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

February 13, 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-Feb-13 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 13 February 2006 Lundi 13 février 2006

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SAM CICCOLINI

OTTAWA DAY

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

BLACK HISTORY MONTH

WORKPLACE HEALTH AND SAFETY

PLANT CLOSURE

YOUTH SERVICES

LOCAL HEALTH

INTEGRATION NETWORKS

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

IN CORNWALL

REPORT, INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

ANNUAL REPORT,

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH

BOARD OF INTERNAL ECONOMY

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

VISUAL FIRE ALARM

SYSTEM ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LES SYSTÈMES D'ALARME-INCENDIE

À AFFICHAGE VISUEL

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

YOUTH SERVICES

HEALTH CARE

PHYSICIAN TRAINING /

FORMATION DES CHIRURGIENS

YOUTH SERVICES

HEALTH CARE

YOUTH SERVICES

HEALTH CARE

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

OMERS PENSION FUND

MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

NUCLEAR ENERGY

ENERGY CONSERVATION

MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

OMERS PENSION FUND

MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

PHYSICIAN TRAINING

MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

FOREST INDUSTRY

PUBLIC TRANSIT

PETITIONS

HIGHWAY 26

CANCER TREATMENT

SERVICES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

JUSTICE SYSTEM

PROPERTY TAXATION

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

AUTISM TREATMENT

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

OMERS PENSION FUND

MACULAR DEGENERATION

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

HANDGUNS

FALLSVIEW CASINO

CROSSWALKS

MACULAR DEGNERATION

ORDERS OF THE DAY

STRONGER CITY OF TORONTO FOR A STRONGER ONTARIO ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 CRÉANT UN TORONTO PLUS FORT POUR UN ONTARIO PLUS FORT

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SAM CICCOLINI

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): I'm pleased to rise today to congratulate Mr. Sam Ciccolini on being named a member of the prestigious Order of

Canada. This deserving designation is in addition to his many recognition awards for service to his community and country, including the Order of Ontario, with which he was honoured in 1999.

The president of Masters Insurance, a company he started with his brother Frank in 1968, Sam Ciccolini serves on boards and committees representing hospitals,

disaster relief efforts, churches, municipal initiatives, sports groups and social agencies.

Mr. Ciccolini credits his success in life to the hard work ethic his family brought to Canada. He was 12 years old in 1956 when he, his mother and four brothers

landed at New York's Ellis Island before travelling to Toronto to join his father, who came to Canada three years earlier.

He and his younger brother Max soon found work delivering newspapers in the early morning before heading off to school. At night, the brothers worked at a

pharmacy. When asked if it was tough to hold down two jobs and go to school, Sam's response is simply, "We had no choice. You did it; that's all. It really gave us a good upbringing, a solid

foundation."

It is on that solid foundation that Sam Ciccolini has built his exemplary life of service to his country. Mr. Ciccolini has said he was honoured and humbled to

be named a member of the Order of Canada. We, his friends and colleagues, would say to him that this honour is well-deserved and rightly bestowed.

OTTAWA DAY

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): I rise in the House today to thank my esteemed colleague Minister Watson and his incredible staff for

organizing what was, in my opinion, the best event of the year at Queen's Park.

Last Monday I had the privilege of attending Ottawa Day at Queen's Park. On February 6, a delegation of the leaders of the Ottawa business community came to

Toronto to speak with cabinet members about Ottawa's thriving economy and to ask our ministers about the issues that concern the people of Ottawa. The delegation included his worship Mayor

Chiarelli, representatives from Ottawa Tourism, the Ottawa Centre for Research and Innovation, the Ottawa Life Sciences Council as well as the presidents of three institutes of higher learning in

our city.

The business community had quite an extensive delegation as well. To name a few of them, we met with Gail Logan, the president of the Ottawa Chamber of Commerce;

Tom MacWilliam, the president of the Eastern Ottawa Chamber of Commerce; and Cyril Leeder, chief operating officer of Scotiabank Place and the Ottawa Senators -- the best hockey team in the world,

as you know.

I thought that Ottawa Day was a huge success and was a tremendous opportunity for the leaders of our great city to come to Toronto to meet the leaders of our

great province. The Premier, Minister Bentley, Minister Bradley and Minister Dombrowsky devoted a significant amount of their time to meet with members of the delegation in small breakout groups to

talk about issues that affect Ottawa today; namely, in the fields of innovation, post-secondary education, tourism and agriculture. I would like to thank all of the cabinet members, Minister

Watson's staff in particular, and all of the delegates from Ottawa who helped make this day a true success.

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): It was less than a year ago that this Legislature welcomed thousands of farmers to the doorstep, and

now forces are gathering again for what I count as the seventh in a series of large farm rallies held over the past year. The rural rallies and the lobbying have every reason to continue. Farm

protests continue because this government refuses to listen. Cash crops, beef, tobacco and horticulture all continue to wait for action on proposals tabled with the minister months ago. Deer, elk

and dairy heifer farmers also need help.

Don't pass the buck. Farmers can't wait for yet another federal election. It was during the October estimates meetings that Ag Minister Dombrowsky acknowledged

that, "CAIS has not worked well for grains and oilseeds." That's why we didn't sign it.

That quote was last October, five months ago, and still no action to fix the problem. There has been no unilateral action on the Ontario government's part. The

McGuinty Liberals continue to turn their back on farmers and rural Ontario. One year, seven tractor rallies and zero action: Quite simply, for farmers and rural Ontario it just doesn't add up. I do

encourage all legislators here today and their staff, and I encourage ministry staff, to meet with farmers tomorrow.

BLACK HISTORY MONTH

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): Black History Month in the city of Hamilton is in February, and it's a very important and impressive

occasion every year. At our community's annual John C. Holland awards dinner, we celebrate the best of the best. We learn of the incredible achievements that the people of African Canadian heritage

contribute as volunteers, academics and luminaries from business and the arts.

As a member from Hamilton who is extremely supportive and proud of Black History Month, I have been concerned to hear some people suggesting that maybe we

shouldn't commemorate such a special month anymore. They say, "Teach black history in schools and you won't need to mark or celebrate a designated month."

I believe that Black History Month, first designated in Canada by the federal government 10 years ago, should continue as a strong Canadian tradition for all

time. African Canadians have a heritage in this country spanning more than 300 years. They explored, built, worked for and served Canada in the face of incredible barriers, not the least of which

was racism. By all means, let's bring forward a curriculum that teaches black history, but let's not lose the advantage that Black History Month presents us to honour our incredible black achievers

and role models. They represent excellence in all the various disciplines, people like the local recipients of our John C. Holland award on February 4: Nancy Di Gregorio, Evelyn and Denrick

Musgrave, Valan Sarjeant and Winston Tinglin, and youth recipients Stephanie Laryea, Samia Omar, Tarryn O'Sullivan and Christine Oluwole-Aina. We congratulate them.

Black History Month is an event that should be here to stay. It's an opportunity for all of us to make a strong statement about the valued contribution of all of

the black cultures to the broader Canadian mosaic. I invite everyone in Hamilton to celebrate the great Black History Month activities that our city has to offer.

WORKPLACE HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mrs. Carol Mitchell (Huron-Bruce): On January 20, at the new Bruce County Museum and Cultural Centre in Southampton, members of the Saugeen

Shores Chamber of Commerce enjoyed a presentation by Kevin Flynn, the member from Oakville and the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Labour. The member was on a province-wide tour

promoting workplace health and safety.

I can tell you that there was a great deal of interest in this subject. The CEO of Bruce Power, Duncan Hawthorne, also took time from his numerous

responsibilities and spoke about the importance of workplace health and safety as well, and also about young people starting their first jobs. The message that safety must be a part of the

workplace culture, and that a healthy and safe working environment leads to success, was stressed.

The government has set an ambitious but achievable goal of reducing workplace injuries by 20% by 2008. I am pleased that this government recognizes the

importance of this issue. By supporting workplace health and safety, we are building strong communities in the province of Ontario.

PLANT CLOSURE

Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): The BF Goodrich tire factory, located in the Kitchener part of Waterloo-Wellington, announced 11 days ago

that it will close its doors this summer; 1,100 jobs are being lost as a result of the company's decision. I want to say to all the BF Goodrich employees and their families that all in our

community share your disappointment. We are behind you, and we want to do whatever we can to help. My thoughts are also on the negative impact this will have on our local economy. Even though

Waterloo region is home to one of the most dynamic and thriving local economies in the whole country, the loss of 1,100 jobs is a massive blow.

The same day that I received the news about the closure of the BF Goodrich tire plant, I spoke with Wayne Samuelson, who used to work there and now, of course,

is president of the Ontario Federation of Labour, to discuss the situation. What employees and their families need is a signal that there is hope that well-paying jobs will be created in this

province to replace the ones that have been lost. What they see instead is Ontario's manufacturing jobs disappearing in droves.

Statistics Canada recently reported that 145,000 Canadian manufacturing jobs disappeared in the last year. We know that most of these losses have occurred in

Ontario, because we are still the main industrial engine of the country. An incredible 33,000 jobs in Ontario were lost in the month of January alone.

Last May, I introduced a resolution in this House calling for a public discussion of the economic competitiveness of Ontario's manufacturing industries, which

would lead to a jobs action plan. My resolution was supported by a number of industry groups. The Ontario government needs to take immediate action and begin the work to restore hope and

opportunity in this province and enact my resolution.

YOUTH SERVICES

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne (Don Valley West): Yesterday, in the heart of Thorncliffe Park, Premier McGuinty announced a new $15-million youth

challenge fund, which will create opportunities for young people who are at risk of making the wrong choices. This announcement is one part of our government's larger plan to revitalize

communities, keep kids in school and prevent violence before it begins.

In Don Valley West, we've established a community safety round table that is working on the kind of local initiatives that we believe are needed to support youth

engagement, youth employment and community mobilization. I'd like to recognize some of the community members involved in that initiative: Mr. Ali Baig, Mr. Abdul Madhani, Mr. David Lemire, Mr.

Abdul Ingar and Mr. Mohammed Dahnani, who are here in the gallery with us today.

Over 200 people from Thorncliffe, Flemingdon Park and from across the riding of Don Valley West joined the Premier, Coach Mike "Pinball" Clemons, provincial

ministers and MPPs to challenge communities to come together to create programs and initiatives that will allow youth to realize their potential. As the Premier said, "If we give our young people

the right opportunities, they will make the right choices." This fund is about creating opportunity and community safety from the ground up by providing local support for youth where it matters

most: in our neighbourhoods.

The neighbourhoods of Don Valley West are unique, but they share the desire of communities across this province for opportunity for the children and youth living

in them. We look forward to working with the new board of the youth challenge fund to make this province a place where every child can achieve his or her potential.

LOCAL HEALTH

INTEGRATION NETWORKS

Mr. Brad Duguid (Scarborough Centre): I rise today to highlight the McGuinty government's progress in health care. I'd like to highlight the

progress we've made through the establishment of local health integration networks.

When we came to office, we knew that the health care system was in need of reform. The Tory government's slash-and-burn approach left Ontario with a health care

system in disarray. They closed 28 hospitals, fired nurses and fired doctors.

We've taken a different approach: investing in community-based health care. We know that health care is best planned, coordinated and funded when it is

integrated with local communities. Minister Smitherman, who is here with us today, knows that Ontario communities are in the best position to determine our local health needs and priorities.

That's what LHINs are all about: delivering more responsible, accountable, transparent health care. This kind of progressive policy allows us to deliver health

services more efficiently, which in turn will help ensure there is money available to invest in the future of health care.

Although there is always more to be done, this kind of progress reflects the hard work, determination and progressive thinking that the McGuinty government has

brought to the health of Ontarians. This government has a mandate to transform our health care system. We're determined to succeed, and LHINs will be an important step forward in accomplishing that

goal.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

IN CORNWALL

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): In early January, the Leader of the Opposition paid a visit to Cornwall, a city facing some

tough economic times due to job losses. He met briefly with city officials, suggesting that the current government has not helped the city. Cornwall mayor Phil Poirier thanked the member, who for

the moment, is representing Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey, for his interest, and then indicated that the McGuinty government has in fact taken a number of steps to assist the city. These steps

include the provision of job counselling and re-employment services for the displaced Domtar employees and funding for a coordinator to manage community support systems. The Minister of Economic

Development and Trade is working with the community to develop a competitive economic development strategy.

This work started back in the summer of 2005, when Minister Cordiano came to my riding for a round table meeting with municipal and business leaders. It would

have been laughable had the esteemed member criticized this government's health care assistance for the city if the bitter taste of false promises from the last Tory government were not so fresh in

the memory of Cornwallites.

The McGuinty government has a real plan based on real, achievable timelines to give the city one of the best health care infrastructures in the province.

Construction will begin shortly on a new community health centre as well as on the redevelopment project at the St. Joseph's continuing care site, where the shovel was recently put in the ground to

start construction. A planning grant for the main hospital project has already been announced, as an early consolidation project.

I am proud of what our government has done for Cornwall, and I shall continue to work with Premier McGuinty on a plan for the city.

REPORT, INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that on January 4, 2006, the report of the Integrity Commissioner responding to

the request by John Tory, leader of the official opposition, for the Integrity Commissioner's opinion on whether the Honourable Harinder Takhar, Minister of Transportation, had breached the

Members' Integrity Act or parliamentary convention, was tabled.

ANNUAL REPORT,

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): On January 17, 2006, the 2005 annual report to the Legislative Assembly of the chief medical officer of

health was tabled.

BOARD OF INTERNAL ECONOMY

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that I have laid upon the table a copy of the order in council appointing Robert

Runciman, MPP, as a commissioner to the Board of Internal Economy, appointed by the caucus of the official opposition in place of Elizabeth Witmer, MPP.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT

Mrs. Linda Jeffrey (Brampton Centre): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on general government and move its

adoption.

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

Bill 27,

An Act to amend the Arbitration Act, 1991, the Child and Family Services Act and the Family Law Act in connection with family arbitration and related

matters, and to amend the Children's Law Reform Act in connection with the matters to be considered by the court in dealing with applications for custody and access / Projet de loi 27, Loi

modifiant la Loi de 1991 sur l'arbitrage, la

Loi sur les services à l'enfance et à la famille et la

Loi sur le droit de la famille en ce qui concerne l'arbitrage familial et des questions

connexes et modifiant la Loi portant réforme du droit de l'enfance en ce qui concerne les questions que doit prendre en considération le tribunal qui traite des requêtes en vue

d'obtenir la garde et le droit de visite.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed? Agreed.

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

Mrs. Jeffrey: I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on general government and move its adoption.

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

Bill 206,

An Act to revise the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System Act / Projet de loi 206, Loi révisant la

Loi sur le régime de retraite des

employés municipaux de l'Ontario.

The Speaker: Shall the report be received and adopted?

All in favour will say "aye."

All 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 1350 to 1355.

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

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Craitor, Kim

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Hoy, Pat

Jeffrey, Linda

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Racco, Mario G.

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Sandals, Liz

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Barrett, Toby

Bisson, Gilles

Hardeman, Ernie

Horwath, Andrea

Hudak, Tim

Klees, Frank

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martiniuk, Gerry

Miller, Norm

Munro, Julia

O'Toole, John

Prue, Michael

Runciman, Robert W.

Scott, Laurie

Sterling, Norman W.

Tory, John

Witmer, Elizabeth

Yakabuski, John

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 56; the nays are 21.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): Pursuant to the order of the House of Wednesday, December 14, 2005, I beg leave to present a report

on the Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee from the standing committee on public accounts and move the adoption of it recommendations.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr. Sterling: Yes. The public accounts committee dealt with the Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee with regard to the auditor's

comments. Of particular concern to the committee was the location of the heirs of people's estates for which the guardian and trustee was responsible. As you know, the guardian and trustee is

responsible for the estates of incompetent people. It was felt by the committee, and by the auditor, that the public trustee and guardian had not made sufficient efforts to locate the heirs of

these estates. That was one of the major concerns of the committee. In fact, there are still 400 files that predate 1996 with regard to estates where heirs have yet to be found.

The other area of concern to the public accounts committee related to the tendering by the public guardian and trustee of investment counsellors: investment

people who were taking care of estates. It seems that in the past, the public guardian and trustee paid no attention or little attention to the record of the people who were taking care of these

incompetent people's estates.

Therefore the committee has made the unusual recommendation in this particular report to ask for a reply to four of its six recommendations within a period of

30 days,

whereas the committee normally gives the respondent 120 days. This is because the committee felt in this case that immediate action was required in order to protect the interests of these

heirs and of these incompetent people for whom the public trustee is responsible.

With that, I would move adjournment of the debate.

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

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

VISUAL FIRE ALARM

SYSTEM ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LES SYSTÈMES D'ALARME-INCENDIE

À AFFICHAGE VISUEL

Mr. Arthurs moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 59,

An Act respecting visual fire alarm systems in public buildings / Projet de loi 59,

Loi sur les systèmes d'alarme-incendie à affichage

visuel dans les édifices publics.

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

Does the member have a brief statement?

Mr. Wayne Arthurs (Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge): Very briefly, the act proposes that fire alarms in municipal and provincial public buildings be

visual as well as auditory. This would ensure that the deaf and the hard of hearing would be able to perceive a fire alarm and exit those buildings safely.

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I move that the following amendment be

made to the membership of certain committees: On the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly, Mr. Balkissoon replaces Mrs. Cansfield; on the standing committee on public accounts, Mr. Milloy

replaces Ms. Broten.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Mr. Bradley has moved that the following amendments be made to the membership of certain committees: On

the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly, Mr. Balkissoon replaces Mrs. Cansfield; on the standing committee on public accounts, Mr. Milloy replaces Ms. Broten.

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

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): 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. Mr. Bradley: I move that, notwithstanding standing order 96(d), the following change be made to the ballot list of private members'

public business: Ms. Marsales, Mrs. Van Bommel and Mr. Racco exchange places in the order of precedence, such that Mr. Racco assumes ballot item number 19, Ms. Marsales assumes ballot item number

27 and Mrs. Van Bommel assumes ballot item number 54.

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

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

The Speaker: Agreed? Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Bradley: I move that, notwithstanding order 96(g), notice for ballot items 18, 19 and 22 be waived.

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

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): 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, February 13, 2006, for the purpose of considering government business.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Mr. Bradley has moved government notice of motion number 58. Is it the pleasure of the House that the

motion carry?

All in favour will say "aye."

All 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 1407 to 1412.

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

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Craitor, Kim

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Jeffrey, Linda

Klees, Frank

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Munro, Julia

O'Toole, John

Orazietti, David

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Racco, Mario G.

Ramal, Khalil

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Runciman, Robert W.

Sandals, Liz

Scott, Laurie

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Sterling, Norman W.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tory, John

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

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

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

Horwath, Andrea

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Prue, Michael

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 79; the nays are 6.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

YOUTH SERVICES

Hon. Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Children and Youth Services): I rise today to send a message to all of Ontario's young people. It's a

message that was delivered by our Premier yesterday. It's a message I'm pleased to reaffirm in this House today. Our government's message is this: We believe in our youth, and we believe that given

the right opportunities, they will make the right choices. We're working hard to ensure that youth who live with circumstances that may present them with significant challenges have every

opportunity to succeed. That's why our government has announced a new youth challenge fund.

This fund will support local community initiatives on the ground. It will make good things happen for children and youth in their neighbourhoods, and it will

create meaningful opportunities, because this fund is about creating opportunities by providing supports and programs for youth where they need them most: in their neighbourhoods.

We are challenging the private sector and individual contributors to match our $15-million investment. We will then match private sector contributions up to an

additional $15 million for a potential total investment of at least $45 million over the next three years.

Finally, we are challenging our young people to seize the opportunities provided by the fund to reach higher and to fulfill their potential.

While our government believes strongly in this grassroots approach, we also recognize that it requires a guiding hand. So we are putting together a board that

will work with our communities, the city of Toronto and the United Way, to choose and support the ideas with the greatest potential to make the most significant impact. I am pleased that the

Premier has asked me to be a member of this board. Argos coach Mike "Pinball" Clemons has agreed to chair the board, which will be comprised of youth, community leaders and private sector leaders

who will work hard to ensure meaningful results for our youth.

The doctor and writer Deepak Chopra once said, "There is always one moment in childhood when the door opens and lets the future in." Our government is working

hard to give our kids more than one moment of opportunity. We want to open as many doors as we can to a future filled with opportunities and achievements, and we are confident that as these doors

open, Ontario's children and youth will pursue every possibility and seize every opportunity. The new youth challenge fund is just one illustration of our government's commitment to our youth. This

fund joins a list of other initiatives already on the way, and there are more to come.

HEALTH CARE

Hon. George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): It's with great pride that I rise in my place today to speak about our

government's efforts, and they are successful efforts, to increase Ontarians' access to doctors and nurses. As my colleagues know, this is one of our three main priorities in health care, the other

two being healthier Ontarians and shorter wait times. It is by focusing on these priorities that we are going to realize the vision of the health care that we share with Ontarians: a system that

helps keep people healthy, gets them good care when they are sick and that will be there for future generations.

We are increasing the supply of doctors in several ways:

We've more than doubled the number of training spots for foreign-trained physicians -- international medical graduates, as we call them. There are so many

qualified people who have, until now, had their dreams of practising medicine in Ontario frustrated, and we're giving them a chance to make their dreams come true and give us some badly needed help

in the process.

We established a program with the College of Physicians and Surgeons to repatriate doctors practising outside Ontario who would like to work here.

We've also increased the number of family residency positions in our medical schools. By 2008, we will have produced an additional 340 family doctors,

providing care to some 400,000 Ontarians.

I would like to bring to my colleagues' attention a recent report by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, which stated that the number of medical

licences issued in the province has nearly doubled in the past 10 years, reaching -- and get this number -- 2,747 in 2005, the highest number in the last 20 years. Furthermore, international

medical graduates received 39% of the licences issued, more than for Ontario graduates and more than double the number for IMGs from 10 years ago, all of which is to say that our efforts are paying

off.

As my colleagues also know, one of our signature initiatives as a government and one of the most positive steps we are taking to improve access for health care

for Ontarians and to improve the quality of that care is the creation of family health teams. We've created 100 so far in communities around the province, with another 50 to come by 2007-08. Family

health teams are a model of health care delivery that experts like Roy Romanow have been calling for for years. They bring together doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners and many other kinds of

health care professionals in teams providing around-the-clock care to patients in their communities close to home. Fifty of these new family health teams are located in communities considered to be

underserviced in terms of family physicians, meaning that thousands of former orphan patients will have access to a whole team of health care professionals working together on their behalf.

On the question of better access to nurses, our government has worked tirelessly on this file for more than two years. It should go without saying that nurses

are the heart and soul of our health care system. We have a responsibility to increase the supply of good, full-time nursing positions, and we have. Just two weeks ago, the Registered Nurses'

Association of Ontario was commending our government's effort in this regard, saying that there are 4,500 more nurses in Ontario than when we took office. We have also introduced several

initiatives to make the job of nursing safer and more fulfilling.

Late last month we created a $40-million nursing retention fund to ensure that nurses can expand their expertise and stay in the profession and that hospitals

can continue to meet the needs of patients in their communities. Just last week we announced the Grow Your Own Nurse Practitioner program, which is going to increase the supply of nurse

practitioners across the province. The idea is to target health care agencies that have funding for nurse practitioner programs but have been unable to fill those positions for at least a year.

There are at least 100 of those vacancies. Agencies like community health centres, family health teams, long-term-care homes and aboriginal health access centres will now be able to use their

operational funding to support registered nurses who want to train as nurse practitioners, on condition that when they become nurse practitioners they return to work in the agencies and communities

where the vacancies existed. In this way, we will ensure that these extremely valued health care practitioners are plying their trade in places where they are most needed.

There is one extremely important initiative undertaken by this government that I have not yet mentioned, and that is a significant increase in the number of

doctors we are training in our medical schools. On that subject, I know that we all look forward to hearing from my friend and colleague the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities.

PHYSICIAN TRAINING /

FORMATION DES CHIRURGIENS

Hon. Christopher Bentley (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): I am pleased to tell the House today about another step the

McGuinty government is taking to improve access to health care across the province.

Last week, the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care, the Honourable George Smitherman, myself and many of my colleagues visited communities across the

province to announce an expansion in first-year medical spaces. In our spring budget we said we would add 104 first-year undergraduate positions in medical schools by 2008-09. We are fulfilling

that commitment. In fact, when you add the 56 new spaces in the Northern Ontario School of Medicine that the Premier opened in the spring, the McGuinty government will have created 160 new

spaces.

Trente-deux étudiantes et étudiants ont démarré en septembre; 72 autres viendront s'ajouter au cours des trois prochaines années.

L'Université d'Ottawa comptera 20 nouvelles étudiantes et nouveaux étudiants pour répondre aux besoins de la collectivité et de la communauté autochtone, et pour

assurer la formation des francophones. L'Université Queen's recevra pour sa part six places, les autres allant à McMaster, à Western et à Toronto.

Over the next three years, Windsor, Mississauga, Waterloo region and St. Catharines will become home to satellite medical school campuses. The University of

Toronto will establish a new medical campus in Mississauga for 30 first-year medical students in September 2007; McMaster University, in partnership with the University of Waterloo, is establishing

a medical school campus in Kitchener-Waterloo in 2007 for 15 students; it is establishing a second campus in St. Catharines for another 15 students; and the University of Western Ontario is

establishing a new satellite medical school in Windsor with 24 students in September 2008. Bringing medical education to four communities that do not now have it with these satellite campuses will

mean more doctors in places where they're needed. Studies suggest that students tend to practise where they are trained.

To ensure that our students receive the best-quality education, our government is more than doubling the support for spaces created since 2002, from $22,000 to

$49,000 per student per year. This funding amounts to $12.4 million in 2005-06 and will grow to $17.4 million in 2006-07.

Congratulations and thanks should be extended to the medical schools, the universities and the communities that have worked so hard to help expand the reach of

medical education. The hospitals and the faculty linked to our medical schools are essential partners in providing a top-quality clinical education to our medical students. I want to recognize

their important role in the success of our expansion plans in all of these communities.

Expanding medical school spaces is part of our government's comprehensive plan to increase access to doctors throughout Ontario. That plan, as you've heard,

includes 150 new family health teams, the new OMA agreement, increased residency spaces, more than doubling the IMG program for foreign-trained physicians and increased medical school spaces.

Last spring, our government announced Reaching Higher, the McGuinty government plan to invest an extra $6.2 billion in Ontario's post-secondary system, the

single largest multi-year investment in colleges and universities in 40 years. Reaching Higher confirms our goal to offer more opportunities to our students so they can aspire to, prepare for and,

if qualified, exercise their choice to pursue post-secondary education. Strengthening our health care professions is a key component of our government's historic Reaching Higher plan.

Increasing the number of medical school spaces will increase the supply of doctors. That means greater access to health care for Ontarians. The new satellite

campuses will bring medical education closer to the communities the doctors will eventually serve. More doctors, better access, improved health care -- this initiative will benefit all

Ontarians.

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

YOUTH SERVICES

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): I rise to respond to the statement made by the Minister of Children and Youth Services, really

repeating for good measure the announcement made by the Premier yesterday. I welcome the announcement, albeit late in coming. I think what it does is confirm the wisdom of the communities in

Toronto and elsewhere that we consulted so broadly over the course of 2005 with respect to what was needed to help, not only to address the problem of crime and guns and gangs but also to address

the problem that affects so many of those communities in terms of marginalization of people and lack of opportunity for young people.

I also endorse, on behalf of the Progressive Conservative Party, the selection of "Pinball" Clemons as the chair. He's someone I know well. I worked with him

well when I was commissioner of the Canadian Football League and at other times. The challenge for him -- and it will be a particular challenge for him working with this government -- will be to

establish the balance between two of the comments he himself made yesterday: one, talking about the urgency to act and to make sure that we get on with actually providing opportunity and providing

programs for these young people and for these communities; and the other, talking about the need to get it right.

I think that too often on matters of this kind, the government has taken too much time to act, too much time to move, and then got bogged down, as I hope they

will not in this instance, in the process of picking a board and finding offices and buying furniture and hiring consultants. I'm sure there'll be an ad campaign involved somewhere, because there

just couldn't be a program without an ad campaign. I think what we have to do instead is to move much more quickly to engage these communities now, to engage now the people and the leadership who

live in these communities. That includes -- but is not limited to, by any means -- the people who are represented here today from one particular community. It includes the leadership of the black

community, who I think are people that we have to get involved in a very detailed way.

What worries me is that I wrote, just to pick an example, to the Premier on August 10, 2005, and talked about "a youth strategy with a focus on coordinating

and replicating programs for children and families that works. Your government and other local governments and agencies such as the United Way have supported some programs for children and

families, which seem to be achieving some good results. My own conversations suggest, however, that there is really no coordination of all of this, nor is there an attempt to replicate the most

effective programs in more neighbourhoods."

Now, there is hope. I live in hope that that is what the announcement of yesterday and today is indeed going to do: not get bogged down in bureaucracy, but

instead actually replicate some of the successes that this government, the United Way and other organizations have achieved. I want to reiterate as well, at this point in time, the offer from

myself and the PC caucus, made to the Premier and to the government, to work together with "Pinball" Clemons and with the Premier and the government to try and address this. I think it's the kind

of issue we should work on together.

I had the privilege of addressing the Canadian Club last week, and when I mentioned this very challenge -- issued it from the podium -- I had several

corporations respond on the spot, saying they would have internship opportunities within their companies. I think that's how this is done. It's not through bureaucracy or paperwork or forms; it's

done by issuing the challenge to people to become involved, to work with all of us to make sure we address a problem that needs to be addressed. I know -- from my work with the United Way, from my

work with "Pinball" -- and I live in hope that the government can take full advantage of what those people have to offer and make sure we can make these programs a success. It's our duty to do

so.

HEALTH CARE

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): I'm pleased to respond to the announcement made by both the Minister of Health and the Minister of

Training, Colleges and Universities. First of all, I think the announcement today about any increase that we might have seen in the way of physicians and nurses certainly confirms the fact that the

plan that we put in place when our government was in office is working.

If this government recalls, we had an eight-point plan to reduce the barriers to registration, assessment and training for international medical graduates. We

also had a plan and we put in place the initiatives in the development of the northern medical school on the two sites in Sudbury and Thunder Bay. We also had a plan to increase medical school

enrolment by 30%. It appears that those initiatives are indeed working.

Also, as far as nurses are concerned, we invested $375 million annually, in response to the request from nurses, to create more than 3,800 nursing positions in

the province, to invest in continuing education for nurses. And of course, our government, on the advice of the nursing profession, particularly RNAO, did create the nursing practitioner

position.

However, the minister talks about the family --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you.

YOUTH SERVICES

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): In response to the Minister of Children and Youth Services, while some may say that this announcement is a

welcome first step, it certainly doesn't absolve the government of its further responsibilities on this file. We really aren't kidding anyone here. This is one-time project money. It's not a

comprehensive strategy. It's not going to fix the systemic problems that contribute to putting our youth at risk, susceptible to violence and to the creation of crime in our cities.

One can argue that this announcement in fact is a bit of a letdown, because really the solutions need to be far more widespread than this announcement

provides. Most of the money is coming from the private sector, but it's the government, not the private sector, that is responsible for finding real solutions to poverty, to the lack of affordable

housing, to the lack of affordable child care and available child care, to ending things like the national child benefit clawback and to creating real opportunities for our youth across the

province. We need to give young people hope instead of leaving them hoping for corporate donations. The McGuinty Liberals simply are not off the hook with this announcement.

The fund provides some investment in Toronto neighbourhoods, but Hamilton and Niagara regions, for example, also experience serious problems that call out for

comprehensive solutions, not one-offs. I'd like to see an all-encompassing strategy announced by the government that's going to help youth in crisis right across the province. Give them hope; give

them a stable environment so they can grow and thrive into the bright future that they so rightly deserve in this province.

HEALTH CARE

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): In response to the statements that were made on health today, I'd refer members to a submission that was

made by the Ontario Nurses' Association to the standing committee on finance and economic affairs. Just recently, on February 2, 2006, under the heading "Government Progress on Nursing Job

Creation" it says, and I'm going read this into the record:

"The government is more than halfway into its four-year mandate but only about a quarter of the way to meeting its promise of 8,000 more nurses by October

2007." The health ministry "says the government has created 3,062 full-time nursing positions so far: 1,202 in hospitals, 375 in long-term care to date, 485 in home care and 1,000 new graduate

positions.

"But, a closer look reveals the 1,000 new graduates are, in fact, three-month temporary contract positions in hospitals. The government obviously has much more

work to do and it must happen quickly.

"In addition, newly created nursing positions in hospitals are being compromised by layoffs announced in order to balance hospital budgets by March 31, 2006.

Here are a few examples: Data from the nursing secretariat show that Bluewater Health created 11 new full-time positions, Lakeridge Health created nine new nursing positions, St. Joseph's

Healthcare Hamilton created 12 new nursing positions and Sault Area Hospital reported 20 new nursing positions were created.

"At the same time, however, over the course of 2005, Lakeridge announced layoffs of 39 full-time RNs and 57 regular part-time RNs; Sault Area Hospital

announced a layoff of 25 full-time RNs and 10 regular part-time RNs. Bluewater announced a layoff of 28 full-time nursing equivalents and St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton announced 18 full-time and

10 part-time RN" layoffs. "These layoffs more than negate any progress being made in recruiting new nursing positions using funding that was targeted for that specific purpose.

"Nurses cannot continue to deliver quality patient care in this endless cycle of hiring and layoffs."

Then, of course, it goes on to be very critical of LHINs, as they were during the public hearings. What else has been said about nurses recently? Here's the

London Free Press, February 2, 2006:

"Job Cuts Will Drive Nurses Away, Union Warns." I'm going to read this into the record as well:

"Nurses are frustrated and looking for a way out of the profession in the wake of the announcement by London hospitals that 117 full-time and part-time jobs

are being eliminated.

"`It makes for a very frustrated, disheartened workforce,' said Dawn Blenkhorn-Bax, local coordinator of Ontario Nurses' Association Local 100, representing

about 1,600 London nurses....

"Many of the 117 cuts will be done by not filling current vacancies and through attrition." She "said it remains unclear if any nurses will be handed layoff

notices.

"But by not filling vacancies, hospitals will be increasing the workload for the nursing staff....

"`We are working at bare minimum staffing as it is,' she said."

What's worse is that this is only phase 1. The hospital still has a $30 million deficit. So if this government forces them to deal with that deficit, there are

going to be significantly more layoffs. She said that "it's difficult for nurses to be told in one breath the province wants to hire 8,000 more nurses and then be told vacancies will go unfilled

and layoffs could be on the horizon." That's the situation.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Today in the Speaker's gallery we are joined by two very distinguished guests: Seated with his grandson,

Sebastian Smith, is former Speaker of the Legislature David Warner, who served from November 1990 to September 1995.

Applause.

ORAL QUESTIONS

OMERS PENSION FUND

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Premier. Could you please give us your best estimate of the total cost of your

OMERS reforms? I would expect that on a matter of this importance you would have your own numbers that you might wish to share with the taxpayers of Ontario.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): It's great to be back, and I welcome the opportunity to speak to what has

developed into a very important issue.

The commitment that we have made is to devolve responsibility for this pension plan, which really doesn't have much to do with the province of Ontario, to

those people who are most affected by it: the employer group, the municipalities and the employees. The second commitment that we made was to ensure that police and firefighters in particular would

have the opportunity to negotiate new benefits that would, among other things, allow them to retire at an earlier age. We think it's important to recognize that their job responsibilities often

entail great risk and danger, and it's only fair that they have that opportunity.

With respect to the question raised by the leader of the official opposition, I look forward to delivering more regarding that at the supplementary.

Mr. Tory: Part of the problem we've seen here is that a good many of the people to whom you want to devolve the responsibility, as you

indicated, have real problems with the way in which you are doing this. Now, I asked a very simple question which had to do with the cost. We have a bill here, Mr. Premier, that is about to enter

third reading. I think it is reasonable that you should know the cost of the changes that your government has put forward, your best estimate of the cost to the taxpayers of Ontario. There seems to

be quite a dispute out there about whether the cost is one number or another number, and I'm asking you to try and give us some estimate. Surely, when you're making changes to a multi-billion

dollar pension plan like this and a series of important matters such as the ones you were discussing a moment ago, you could give us your best estimate and that of your government as to how much

this is going to cost taxpayers. Can you clear the air for us?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The leader of the official opposition is effectively asking me if I can predict with absolute certainty what the outcome of

negotiations will be. I cannot do that. But what I can say is that this particular bill, if passed into law, will not allow the negotiation to begin in earnest for at least two years. It then

provides that it will take a minimum of nine years for full implementation of negotiation of new benefits.

From the municipal perspective, I have every confidence in our municipal partners to come to the table and bargain strongly and fairly on behalf of their

constituents; I have every faith in the municipalities managing that. On the other side, when it comes to employee groups, I can say that they will do the very same thing. So I have confidence in

the process that we are putting in place and I have confidence on both sides of the negotiations.

Mr. Tory: I think it's very hard for the people of Ontario to believe that when you are making changes to a multi-billion dollar pension plan

like this, whether it's two years or nine years, you wouldn't have some estimate as to how much this might cost taxpayers. It's funny: Everybody else can come up with an estimate, and they disagree

with one another, but you can't come up with one at all, and you are the person prepared to put forward these changes.

Now, let's try this another way: The mayor of Sarnia, Mike Bradley, says his city "will be hit with a $1.6-million bill;" Mayor Poirier of Cornwall says, "If

this legislation goes through, it could add to our tax bill 3%;" Mayor Miller here in Toronto says, "We would hope they would withdraw it even at this late stage;" and Mayor Di Ianni says,

"Hamilton has already told the government it objects to the legislation because it will increase municipal pension costs dramatically." If all of these people are wrong, then please stand in your

place and tell the people of Ontario what calculating, what estimating you have done that any responsible government would do before you introduce changes of this kind to a multi-billion dollar

pension plan: It's the least people have the right to expect.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The reason that there is such a broad divergence in the numbers is because they are all speculative in nature. Again, what

the leader of the official opposition is asking me to do is predict with certainty the outcome of the negotiations.

I think it's important to understand that when the city comes to the table to bargain with police and firefighters, for example, they're coming to the table

with a certain amount of money. If the police and firefighters want to spread that over pay and existing benefits and supplementary benefits, they can do that, but I don't think it's going to

require that the city bring any more money to the table.

The other thing to keep in mind is that when it comes to the police and firefighters, they've got to put in 50% of any increased costs. So I don't think you're

going to see a huge outpouring among workers in the province of Ontario saying, "Yes, I want to put all kinds more money into this new supplementary plan." So we are convinced. We have had

extensive committee hearings on this. We have had an opportunity to improve the quality of the legislation by listening to the opposition -- both sides -- and we look forward to moving ahead with

the bill.

MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question again is to the Premier. Why have you allowed Minister Takhar to remain at his post as

Minister of Transportation after the Integrity Commissioner described him as having displayed "negligence, being "egregiously reckless" and concluded that in his conduct he violated the Members'

Integrity Act?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I just think it would be fairer to all concerned if the leader of the

official opposition were to quote from the Integrity Commissioner's report in its entirety. He chooses to be very selective in terms of those parts.

There's another part that I think is very important, and it's found on page 30 of the report. I'll quote from the Integrity Commissioner. He says, "I have to

recognize that the minister did not go about intentionally trying to short-circuit the system." He then goes on to conclude, "I think it would be unfair to sanction the minister beyond issuing a

reprimand...."

I don't think it's fair to pick and choose those parts of the Integrity Commissioner's report on which you intend to rely. I think we have to look at it in its

entirety.

Mr. Tory: Let's talk for a minute about picking and choosing the Integrity Commissioner's words. In a letter I sent to the Integrity

Commissioner just last week to clarify whether he had in any way inferred or recommended, as you repeatedly have suggested he did, that the minister should stay at his current post or that you as

Premier should keep him there, in his reply, which I will send over to you now, he indicated to me some words that are very interesting from a former Integrity Commissioner, the Honourable Gregory

Evans. He said, quoting Commissioner Evans, "Whether a member of the executive council remains in cabinet is not a matter of my office. It would not be correct to draw any inference that my

recommendation that no penalty be imposed has any relationship to a member's status as a member of the executive council." Justice Osborne then goes on to say in his letter to me, which you now

have a copy of, "I agree with this conclusion. I do not have jurisdiction to advise the Premier or make recommendations as to who should sit on the executive council."

Now there's nothing to hide behind. Why will you not ask this minister, who has been found to have breached the act and found to be guilty of egregiously

reckless conduct --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The question has been asked. Premier.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Not being satisfied with the original Integrity Commissioner's report, the leader of the official opposition is now seeking

unilaterally to amend it in some way.

I accept and fully support the Integrity Commissioner's report. I think that, again, it's important not to lose sight of the facts here. We're not talking

about a case of releasing confidential health information. We're not talking about a case of hiding expenses through crown corporations. We're not talking about expenses related to hotel rooms and

expensive steak dinners. The taxpayers' interests in all of this were in no way, shape or form compromised.

I can tell you that the Minister of Transportation has learned a very important lesson. He should not have had that meeting at that particular place of

business, and I stand with the Integrity Commissioner --

The Speaker: Thank you. Final supplementary.

Mr. Tory: I would point out to the Premier that it is not I who invoked the words of a former Integrity Commissioner; it is the current

Integrity Commissioner himself who adopted those words, said he followed them and said he passed no comment whatsoever on a decision that is up to you to set and to make with respect to the

standard of conduct you expect from your ministers.

I think the people of Ontario are wondering exactly what it takes to lose your job in this government. You and only you are responsible for setting the

standards of behaviour, for deciding what is going to be accepted and what is not in terms of ministerial behaviour. Can we now assume that if the Integrity Commissioner has found the minister

guilty of "egregiously reckless" and negligent behaviour, that is a standard of conduct that is appropriate for a member of your cabinet, based on the Integrity Commissioner saying it is you and

you alone who sets that standard? Is that the standard you're going to stick to for your ministers?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The whole issue of accountability in government and government integrity loomed very large in the recent federal election.

I think it's really important for Ontarians to understand where I am coming from on this issue, and it's important for them to understand the nature of the facts behind this. The Minister of

Transportation had a meeting at a former place of business. He shouldn't have had the meeting there; he should have had the meeting elsewhere. Beyond that, what the Minister of Transportation did,

even though there was no rule specifically prohibiting this, is that his relationship with his trustee had changed, and he really should have put the Integrity Commissioner on notice.

It's important for Ontarians to understand that this does not involve, in any way, shape or form, any effort to compromise the interests of taxpayers. The

Minister of Transportation did not enrich himself in this particular matter. Just so we're clear, in my estimation, given those facts, I am keeping the Minister of Transportation in my cabinet.

NUCLEAR ENERGY

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. In your third year of government, you have now made quite a mess of

Ontario's electricity system. You are lurching from crisis to crisis, trying to make policy up on the fly, like your $40-billion nuclear power boondoggle. My question is, how do three days of open

houses on your $40-billion nuclear scheme represent the real and meaningful consultation that you promised people?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I am also pleased to entertain this question. It too is a very important

issue. We have before us a real challenge for all Ontarians, and that is to ensure that we take the necessary steps, sooner rather than later, that will ensure that we have a reliable supply of

electricity in 2015 and beyond. That's really the issue that is before us.

The leader of the third party asks about consultation, and we are pleased to engage in consultation with Ontarians on this issue. The Ontario Power Authority

was the first to make some consultations over the course of the summer. When it came out with its report, that was posted on the Environmental Bill of Rights website. We have extended the normal

period to allow more Ontarians to access that and provide us with their best advice. There is now ongoing consultation in 12 cities throughout the province. The Ministry of Energy also has made

their site available for advice with respect to the Ontario Power Authority's recommendations.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Hampton: In the last year, Ontario has lost 100,000 good-paying manufacturing jobs in the forest sector and other manufacturing sectors;

33,000 jobs in the month of January alone. The major reason? Because of your policy of driving electricity rates through the roof. Now you have a $40-billion nuclear scheme, which works out to

about $13,000 per household, which means even higher electricity rates. You promised people meaningful consultation, and what do they get? Three days of open houses.

Premier, before you commit Ontario to another $40-billion nuclear fiasco, will you keep your promise: Hold full environmental assessment hearings, the

meaningful consultation that you promised?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I know that the leader of the NDP would not want to leave Ontarians with the mistaken impression that the economy's not

performing well, and I'm pleased to report that 15,600 net new jobs were created in January.

Again, the OPA itself had consultations. There was an opportunity to register your advice with the Environmental Bill of Rights website. We are conducting

consultations now in 12 different cities. There is access available to the Ministry of Energy website, again for Ontarians to register their concerns or advice. I can also say that whatever

happens, whatever the outcome might be, it will be the subject of an extensive environmental assessment process. The leader of the NDP understands that. I know it's a difficult question for all of

us to come to terms with, but we will be moving forward.

Mr. Hampton: Premier, you don't have to repeat the nuclear mistakes of the past. I can remember when yourselves and the Conservatives used to

rail about our electricity system's $20-billion debt. It's all a nuclear debt. There are real alternatives. There are good strategies in energy efficiency, energy conservation, which your

government only talks about and never does.

Here's what it amounts to, Premier: You have superficial ads on television talking about energy efficiency, but no programs, no strategies. Meanwhile, you want

people to swallow $40 billion in new nuclear plants. I'm simply asking you to keep your promise. You promised real, meaningful consultations before adopting a nuclear power plan. Here's a

$40-billion nuclear power scheme. Will you hold now the full environmental assessment hearings and the full, meaningful consultation you promised?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The leader of the NDP may not have heard me, but we're into our third round of consultations right now. There will in due

course be a full environmental assessment. Just so we're clear, we are exploiting every possible alternative. We have the most aggressive jurisdiction in all of North America when it comes to

getting electricity from renewables. We have recently learned -- this is great news -- that there is going to be a new plant going into Sault Ste. Marie where they're going to manufacture the steel

for those turbines which support the electricity that we draw from wind. So there are some really good economic upsides to be associated with our plan for energy. We will, each and every step along

the way, be providing opportunities for Ontarians to have input, and we look forward to hearing from them this very week.

ENERGY CONSERVATION

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): To the Premier: Nowhere is your misdirected electricity scheme more obvious than in Toronto. The

mayor of Toronto has said to you, "We want to focus on energy conservation and energy efficiency." City councillors have told you they want to focus on energy conservation, energy efficiency. The

head of Toronto Hydro has said they've already saved 140 megawatts; they can save 200 more. But what is your strategy? You want to build a natural gas megaplant without even trying energy

efficiency and energy conservation. Premier, why is the McGuinty government policy all about mega-nuclear, mega-natural gas, without giving energy efficiency and conservation even a chance?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): In truth, the city of Toronto proposal called for, I believe, 200

megawatts of conservation. Our proposal calls for 300 megawatts of conservation.

Just so we understand what we're talking about here, in the 1960s Toronto had half the population it has today and 1,200 megawatts of supply within the city.

Today, with double the population, we have almost no supply within the city. We have put forward a proposal which we think is the best in the circumstances. It is faster than the Toronto proposal,

because an environmental assessment has already been completed. It is less expensive; there is no need to buy out a private sector interest, as there would be in the city of Toronto proposal. I

would also argue that it is better for the environment; there is no temporary generation involved. And as I mentioned a few moments ago, we're looking for 300 megawatts of conservation as opposed

to 200.

Mr. Hampton: Premier, people hear your speeches, they see the photo ops, but they haven't seen, after three years, anything that even

approaches an energy-efficiency strategy. Someone living in Manitoba can get a $5,000 low-interest loan to buy energy-efficient appliances, to put in energy-efficient windows, to put in insulation

so they use less electricity. If they live in Quebec, they can do the same thing. But what do they find in Dalton McGuinty's Ontario? They don't find any strategy. They find superficial television

ads.

When are we going to see energy efficiency and conservation rather than nuclear megaplants and natural gas megaplants, Premier?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The leader of the NDP will know that we've already brought on close to 3,000 megawatts of new generation. He will also know

that we have another 10,000 megawatts of supply in the works. By the way, that 13,000 megawatts is very balanced -- in fact, extraordinarily so. A quarter of that comes from refurbishment of

nuclear generation; a quarter of that -- and this is extraordinary in North America -- comes from renewable sources; and the balance comes from natural gas and other. I've also been working as hard

as I can, together with the Minister of Energy, to ensure that we can in fact buy electricity from Manitoba and from Newfoundland; we've been working with the province of Quebec on that as well. It

would have been better had the NDP not cancelled that contract with the province of Manitoba. It was very affordable, clean and reliable electricity. That's in part what put us behind the eight

ball, but we are moving ahead.

Mr. Hampton: Premier, you want to talk about purchasing electricity from Manitoba. I just want to remind you of what the energy critic for the

Liberal Party said in 1992: "We can't afford to purchase electricity for Manitoba. It's too expensive." And who was that energy critic? Dalton McGuinty.

So, Premier, this is more of your on again, off again. I want to ask you again, Premier: People are looking for meaningful energy efficiency. The people of

Toronto are not interested in a natural gas megaplant, just as many other people across the province aren't interested in $40 billion of nuclear power. They want to see real energy efficiency, real

energy conservation, not superficial television ads.

When is the McGuinty government going to stop talking about energy efficiency, stop talking about energy conservation and actually do some energy conservation

and efficiency, rather than meganuclear --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The question has been asked.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The leader of the NDP is always passionate about these issues, and I do not for a moment doubt his sincerity. I wouldn't go

that far.

I can tell you again, in terms of our commitment to conservation, that the city of Toronto proposal for the waterfront generation project was looking at 200

megawatts of conservation. We've upped that to 300 megawatts of conservation. We have put in place a new chief conservation officer, the first of his kind in Ontario. We're putting smart meters in

800,000 homes. We have established for the first time a 5% target, province-wide, for energy conservation and a 10% conservation target for the Ontario government. So we have in place some huge

efforts to drive conservation. We want to see those move more quickly, and what we've done now is put a very important advertising campaign on TV, which is helping to enlist Ontarians more and more

to the cause of conserving electricity.

MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): I'd like to come back to the Premier on the subject of Mr. Takhar. Again, when the Premier talked

about this being just about a meeting to discuss something and so forth and so on, he was conveniently overlooking the fact that the Integrity Commissioner, whom we, the Legislature, appointed to

look into these matters, found the minister's conduct to be, and I'm using his words, "negligent and egregiously reckless" -- not just reckless but egregiously reckless. Seeing that you've chosen

to ignore us and the representations we're making on this today, as well as the Integrity Commissioner, maybe we could share with you some other opinions that have been rendered on this:

"Premier Dalton McGuinty should reconsider his earlier defence of Takhar and remove him from cabinet ... McGuinty is wrong to argue that the reprimand by

Osborne is `significant' and enough punishment." Toronto Star.

"Mr. Takhar should not be in the cabinet. Mr. McGuinty should have booted him out as soon as Commissioner Coulter Osborne delivered his devastating report."

Globe and Mail.

Premier, this is not about any one minister; it's not about any one Premier; it's not about a debate in the Legislature. It's about respect and integrity for

the government, for the Legislature and for people in public life --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The question has been asked. Premier.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): The question has been asked many times, and I've had the opportunity to

answer it many times as well. The answer to that particular question is no.

In terms of making the government more accountable, I want to tell you about some of the progress we've been making as a government. We introduced and have

passed into law the Fiscal Transparency and Accountability Act, which is going to make sure the Auditor General signs off on the books before an election so that no government ever again can hide a

$6-billion deficit. I'm somewhat surprised to learn that the Conservative Party voted against that bill. We've also brought the freedom-of-information law to bear on OPG and Hydro One, which had

been sheltered from that particular legislation by the Conservatives. We gave the Auditor General more powers to audit school boards, hospitals, colleges and universities. We have banned partisan

government advertising in the province of Ontario. We've opened up universities to freedom of information. We've brought in real-time disclosure for political donations. I could go on. We are doing

more and more every day to ensure that our government is held up as accountable.

Mr. Tory: We could debate each and every one of those things, but it's about your standard today. May I remind you of what you said on June

25, 1997. You said, "The report we obtained today leads us to one overwhelming, overriding conclusion: that the minister, Al Leach, is in breach of the legislation, that he has broken the law and

that he should resign."

Adding to the mountains of opinion: Christina Blizzard, Toronto Sun: "He can't keep a minister in cabinet who has breached the integrity rules." Murray

Campbell of the Globe and Mail: This "is the Premier's power alone. He should use it to protect the integrity of the political system."

Why, when there has been a law broken here, a rule violated, when there has been a finding of egregiously reckless conduct, when there has been a finding of

negligence and a reprimand under the Members' Integrity Act, will you now not exercise your judgment and say, "That kind of standard of behaviour, egregiously reckless and negligent, is not

acceptable in the cabinet of Ontario," and that you are not going to accept it as Premier of this province?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I've answered this several times now. The leader of the official opposition doesn't like the answer, but perhaps he does

not have the benefit of context. Through no fault of his own, he was not here at the time that Conservative government ministers were in breach of the Members' Integrity Act and suffered the wrath

of the Office of the Integrity Commissioner. But just to remind him, this does not involve hiding expenses through crown corporations; it does not involve an abuse of taxpayers' money through

expensive hotel rooms and steak dinners. Minister Takhar did not in any way enrich himself; he did not in any way abuse or was even seen to attempt to abuse taxpayer dollars. So I think what we

have here is clearly a difference of opinion, and I've expressed mine.

OMERS PENSION FUND

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): Speaker, as I rise to ask the question, Rosario Marchese is dropping off some letters sent by --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order. Members know that demonstrations in the Legislature are out of order.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The member for Hamilton East may have a question.

Ms. Horwath: Premier, with each passing day it becomes more and more clear how badly you've botched the OMERS pension legislation. Thanks to

the incompetence and poor choices you've made, the vast majority of both employee and employer groups are livid. You know that it wouldn't have been hard to get this legislation right. You could

have treated everybody equally, offering at least the same rules for everyone. Basic fairness could easily have been achieved in this bill. Why wasn't it?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I want to thank the member for the question. I want to register an

objection on the part of Mr. Ryan, who is here, because I know he wanted that question to be on earlier. Be careful, Sid, because the next thing you know, you'll be out of the party.

Interjection: No notice.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: No notice, no debate, no consultation.

There is an important issue here, and I want to in fact welcome Mr. Ryan to the Legislature. We have worked long and hard with all parties concerned to get

this bill right. I'm convinced that, taking the best advice we could possibly get, including that coming from the parties opposite, we have improved the quality of this bill.

There is one thing in particular that I want to relay to Mr. Ryan and to the membership, and I'll get this out very quickly: We are doing nothing in here that

will in any way, shape or form, compromise the pension plan for --

The Speaker: You may want to get to that in the supplementary.

Ms. Horwath: Premier, your jokes really do indicate the way you've been treating certain members of the unions in regard to this legislation.

It's indicative of your lack of concern about their issues. Your bill --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, Minister of Health.

Interjections.

The Speaker: We can wait.

The member for Hamilton East.

Ms. Horwath: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Your bill is so flawed that it was entirely rewritten in committee, and it's still offensive in many ways, particularly in the supermajority processes that are

still in there. Continued opposition by CUPE members, municipalities and serious concerns from stakeholders like OSSTF, OPSEU and school boards show that it's still a flawed bill. We're talking

about changes to workers' pensions that discriminate against the majority of workers in the plan. That's unconscionable and could be the difference between people retiring in poverty or with the

dignity of a secure income.

You have to get this right. What are you going to do to fix this bill?

Interjections.

The Speaker: The government needs to come to order. The treasury bench is no better.

Interjection.

The Speaker: The Minister of Community and Social Services will come to order.

The member for Hamilton East.

Ms. Horwath: Premier, you have to get this bill right. I'm simply asking, what are you prepared to do to fix it?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: As I understand it, one of the concerns shared by Mr. Ryan and CUPE members is whether or not this particular bill, which

enables police and firefighters to negotiate additional benefits under a supplemental plan, is going to compromise the pension rights of other plan members.

The NDP in fact put forward a motion which was so good that we adopted it in its entirety. I want to quote from that motion. It's now part of the bill: "No

assets of the primary pension plan shall be used for the purpose of paying any optional benefit under a supplemental plan or funding the payment of any other liability of a supplemental plan."

We've gone to great lengths, working together with the NDP, to provide CUPE members and all plan members with the assurance that what we do for police and firefighters, in giving them the right to

negotiate new opportunities, will not in any way compromise the pension rights of other plan members.

We're doing this in the fairest way possible to devolve responsibility for the plan and at the same time honour our commitment to police and firefighters.

The Speaker: New question.

Mr. Dave Levac (Brant): My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. This past week, I've had many discussions with

municipal officials and constituents who are members and contributors of the Ontario municipal employees retirement system -- OMERS -- pension plan. I understand that the debate on putting the

OMERS plan into the hands of those who have contributed to it has been ongoing for more than 10 years. The previous government didn't do an awful lot about that debate. In fact, in these two

committee hearings that we've heard after first and second readings, they've submitted two motions and removed two motions from their own suggestions for the pension plan. Right now, the province

has to play the sponsor's role of OMERS plan, which includes responsibility for plan design and benefit changes, as well as appointing the OMERS board, but the province doesn't contribute to the

plan directly. Minister, what progress have we made to bring OMERS into the hands of those employees/employers who contribute to it?

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I'd like to thank the member for his question, because I know he's had a

great interest in this issue for some time.

Changes to the OMERS pension plan with respect to governance have been talked about by different governments for at least the last 10 years. All we're doing by

devolving the OMERS pension plan is giving responsibility to those individuals who pay into it and those individuals who benefit from it. The government's proposed model, as a matter of fact, was

recommended by the OMERS board in the year 2002. At that point in time, Howard Hampton, the leader of the NDP said on November 26, 2002, "The New Democratic Party fully supports OMERS

autonomy."

With respect to the supplemental benefit plan that we are allowing negotiations to take place on, this plan does not in any way, shape or form affect the main

plan as far as the finances are concerned.

Mr. Levac: Minister, there's another major area that needs to be addressed: OMERS retirees, those presently retired. Whether it is through

miscommunication or just plain misinformation, I've received phone calls and e-mails from retirees who -- and I don't believe this is too strong a phrase -- are frightened and angry. It's my

understanding that they are actually to receive something in writing that tells them what Bill 206 will do or will not do for them. Because of this misinformation, these retirees have been telling

me -- and quite rightfully so -- that their pensions will be cut and even dumped altogether. Those are some of the things that I've been receiving, and I'm disappointed by that. Because of this

misinformation, we're told that they have no voice as to what is happening to their pension. Minister, I think it's outrageous that people who have spent their entire life working, who should now

be enjoying their retirement, are spending time worrying about whether or not their pension is secure. It's time to set the record straight: Will you tell us right now exactly what 206 does and

doesn't do for present pensioners?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: This a very important issue, because we all have received letters of that nature as well. Let me be absolutely clear:

There is nothing in Bill 206 that would change the terms of existing pensions. People's existing pensions are safe. As a matter of fact, the proposed bill provides that retirees get voting

representation, for the first time, on both the administration board and the sponsors board. For those members who are currently contributing to the plan, if the bill passes, it will be up to the

employers and the employees who are currently contributing to the plan to determine if any of the benefits -- the supplementary benefits that were talked about earlier -- will be accessible. The

cost of that will be borne on a 50-50 basis between the employers and the employees. There is absolutely nothing in the bill that affects existing pensions or pensioners.

MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): I'd like to come back to the Premier, if I could, on the Takhar matter again. I wonder if the

Premier could explain the difference between the Leach case -- which he talked about in the Legislature in 1997, where the Integrity Commissioner at the time found the minister had breached the

legislation and the Premier at that time said the minister should resign -- and the Takhar case, where the Integrity Commissioner has found that the minister has breached the legislation and for

the first time ever has reprimanded a minister under the Members' Integrity Act. Could you tell us what the difference is between one case, where you said the minister should resign because he

breached the act, and this case where, more seriously, the Integrity Commissioner reprimanded the member and you now think the minister shouldn't resign notwithstanding egregiously reckless and

negligent conduct?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): First of all, let me just say that the reprimand in and of itself is very

significant. The members opposite may not see it as such, but it's certainly nothing to which any of us on this side of the House aspire. It is very significant. Beyond that, again, the leader of

the official opposition chooses to be selective in terms of reading from the original report of the Integrity Commissioner, where the Integrity Commissioner specifically says that it would be

unfair to impose any additional sanctions.

Mr. Tory: It's absolutely unbelievable that you would stand here after the letter I received today, of which you have been provided with a

copy, where the Integrity Commissioner of Ontario specifically says that he was not making any comment whatsoever about the fitness or lack of fitness of this man to continue to serve in your

cabinet. You know from what he has said today that it is your responsibility and your responsibility alone to decide on standards of behaviour for your ministers. I think it is high time that you

stood up and at least had the courtesy to the Integrity Commissioner to say that you have been less than straightforward with people in your

interpretation of what he said, that you have to set

that standard of conduct and that you are prepared to accept egregiously reckless and negligent behaviour as the standard of behaviour for your ministers. If that's good enough for you, have the

courage to get up and say so.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I really do appreciate the advice of the leader of the official opposition. As you might imagine, I get all kinds of

advice. Some of it I actually seek.

Let me say that I've thoroughly considered this matter, and given the facts and the nature of this particular matter, it was inappropriate for Minister Takhar

to hold a meeting at his place of business. He should have held that meeting elsewhere. Even though there was nothing specifically provided by way of rule or regulation that said that you've got to

put the Integrity Commissioner on notice when you change your relationship with your trustee, he really should have done that. But again, this does not, in any way, shape or form, involve any

enrichment on the part of the Minister of Transportation. It does not, in any way, shape or form, involve any use, misuse or abuse of taxpayer dollars. In those circumstances, I am very comfortable

-- the leader of the official opposition is obviously not -- maintaining the Minister of Transportation --

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

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Premier, and it's again on this same issue. As opposition leader in 1997, you

stood in this House regarding former Minister Al Leach, who found himself in violation of the Members' Integrity Act. I'd like to quote again exactly what you had to say that day. You said that the

Integrity Commissioner "said that the minister has broken the law. It seems to me that in those circumstances what the Premier should have done today is he should have stood in his place and said

that he has asked for the resignation of the minister, and to that he should have added that he accepted that resignation." That's what you said when you were in opposition, but today, repeatedly,

you are saying exactly the opposite. What has caused you to change your mind so much? Is it because it is your member today rather than someone on the other side?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: To be very direct, I stand by this decision. The members opposite may not like the decision, they may want to read more

into the Integrity Commissioner's report than is actually to be found there, but I stand by this decision. Given the facts, given the work ethic of my Minister of Transportation, given the

absolutely astounding job that he continues to do on behalf of the people of Ontario, I stand by my decision.

Mr. Prue: You came to power promising that you would make tough decisions. You promised that you would be responsible, but you have ducked

everything. The Integrity Commissioner has made it clear that he cannot remove someone from your cabinet; only you can do that. Only you can make the right decision. Only you can ensure that there

is integrity at the table around you. The people of Ontario are entitled to some modicum of leadership, the people of Ontario are entitled to some moral courage and the people of Ontario are

entitled to some conviction. When are you going to provide it?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: What it comes down to again is that the members opposite are not in agreement with the decision I have made. I accept their

disagreement, but it will not influence my decision. I have a responsibility to ensure that we work as hard as we can to inspire confidence in the people we are privileged to represent, and we will

do that in every way possible. I've listed earlier some of the initiatives that we have taken as a government. So I am very clear in this matter.

What we're talking about here is a member of my cabinet who held a meeting at a place of business when he should have held that meeting, clearly, in some other

place -- any place but that place of business. Also, even though there's no rule or regulation requiring him to do so, when he changed his relationship with his trustee, he really should have

notified the Integrity Commissioner. Those are important lessons to be drawn from this, but the question the members are asking is, does that make this worthy of an expulsion from cabinet? Clearly,

I say no.

PHYSICIAN TRAINING

Mr. John Milloy (Kitchener Centre): My question is to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. In my area, one of the greatest

problems is access to physicians, but as everyone in this House knows, it's not an easy problem to address. There's no grand, sweeping strategy. Instead, our government has adopted a series of

strategies, such as the recent agreement with the OMA, which serves to retain physicians here in the province and attract some back. We've also had extraordinary work done in terms of training more

international medical graduates. We've seen the creation of family health teams -- three in my region. However, missing from this long list are the medical schools, and I'd like to ask the minister

how he's engaging medical schools in addressing the doctor shortage in this province, and how it will affect areas like Waterloo region.

Hon. Christopher Bentley (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): I'd like to thank the member for Kitchener Centre for his advocacy

on behalf of his community to address issues of access to doctors. Last week, he and I participated in part of an announcement -- an announcement that underlines and supports the McGuinty

government's commitment of access, an announcement that delivered 104 new medical spaces for medical doctor education in the province of Ontario. Those, combined with the 56 new spaces created when

the Premier opened the new Northern Ontario School of Medicine this spring, mean that we're delivering 160 new spaces. Where are they going? They are going to a community such as Kitchener-Waterloo

region, where the member for Kitchener Centre has been advocating for a long period of time that we need more doctors. So we're delivering a new satellite medical school campus to

Kitchener-Waterloo in his community.

Mr. Milloy: I'd like to begin by thanking the minister for last week's announcement, which was greeted in the community with a great deal of

excitement and enthusiasm. His announcement last week, of course, involved the establishment of satellite medical schools, which is a bit of a novel twist to the whole idea of medical training in

Waterloo region. It's of particular interest because the school will be established in downtown Kitchener on the site of the new downtown medical school sciences campus, as part of the University

of Waterloo. What I wanted to do was ask the minister why he decided to pursue this idea of satellite medical schools, along with other support that the government will be offering in terms of

training physicians.

Hon. Mr. Bentley: Working together with my colleague the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care and other colleagues in the government, and

taking the great advice from members such as the member from Kitchener Centre and my other colleagues, it became clear that in order to extend the reach of medical education, we needed satellite

medical campuses. So we've established them. We're establishing them in Kitchener-Waterloo, in Windsor, in Mississauga, in St. Catharines, to ensure that doctors are going to be educated closer to

the communities that they're going to be serving.

Among other things, the study suggests that doctors tend to remain in the communities closer to where they are educated. This extends the reach of medical

education. For example, in the Kitchener-Waterloo area, the doctors who will be trained there will have some of their training done not just in the Kitchener-Waterloo hospitals but also in

hospitals in Guelph -- for example, Guelph General and Homewood Health Centre. It's good for the communities, good for the people of Ontario, good for access to doctors and it will all be supported

with more --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you.

MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): I guess we'll have one more try here to see if we can get the Premier to follow his own words. He

just said in this House a few moments ago, and I agree with him on this, that his job, together with all of us here in this Legislature, is to inspire confidence on the part of the people that we

represent in the system that we're a part of in the roles that we fulfill in cabinet, in the Legislature, as Leader of the Opposition, and so on.

Could the Premier explain to me how leaving a man in a senior position in cabinet after he has been found guilty of breaching the Members' Integrity Act -- for

the first time in history, a minister has been reprimanded, and the words used in finding him guilty and in reprimanding him describe his conduct as "egregiously reckless" and negligent. Could you

tell me how that inspires confidence on the part of the people of Ontario, who have already seen quite enough to shatter their confidence in the integrity of politics and politicians? How does this

help in terms of your expressed desire to do that? How is your decision here helping that?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Again, the leader of the official opposition chooses to be selective in

the choice of quotations that he abstracts from the Integrity Commissioner's report. Again, I think that report should be viewed in its entirety. Again, though, ultimately this is something that

falls to me. It's up to me, ultimately, to make the decision, and I've made that decision. I am comfortable making that decision.

In some ways, it would be so much easier to send Minister Takhar out of the cabinet, but I think that would be wrong, given the circumstances of this matter.

Again, we're talking about a man in cabinet who had a meeting at a place where he shouldn't have had that meeting. We're talking about a man in cabinet who also, even though there was no rule or

regulation to the contrary, really should have notified of the change of his relationship with his trustee and put the Integrity Commissioner on notice.

Under those circumstances, I think --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Tory: I say, with respect to the Premier, that he's got this wrong. The easy way to is leave him there and do nothing, and do nothing to

establish for all of us, for the process that we're all a part of, a reasonable standard of behaviour that you expect and that we would expect and that, more importantly, the people expect of their

ministers.

Now, you having made that decision, as you say -- and we live in hope that you might think about this again -- could I at least ask you to confirm that you

have been repeatedly incorrect in the attribution that you have made to the Integrity Commissioner -- because I think at least you owe him that -- in using his words to justify your decision not to

in any way deal with your minister? He says right here, and I quote, "I do not have jurisdiction to advise the Premier or make recommendations as to who should sit on the executive council." Are

you at least prepared to stand in your place and say that it is not him who gave you any recommendation or advice or comment whatsoever on the matter of Mr. Takhar's fitness to remain in your

cabinet: that it is your decision alone?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: While the leader of the official opposition chooses to luxuriate in this matter to an obsessive degree, I think Ontarians

are entitled to know what the Minister of Transportation has been doing.

He has launched a more secure drivers' licence scheme. He has launched the first high-occupancy vehicle carpool lanes on GTA highways. He has launched a new

safety initiative for our school buses. He has launched a new program for booster seats for children in cars. He has launched the new Viva transit system in York region. He has launched the new GTA

fare card. He has put in place a new northern Ontario highway strategy. He's got in place now a rental truck safety inspection blitz. He has done many, many things which I believe without any

shadow of a doubt will, at the end of the day, stand to his credit when people look back on his history of serving the people of Ontario in this Parliament.

FOREST INDUSTRY

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): My question is to the Premier. The job losses continue in the forest industry. Just last Tuesday, in

one week in northern Ontario, we saw the loss of 19 jobs at the Tembec mill in the city of Timmins. On Friday, we heard the announcement made by Columbia Forest Products of the loss of 76 jobs at

the melamine plant and the particleboard plant in the community of Hearst.

In those closures, again, the companies are saying a big part of the problem is your energy policy and your fibre cost policy. A very simple thing, Premier, in

this whole situation is that your government is doing absolutely nothing to avert these job losses. My question to you is simply this: When are you going to reverse your energy policies so that we

stop the job losses that we're seeing across Ontario, but specifically for the north?

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

Hon. David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources, minister responsible for aboriginal affairs): I'd say to the honourable member, he knows

that there's $680 million this government has put forward towards initiatives in the forest products industry of all of this province, not just northern Ontario. The member knows that, and the

member also knows that this government announced the extension of the electricity pricing rate cap for another three years, starting at a level of 4.6 cents a kilowatt hour, which is a reduction

from what people are paying today, and that will start May 1. The member should also know that as part of the prosperity program there is a lot of latitude in regards to the negotiations between

companies and the government in regards to energy projects and how those are funded by this government.

Mr. Bisson: I'm sure what you meant was platitudes, not latitudes, because that's all we're getting from this government. For this government

and this minister to stand up and say, "Oh my God, we delivered this great forestry plan to the industry to assist it" -- the Ontario Forest Industries Association, the Canadian energy and

paperworkers unions, the Steelworkers, the communities all have said the same thing: "It's not working. Dalton McGuinty, would you wake up?" We're losing jobs by the thousands across northern

Ontario and across this province because of your energy policies and your inaction on this file. Stop the platitudes. When are you going to announce a reversal on the energy policies of this

government?

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: I think the member should be reminded that in January there were 2,300 new jobs in northern Ontario. While this particular

industry is having exceptional challenges, I want you to know that Premier McGuinty, this cabinet, all of us, are working to make sure that this industry gets on to a sure footing. In the last few

days, I've been working with the industry on a go-forward basis and discussing what the challenges are going forward, what their immediate needs are. You've heard this Premier say that we are going

to do more for this industry, and you're going to hear that in the next few days.

PUBLIC TRANSIT

Ms. Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): I'm happy to ask a question about Hamilton, instead of all the grandstanding.

My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Commuting to and from the ambitious city of Hamilton has certainly taught me a great deal about the

congestion on the roads. This experience has also pointed out the need for a very efficient public transit system. Encouraging the use, however, of the public transit system by people will

certainly ease congestion, but will also accrue as an important benefit for our environment and, by extension, a benefit to our communities and to our economy.

For the environment, public transit means our roads are less congested. It means a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. These emissions are filling up the

air and creating smog, which negatively affects the health of Ontarians. However, less congestion is very important for Hamilton because we need to enhance our economic activity. We do not want our

future stuck in traffic --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The question has been asked. The Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Harinder S. Takhar (Minister of Transportation): I would like to thank the member from Hamilton West for her question. The gas tax was

one of our original election platform commitments, and we moved on that commitment in our very first budget. In our first budget, we gave one cent per litre of gasoline tax to the municipalities,

and it came to about $156 million to about 110 municipalities and about 83 to 85 transit systems. This has really paid big dividends for us. It has increased the stock of new buses on the road.

They have been able to hire new drivers. They have been able to add new routes.

We are already moving with the second phase, which is about one and a half cents of the gasoline tax per litre to the municipalities. It's about $232 million,

and it will also affect about 110 municipalities. By the way, Hamilton will get about $8 million, which they should be able to put to good use.

The Speaker: Supplementary?

Mrs. Liz Sandals (Guelph-Wellington): Minister, we know that the previous government did not support the expansion and improvement of local

public transit systems. In my riding of Guelph-Wellington, we have a large population of students from the University of Guelph and area high schools. I know that they rely on public transit a

great deal to get them to and from activities.

Last year, the gas tax transfer to the city of Guelph resulted in a payment of $1.4 million to my local transit committee, and they used this money very

effectively. They added a new route which made the transportation around Guelph much more efficient, much more effective. Historically, we've had a daisy style of transportation: Every route went

out and back in to a central point. What they did with the money we added last year was add a perimeter route to connect everybody as they moved around. So we have had an excellent improvement.

Minister, what are we going to be able to do this year for my constituents?

Hon. Mr. Takhar: We are making record investments in transit. This is the first government that has provided stable, long-term funding to the

municipalities so they can address their transit needs. The gas tax money alone this year will be $232 million. Out of that, the share for your area will be about $2.1 million.

As we have seen with all of the other municipalities, they have put this money to good use, and we look forward to the municipalities making good use of this

money as well, making real improvements in transit and adding new routes, new buses and so on. In total, we are also making about a $900-million investment in public transit.

PETITIONS

HIGHWAY 26

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

"Whereas the redevelopment of Highway 26 was approved by MPP Jim Wilson and the previous PC government in 2000; and

"Whereas a number of horrific fatalities and accidents have occurred on the old stretch of Highway 26; and

"Whereas the redevelopment of Highway 26 is critical to economic development and job creation in Simcoe-Grey;

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

"That the Liberal government stop the delay of the Highway 26 redevelopment and act immediately to ensure that the project is finished on schedule, to improve

safety for area residents and provide economic development opportunities and job creation in Simcoe-Grey."

I want to thank Kim Taylor of ReMax Wasaga Beach for circulating that petition on behalf of the people of my area.

CANCER TREATMENT

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): I have a petition that reads as follows:

"Whereas Ontario has an inconsistent policy for access to new cancer treatments while these drugs are under review for funding; and

"Whereas cancer patients taking oral chemotherapy may apply for a

section 8 exception under the Ontario drug benefit plan, with no such exception policy in

place for intravenous cancer drugs administered in hospital; and

"Whereas this is an inequitable, inconsistent and unfair policy, creating two classes of cancer patients with further inequities on the basis of personal

wealth and the willingness of hospitals to risk budgetary deficits to provide new intravenous chemotherapy treatments; and

"Whereas cancer patients have the right to the most effective care recommended by their doctors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Parliament of Ontario to provide immediate access to Velcade and other intravenous chemotherapy while these new cancer drugs

are under review and provide a consistent policy for access to new cancer treatments that enables oncologists to apply for exceptions to meet the needs of patients."

I am in agreement and sign my name thereto.

SERVICES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I'm pleased to join with my colleague the member for Niagara Falls in presenting this petition to the

Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads as follows:

"Whereas without appropriate support, people who have an intellectual disability are often unable to participate effectively in community life and are deprived

of the benefits of society enjoyed by other citizens; and

"Whereas quality supports are dependent on the ability to attract and retain qualified workers; and

"Whereas the salaries of workers who provide community-based supports and services are up to 25% less than salaries paid to those doing the same work in

government-operated services and other sectors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to address, as a priority, funding to community agencies in the developmental services

sector to address critical underfunding of staff salaries and ensure that people who have an intellectual disability continue to receive quality supports and services that they require in order to

live meaningful lives within their community."

It's my privilege to sign this petition and ask page Katelynne to carry it for me.

JUSTICE SYSTEM

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

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Honourable Michael Bryant is minister responsible for democratic renewal;

"Whereas the Honourable Michael Bryant, Attorney General of Ontario, is elected to safeguard our justice system on behalf of the people of Ontario;

"Whereas the Ministry of the Attorney General may not be aware of the serious and important issues facing individuals involved in areas of the justice system

even though the Attorney General's ministry is continually monitoring;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, ask the Honourable Michael Bryant, Attorney General, for his in-depth investigation of the Ontario judicial system and to make

the public aware of his findings immediately."

I affix my signature in full support.

PROPERTY TAXATION

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): I have a petition that reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas property assessment now occurs on an annual basis;

"Whereas the Mike Harris government created the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) to deflect criticism of property assessment methodology from

the province;

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberal government promised to create a fair and equitable system of assessment; and

"Whereas property values are not related to the cost of municipal services or to the ability of taxpayers to pay;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of Ontario to immediately create a new system of property assessment that provides property and

business owners with fair and equitable assessments that are stable and transparent that a property owner will clearly be able to understand."

I'm in agreement and will affix my signature thereto.

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mrs. Liz Sandals (Guelph-Wellington): This petition is from the supporters of Community Living Guelph-Wellington.

"Whereas, without appropriate support, people who have an intellectual disability are often unable to participate effectively in community life and are

deprived of the benefits of society enjoyed by other citizens; and

"Whereas quality supports are dependent on the ability to attract and retain qualified workers; and

"Whereas the salaries of workers who provide community-based supports and services are up to 25% less than salaries paid to those doing the same work in

government-operated services and other sectors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to address, as a priority, funding to community agencies in the developmental services

sector to address critical underfunding of staff salaries and ensure that people who have an intellectual disability continue to receive quality supports and services that they require in order to

live meaningful lives within their community."

I'm pleased to sign this into the record.

AUTISM TREATMENT

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas children with autism who have reached the age of six years are no longer being discharged from their preschool autism program; and

"Whereas these children should be getting the best special education possible in the form of applied behaviour analysis ... within the school system; and

"Whereas there are approximately 700 preschool children with autism across Ontario who are required to wait indefinitely for placement in the program, and

there are also countless school-age children that are not receiving the support they require in the school system; and

"Whereas this situation has an impact on the families, extended families and friends of all of these children; and

"Whereas, as stated on the website for the Ministry of Children and Youth Services, `IBI can make a significant difference in the life of a child with autism.

Its objective is to decrease the frequency of challenging behaviours, build social skills and promote language development';

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to fund the treatment of IBI for all preschool children awaiting services. We also petition

the Legislature of Ontario to fund an educational program in the form of ABA in the school system."

I'm pleased to add my signature to this petition.

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr. Kuldip Kular (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): This petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas, without appropriate support, people who have an intellectual disability are often unable to participate effectively in community life and are

deprived of the benefits of society enjoyed by other citizens; and

"Whereas quality supports are dependent on the ability to attract and retain qualified workers; and

"Whereas the salaries of workers who provide community-based supports and services are up to 25% less than salaries paid to those doing the same work in

government-operated services and other sectors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to address, as a priority, funding to community agencies in the developmental services

sector to address critical underfunding of staff salaries and ensure that people who have an intellectual disability continue to receive quality supports and services that they require in order to

live meaningful lives within their community."

I affix my signature on this petition as well.

OMERS PENSION FUND

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a petition from my riding of Parry Sound-Muskoka. It says:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas CUPE Local 1457 is concerned by the Liberal government's legislation, Bill 206, Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System Act, 2005; and

"Whereas Bill 206 contains a multitude of changes that will cripple OMERS' ability to manage its $40-billion pension assets; and

"Whereas Bill 206 makes no provision for oversight of pension funds or accountability; and

"Whereas Bill 206 changes the rules on resolving differences among sponsors, making it harder for CUPE to find a way to improve and protect pensions; and

"Whereas Bill 206 discriminates against women and lower-paid members while providing for special consideration for police and firefighters;

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

"That the McGuinty government abandon passage of Bill 206."

MACULAR DEGENERATION

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): I'm pleased to introduce this petition on behalf of my riding of Niagara Falls. The petition is addressed to

the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and reads as follows:

"Whereas the government of Ontario's health insurance plan covers treatments for one form of macular degeneration," known as wet, "and there are other forms of

macular degeneration," known as 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" individuals "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" plan.

I'm pleased to support this petition by affixing my signature to it.

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): I'm pleased to present a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the federal Income Tax Act at present has a minimum amount of medical expenses for which a taxpayer is entitled to claim a non-refundable income tax

credit;

"Whereas the health and medical expenses of every citizen in the province of Ontario, great or small, affect their overall net income;

"Whereas the Ontario Liberal government moved in their 2004 budget on May 18 ... to delist publicly funded medical services such as chiropractic ... optometry

examinations and physiotherapy services;

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

"That the Income Tax Act remove the present minimum amount of medical expenses for which an Ontario taxpayer is entitled to claim a non-refundable income tax

credit."

I am pleased to sign this and support it on behalf of my constituents of Durham.

HANDGUNS

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): These signatures were gathered at the Port Rowan outdoors show. It's titled, "McGuinty's Handgun

Ban is Not the Answer," and it's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It begins with a quote from Premier McGuinty:

"`I think a handgun ban is an absolutely essential component of any intelligent, comprehensive plan to address shootings, especially those that are taking

place here in the city of Toronto. I think we owe it to our young people in particular to take guns off the streets, and I can't think of anything more powerful in that regard than a handgun ban.'"

(Dalton McGuinty, Hansard, Dec. 8, 2005)

"We, the undersigned, respectfully disagree with Mr. McGuinty and petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to take action on