiving in their total benefit package. Their defined benefit plan is worth 35% of their salary base; 35% of $147,000 is about $60,000 a year. So they're not

only receiving $147,000 a year; they're receiving in kind, in terms of their benefit package, about $60,000 a year. Their total package is over $200,000. So while our Premier is going to be receiving under $200,000, his brother, David McGuinty,

who represents the same constituency as the Premier, still has a better benefit package after Bill 173 is implemented than his brother. David McGuinty has a better package than Dalton McGuinty even though Dalton is Premier and David McGuinty is a

backbencher in the opposition.

I bring forward those numbers to show what has happened over the last 15 or 16 years. It's been the fault of our system and the leaders who have been in place during that period of time and their advisers.

Premiers, and people who are on the staff of Premiers, are very reticent to come forward to even talk about benefits for MPPs because it evokes such a visceral reaction from the press and from everyone else.

What has happened, of course, is that while we have sat almost in a stagnant position since 1990, other democratic institutions have continued to progress and have given inflationary increases in terms of the

benefit package and the salaries to their elected representatives. This is true at the federal level, as I say, where an ordinary MP now has a benefit package of over $200,000, and we have seen it as well at the municipal level, where they have

increased, in their case, their salary and their pension benefits equally as much as inflation has taken hold.

I think the greatest criticism here is that it has been left in neglect for so long that the increase seems excessive in terms of the percentage that has been going up. So we find ourselves in this particular

position that we now are.

I want to quote from my friend Sean Conway, who is now retired, who was asked this weekend -- it was quoted in one of the newspapers:

"`In the last few years, I've actually seen something I've never seen before,' said Sean Conway, a Ontario legislator who represented Renfrew for more than 28 years before leaving public office for private

opportunities in teaching and in consulting.

"`People are now leaving Queen's Park to go back to a municipal government because the pay, the working conditions -- including being at home -- and what I will call the electoral stability are much more

advantageous,' he said."

We all know that virtually every incumbent who ran for council in the city of Ottawa -- I think there were 17 of 18 incumbents who got re-elected -- and virtually every incumbent who ran for council here in

the city of Toronto got re-elected as well. The most vulnerable position seems to be the mayor, or the head of council, in terms of longevity in getting re-elected,

whereas in this place the average length of service for members here now is eight

and a half years. That's about what it is for all of the 103 members who are sitting here with us today. And, when a member leaves here after eight years of service, he or she may not have the same skills that they had when they entered here to go

back into the private workforce.

I know from some of my colleagues from the former Conservative Party who were unfortunate in not being re-elected in 2003 that some of them had a very, very difficult time in obtaining employment when they

returned to the private sector after they had been here. Those were people not only with limited education but those who had university training, university degrees, had professional designations and other skills. So the notion that, once one is

here for any period of time, you go back into the private sector and use your political experience as a positive is not necessarily true.

I also want to talk about the fact that I really do believe our work here is important. I think that being a member of the Ontario Legislature is one of the best jobs in the world. I certainly didn't come here

because of the monetary rewards for serving here, nor do I believe that other members in this Legislature came here and that that was their primary reason for coming here. We come here because we want to change things for the better for our

families, for our communities, and if we're lucky enough to be put in a position that we can do that, then we have a very satisfying career here in what we do.

But I also believe that we should, as I said before, attract the best that we can in order to do that. Over the period of time that I have been here, the budget of Ontario has gone from -- and I'm going to use

approximate figures here -- about $18 billion to $20 billion to about $85 billion or $87 billion. That's a four-fold increase. That doesn't just mean that we're spending more money on things than we did in 1977; we are much more involved in

society and the problems have become more complex. So members must be able to understand what the issues are about and must understand where the differences are in order to bring forward resolution to those particular problems and conflicts that

we're asked to do.

Jim Coyle of the Toronto Star wrote an

article that I would like to quote from as well. He's talking about some of the demands on politicians:

"It's not for nothing the toll on marriages and health is high among politicians, that stress makes rates of alcoholism and ... drug addiction higher, it's been reported, than in the general population.

"It is a bizarre society that complains endlessly about the quality of its politicians and leadership, demands that they master the most complicated of subjects, come up with solutions to our most intractable

problems, do so without ever changing their mind, do so under constant glare of media attention and put up cheerfully with whatever character assassination commentators and voters want to hurl their way -- and do so for far less money than most

could make in the private sector, at pay rates vastly outmatched by those who shoulder a fraction of the responsibility."

As I said, I come to this job voluntarily, and I think it's a great job because it gives me a great opportunity to have an influence on the direction my province is taking and has taken over the last 30 years.

However, if we are to ensure that as we go forward we will have people who will come to this place who will be able to make the decisions and understand the complicated process and go back and listen to our people in our constituencies, to bring

those here, we must be competitive in what we're going to offer those people.

Members