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

June 20, 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-Jun-20 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 20 June 2006 Mardi 20 juin 2006

ESTIMATES

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

CHIEF EAN ALGAR

ROUGE PARK

PORTUGUESE CANADIAN COMMUNITY

EDUCATION FUNDING

EVENTS IN HAMILTON WEST

NATIVE LAND DISPUTE

TOURISM

PREMIER'S VISIT

VISITORS

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

ANNUAL REPORTS, OFFICE OF THE INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

MINING INDUSTRY

HEALTH PROMOTION /

PROMOTION DE LA SANTÉ

MINING INDUSTRY

HEALTH PROMOTION

MINING INDUSTRY

HEALTH PROMOTION

AUDITOR GENERAL

AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR

LE VÉRIFICATEUR GÉNÉRAL

AUDITOR GENERAL

AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR

LE VÉRIFICATEUR GÉNÉRAL

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES /

POLITIQUES FISCALES

FÉDÉRALES-PROVINCIALES

ORAL QUESTIONS

NATIVE LAND DISPUTE

ENVIRONMENTAL BILL OF RIGHTS

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

BAIL VIOLATIONS

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

EDUCATION FUNDING /

SUBVENTIONS DESTINÉES

À L'ÉDUCATION

NIPISSING UNIVERSITY

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

GLOBAL SUPPLY MANAGEMENT

BAIL VIOLATIONS

ENVIRONMENTAL BILL OF RIGHTS

VISITOR

PETITIONS

SCHOOL FACILITIES

IDENTITY THEFT

ORGAN DONATION

LONG-TERM CARE

FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

EDUCATION FUNDING

GO TRANSIT TUNNEL

EDUCATION FUNDING

ORDERS OF THE DAY

RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LA LOCATION

À USAGE D'HABITATION

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

ESTIMATES

Hon. Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): Mr. Speaker, I have a message from the Honourable the

Lieutenant Governor, signed by his own hand.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The Lieutenant Governor transmits estimates of certain sums required for the services of the province for

the year ending March 31, 2007, and recommends them to the Legislative Assembly.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

CHIEF EAN ALGAR

Mr. Cameron Jackson (Burlington): On Friday, June 2, residents of Halton region assembled to pay tribute to the outstanding contributions to our

community by our beloved Halton Police Chief, Ean Algar. His 38-year policing career has been recognized for outstanding leadership, for incredible sensitivity and for understanding on all of the

major issues facing police services for the men and women who serve with distinction under his watch -- sensitivity to the needs of cultural diversity by developing the province's first outreach

programs and open-door policies; sensitivity to the needs of victims of violence, especially women and children; and sensitivity to the needs of seniors, all too often the targets of fraud

artists.

As the first officer to rise through the ranks to become police chief, growing up in Halton, Ean recognized the importance of police understanding the needs of a

changing community, and he actively participated in making it safer, better and more tolerant. As one tribute stated, "Ean Algar is the gold standard for leadership and an outstanding model of

inclusion and partnership."

On behalf of the citizens of Halton region, we want to pay a special thank-you to Chief Ean Algar and to his beautiful wife, Suzanne, and their family for his

inspired leadership and their selfless support and the many contributions he made to make Halton a safer and better place for all of us to live.

ROUGE PARK

Mr. Tony C. Wong (Markham): On June 3, I had the privilege of attending the Rouge Park Wetland grand opening and greenbelt celebration. This

environmental initiative is yet another example of our government's bold leadership and vision in recognizing that we must protect and do everything we can to preserve our vulnerable green

spaces.

The benefits of protecting and preserving our natural heritage, like the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve, are endless. My visit included a tour of the

wetland and a hike up Beare Hill. From Beare Hill, I could feel the beautiful expanse of the Rouge Duffins greenbelt stretching from Lake Ontario to the Oak Ridges moraine. I can tell you, from

experience, the view is awesome.

Over the past few years, Friends of the Rouge Watershed have worked with municipal, provincial, federal, youth and community partners to convert an old gravel

pit into a beautiful and habitat-rich 12-acre wetland in the heart of Rouge Park. This government's creation of a 1.8-million-acre greenbelt to limit urban growth has helped make this natural

habitat possible.

Over the summer months, I will remind myself and encourage others to make simpler and cleaner choices that will contribute to the preservation of our

environment. I welcome you to visit Rouge Park to experience for yourself the great things this government, our youth and community volunteers have done to build a healthier, greener Ontario.

PORTUGUESE CANADIAN COMMUNITY

Mr. Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): On June 10 of each year, Ontarians celebrate Portuguese history and heritage on Portugal Day in the month of

June, designated by the Celebration of Portuguese Heritage Act, 2001,

an act I supported and voted for.

I was honoured to join in the celebration with the large Portuguese population in Cambridge a couple of weeks ago, enjoying the parade and flag raising. Now I

stand in this place and recognize the 50th anniversary of 10 Portuguese pioneers in Cambridge. In 1956, 10 young men -- Augusto Moitoso, Antonio Pereira, Ernesto Rebelo, Gilberto Inacio, Jose

Oliveira, Jose Da Silva, Jose Santos, Jose Silveira, Manuel Duarte and Manuel Da Silva -- left their homeland of Portugal to come to Canada and Cambridge, which today they and their families call

home.

On July 8 and 9, these men will be honoured at Our Lady of Fatima Church in Cambridge. Their hard work, sacrifice and dedication to provide their loved ones with

a life of freedom, stability and opportunity is to be commended. They forged a trail for their families and thousands of other Portuguese immigrants in Cambridge.

I want to thank these men, who have made Cambridge and Ontario a better place to live, work and raise a family.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): The government continues to claim that schools are adequately funded. If schools are being adequately

funded, why are parents at Keys Public School in the Renfrew County District School Board being asked to provide the following basics to grade 7 and 8 students out of their own pockets? "During the

first week of September, please provide your child with a $13 cheque, payable to `Keys Public School.'" Here are the supplies they're being asked to bring: pencils, approximately 20, two per month;

erasers, good quality, approximately five, one every two months; pencil sharpener with container; ball-point pens; glue sticks; white-out; scissors; calculator, solar; pencil crayons; markers,

water-soluble; ruler; reinforcements; protractor and compass; two pencil cases; five Duo-Tangs; Bristol board; computer disks for saving computer assignments; and on and on.

We also have a list from T. W. Morison Public School in the Renfrew County District School Board for parents of grade 1 to 4 students. They have to bring:

pencils; erasers; pencil sharpener with container; ball-point pens; glue sticks; white-out; scissors; calculator; Bristol board; two Hilroy notebooks/cahiers; five computer disks for saving

computer assignments; and so on. You get the drift.

When will this government come up with a funding model that does not require parents to subsidize their children's education --

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

EVENTS IN HAMILTON WEST

Ms. Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): I rise in the House today to bring two wonderful stories from Hamilton. First, 31 female rowers from St.

Mary's Catholic Secondary School are number one in the nation. On June 4, St. Mary's Crusaders won the Canadian Secondary Schools' Rowing Association Regatta and were awarded the Hanlan Boat Club

trophy. This is the second year in a row for the St. Mary's women's rowing crew to take home this championship trophy, awarded to the top women's rowing program in the country.

Head coach Kevin Monaco, from St. Mary's Catholic Secondary School, is proud of the program and credits its success to a combination of physical education,

rowing instruction and dedicated athletes.

I also want to congratulate the team of five girls who took home two gold medals in two different races: Brittany Furtado, Brianne Misner, Julie VanBerkel, Julia

Thomson and coxie Jennifer Freeman. Hard work, dedication and a commitment to working together make this St. Mary's rowing team a champion.

Honourable mentions to other Hamilton teams participating in the regatta include: Westdale Secondary School, Hillfield-Strathallan College, Bishop Tonnas and

Bishop Ryan Catholic Secondary School.

These are great, great students in Hamilton, and we really commend their sincere dedication and effort.

NATIVE LAND DISPUTE

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): Welcome to Dalton Creek Estates, coming soon to a community near you. First Caledonia, next Burtch;

who knows: Townsend, South Cayuga, Brantford, the region of Waterloo?

Under the Places to Grow Act, Caledonia is the first community to host Dalton Creek Estates. Don't go to Dalton Creek Estates if you want to escape Premier

McGuinty's weak leadership. Just recently, he bought the whole development at a secret price.

Dalton Creek is a gated community, despite government rhetoric to the contrary. But don't let the gates fool you: Things can get ugly. The rule of law does not

apply. Premier McGuinty negotiates, at taxpayers' expense, from a position of weakness despite six warrants outstanding and barricades still up.

Located at the south end of Caledonia, Dalton Creek Estates is facing economic hardship. Business is down; neighbouring subdivisions feel the stress and tension

and are exposed to violence and mayhem.

There are no phones or TVs at Dalton Creek Estates, but that's part of the broader policy being promoted by Premier McGuinty: no communication of any kind. And

if you don't like the landlords running Dalton Creek Estates, too bad for you, because the question remains: Does anyone know who's in charge? And if someone is in charge, how would we know?

There's no communication and there's no leadership.

TOURISM

Mrs. Carol Mitchell (Huron-Bruce): I'm very pleased to rise today to speak about this government's recent fun pass announcement. The 2006 More

to Discover fun pass, distributed to every elementary school student across the province, contains one free admission to 15 provincial attractions across Ontario and a discount on daily vehicle

parking permits to any of our provincial parks.

In my riding of Huron-Bruce, that means children and their parents can enjoy a discounted parking rate at Point Farms Provincial Park north of Goderich,

MacGregor Point Provincial Park south of Port Elgin, and Inverhuron Provincial Park outside of Tiverton. Last summer, this government officially opened the overnight camping portion of Inverhuron

after 29 years of closure.

The fun pass will help to attract many new tourists to the area each day, and in turn will be a boost to our local economy. I hope everyone takes advantage of

the wonderful opportunity to discover what this great province has to offer and takes the time to travel through the most beautiful riding in Ontario, that being Huron-Bruce.

M. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): Lundi matin, j'ai eu le plaisir de me joindre à mes collègues l'honorable Sandra Pupatello,

ministre de l'Éducation, l'honorable Madeleine Meilleur, ministre des Services sociaux et communautaires et ministre déléguée aux Affaires francophones, et député

Jean-Marc Lalonde pour une annonce qui va contribuer à la réussite des élèves francophones de l'Ontario.

l'Ontario pour appuyer l'amélioration continue des résultats des élèves francophones de la province. Il s'agit d'une augmentation de 34 $ millions, ou de 3,5 %, pour

appuyer le rendement scolaire de près de 90 000 élèves francophones en Ontario. Cet investissement va non seulement assurer la qualité de l'éducation en langue

Enfin, le gouvernement de monsieur McGuinty veut renforcer les communautés francophones de l'Ontario. C'est pour cela que nous continuerons de soutenir et

J'étais très heureux de me joindre à mes collègues pour cette annonce. J'anticipe davantage de résultats positifs grâce au soutien

PREMIER'S VISIT

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): This past Friday, Premier McGuinty spent some time with me in Cornwall in my riding of

Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh, and what a day it was. We visited Viscount Alexander Public School, where I began my teaching career in 1969, and Cornwall Collegiate and Vocational School, the

school I attended for my high school years, which this year is celebrating its bicentennial. The Premier dialogued with students, commending them for their dedication and inspiring them with the

simple message that with a strong education, anything is possible. He met with community leaders and townsfolk, sharing in their spirit of possibility and reaffirming his commitment to the

community through his words and actions.

With his visit, Premier McGuinty has energized my constituents. They can feel that the sky's the limit for Cornwall. With such news recently received on 90%

funding for Cornwall and Winchester hospitals, financial supports for our schools to reduce class sizes and raise test scores, and the $6 million for the ethanol facility planned in my riding, my

constituents understand that their government and their Premier are supporting them 100%.

The visit last Friday was a boost to my constituents and to those who work so hard. Those community leaders, especially those who work on municipal councils,

have worked hard. My constituents have told me to tell you what a great leader and role model our Premier is and that he will always be welcome in Cornwall and throughout the riding of

Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh.

VISITORS

Mrs. Maria Van Bommel (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I beg your indulgence while I introduce my daughter Amanda

Shelly and my granddaughter Grace, who have come to visit with us. They're in the members' gallery right here.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I'm pleased to introduce a young woman, Ana Bredova, from Michalovce,

Slovakia, here visiting her aunt Margita Galat and her uncle Branislav Galat.

Hon. Jim Watson (Minister of Health Promotion): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I'd like to point out in the Legislature three of our great

summer interns working at Health Promotion: Paulo, Brian and Jana -- their very first time visiting us here and seeing us in action. Welcome.

MOTIONS

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 Tuesday, June 20, 2006, for the purpose of considering government business.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Mr. Bradley has moved government notice of motion number 176. Is it the pleasure of the House that the

motion carry?

All those in favour will say "aye."

All those opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the nays have it -- the ayes have it. I'm sorry.

Interjections.

The Speaker: In my opinion, the ayes have it.

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): You can't do that.

The Speaker: Yes, I can. Call in the members. There 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

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Brownell, Jim

Cansfield, Donna H.

Colle, Mike

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Elliott, Christine

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Jackson, Cameron

Jeffrey, Linda

Klees, Frank

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, Dave

MacLeod, Lisa

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Mauro, Bill

McMeekin, Ted

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Munro, Julia

Orazietti, David

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Racco, Mario G.

Ramal, Khalil

Rinaldi, Lou

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Scott, Laurie

Sergio, Mario

Sterling, Norman W.

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tory, John

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Witmer, Elizabeth

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

Bisson, Gilles

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Murdoch, Bill

Prue, Michael

Tabuns, Peter

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 60; the nays are 7.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

ANNUAL REPORTS, OFFICE OF THE INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that I have today laid upon the table the annual report of the Office of the

Integrity Commissioner for the period April 1, 2005, to March 31, 2006.

I further beg to inform the House that I have today laid upon the table the seventh annual report from the lobbyists registration office, Office of the

Integrity Commissioner, with respect to the administration of the Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998, for the period April 1, 2005, to March 31, 2006.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

MINING INDUSTRY

Hon. Rick Bartolucci (Minister of Northern Development and Mines): I am very pleased to rise in the House today to inform members that a new,

brilliant

chapter in Ontario's colourful and prolific mining history was opened yesterday with the official launch of construction of De Beers Canada Victor Project, Ontario's first diamond

mine.

I was honoured to join Premier Dalton McGuinty, Minister David Ramsay, Minister Chris Bentley, representatives of the Attawapiskat First Nation and officials

of De Beers Canada in the ceremonial start of construction of the mine, located approximately 90 kilometres west of the community of Attawapiskat on the coast of James Bay.

From a statistical perspective, the Victor Project is truly remarkable. When it goes into production in 2008, the mine is expected to produce six million

karats of diamonds during its life. According to De Beers estimates, its total investment into the mine is approximately $1 billion. The mine will employ about 600 people during construction and

375 people during production. De Beers anticipates that this project will create a $6.7-billion ripple through the provincial economy, much of it in northern Ontario.

While the numbers are impressive, the Victor project is, in my mind, more about people. I am thinking particularly about the potential that it has to greatly

benefit the people of Attawapiskat and other aboriginal communities in the area.

The evolution of the Victor project has been marked by extensive and forthright consultations with local stakeholders. In fact, there were more than 100

meetings with coastal First Nations communities to discuss the impact of the operation. The pinnacle of those discussions was the ratification by members of the Attawapiskat First Nation of an

impacts benefits agreement. The agreement covers a wide range of issues, including education and training, employment, workplace conditions, business opportunities, environmental protection, social

and cultural protection, and significant financial considerations.

Communication is the essence of understanding. I commend De Beers Canada and the First Nations communities for developing a dialogue and a basis for mutual

trust. Together, they have built a foundation for a project that will minimize impacts and maximize benefits for those communities.

The Victor project has also been marked by exemplary co-ordination between various provincial and federal agencies. Staff from both the provincial and federal

levels of government worked tirelessly and in unison to ensure that permitting and environmental assessments were met and carried out in an expeditious way.

The road to Ontario's first diamond mine has necessarily been a long one. A great deal of effort, consultation and investment is now being rewarded. As Ontario

joins the exclusive group of diamond-producing jurisdictions in the world, I am optimistic that other diamond deposits will be discovered in the north.

The Ministry of Northern Development and Mines has been working diligently to encourage and support the search for diamonds. We have developed programs and

services such as indicator mineral studies, inventory studies, bedrock mapping, airborne geophysical surveys and field trips to assist in identifying potential diamond exploration targets. Our

geoscientists provide knowledgeable advice to clients so they can efficiently and effectively target their exploration resources.

The Victor project has also been a catalyst for diamond exploration in the province. Spending has climbed from $5 million in 1998 to more than $45 million in

2005, and more than 30 companies are exploring for diamonds throughout the province.

The McGuinty government continues investing in programs and services to ensure that mineral exploration and development opportunities continue to thrive for

everyone. This includes launching Ontario's first mineral development strategy, which will enhance the mineral sector's global competitiveness while opening new opportunities for all Ontarians;

investing $10 million in Laurentian University's Centre for Excellence in Mining Innovation; investing $15 million over three years for geological mapping in the far north; providing ongoing,

one-stop Internet access to provincial mining-related services; and maintaining one of the most favourable tax systems and most attractive business climates in the world.

For most of the 20th century, diamond deposits in Ontario have been nothing more than a gleam in prospectors' eyes. Today they are very real, and they are

bringing the sparkle of prosperity to Ontario's north and to the rest of the province.

HEALTH PROMOTION /

PROMOTION DE LA SANTÉ

Hon. Jim Watson (Minister of Health Promotion): I rise in the House today to put before you this government's action plan for healthy eating

and active living.

When Dr. Sheela Basrur rang the alarm bell on the issues of obesity and diabetes in her Healthy Weights, Healthy Lives report, she challenged many sectors in

this province to take action. For instance, there has been a 300% increase in obesity rates amongst children in the past 15 years. Dr. Basrur challenged all of us to work together to find ways to

improve health in Ontario. The action plan that I released today is the Ontario government's response to Dr. Basrur's very thoughtful report.

À l'aide de cette stratégie bien pensée, nous travaillerons en étroite collaboration avec la collectivité, le secteur privé, les

ministères qui sont nos partenaires et d'autres organismes afin d'aider les Ontariens à améliorer leur santé, à devenir plus actifs physiquement et à faire de

meilleurs choix. Je suis vraiment très enthousiaste au sujet de ce plan d'action.

This is the first time that Ontario has integrated healthy eating and physical activity into one strategy -- two factors which, together, have a significant

impact on a person's health.

Our government's goal is to help Ontario families to live healthy, long lives. Good health is, of course, a shared responsibility. Our government is committed

to healthy Ontarians in a healthy Ontario, but we cannot do it alone. Our action plan is to call our partners -- government bodies and the private sector, community groups and sport and recreation

organizations, institutions and health professionals, and, of course, most importantly, families and individuals -- to work together toward this goal.

It was my honour this morning to share the podium at the YMCA in downtown Toronto with Dr. David Bach, president of the Ontario Medical Association, and Mr.

Rocco Rossi, president and CEO of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada.

We were joined by literally dozens of other partners who came out in support of the plan: the Canadian Cancer Society, the Canadian Diabetes Association, the

Boys and Girls Clubs of Canada, the Dairy Farmers of Ontario and the YM/YWCA, to name just a few.

These two organizations in particular, the OMA and the Heart and Stroke Foundation, exemplify the true nature of effective partnerships and organizations that

have taken on the fight against obesity as their own cause as well.

C'est parce qu'une alimentation saine et un mode de vie actif sont beaucoup plus qu'une question de choix individuel. Il s'agit de travailler ensemble selon

une approche coordonnée afin que nous puissions y arriver.

J'aimerais remercier nos partenaires pour l'aide qu'ils ont déjà apportée aux Ontariens afin de les faire progresser sur la voie d'une meilleure

santé.

The action plan lays out the plans for a pilot program -- for instance, to deliver fruits and vegetables to students in northern Ontario -- modelled on a

similar program in the UK.

The action plan introduces our goal of working with dieticians of Ontario to develop a web- and telephone-based advisory service on nutrition. An example is a

dial-a-dietician program that has been very successful in British Columbia. We don't have to reinvent these programs; we can share them from other jurisdictions.

The action plan introduces a recognition program for schools to acknowledge efforts to promote healthy eating and physical activity in Ontario schools. I look

forward to working with Minister Pupatello to roll out that program in the fall.

Our plan builds on a strong foundation of strategies already under way. These include our Active 2010 strategy, the Ontario trails strategy, the heart health

program, the communities in action fund -- many members are well aware of how successful that program has been in getting small amounts of seed money into physical activity programs across the

province -- the chronic disease prevention programs delivered on our behalf through public health units, and a variety of public education campaigns, including encouraging the federal government to

revitalize the very successful Participaction program. I look forward to dealing with Ministers Chong and Clement on this and on sport infrastructure matters tomorrow and Thursday at the

federal-provincial-territorial sports meeting.

The action plan I announced today also builds on the success of the government's Smoke-Free Ontario Act and the lessons we learned in making this landmark

legislation a reality.

Grâce à cette loi, nous avons compris l'importance de l'engagement et de la sensibilisation de la population concernant les menaces à la

santé. Nous savons que les Ontariens sont désireux de faire des choix santé et ils le feront lorsqu'on leur donnera les bonnes informations et lorsque nous aurons tous conjugué

nos efforts pour atteindre cet objectif commun, une meilleure santé.

Our action plan invests $10 million this year in a phased-in approach to healthy eating and active living in areas that have the greatest need and potential

for change.

In

summary, our priorities are to grow healthy children and youth, build healthy communities, champion healthy public policy, and promote public awareness and

engagement.

Since the inception of the Ministry of Health Promotion, created by Premier McGuinty one year ago next week, our government has championed health promotion and

served as a catalyst for healthy eating and active living across the government and across Ontario. We can begin to overcome barriers to healthy eating and active living. I look forward to members'

input and support of this very ambitious, progressive and exciting plan.

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

MINING INDUSTRY

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): It is indeed good news that Ontario is opening its first diamond mine, west of Attawapiskat, by De

Beers. I would like to congratulate De Beers and the First Nation communities in the Attawapiskat area. This mine is certainly going to provide a lot of hope for the Attawapiskat aboriginal

communities and possibilities for jobs and other economic benefits.

As has been pointed out, there's a long time involved in developing a mine such as this, and huge investments. I know De Beers has invested about $1 billion to

make this mine a possibility. The mine involved exploration, diamond drilling, establishing the ore body, then determining the economics of the particular mine, and, in this case as well,

negotiating an impacts benefits agreement with the First Nations in the area. So it certainly didn't happen overnight. I would like to thank the northern development and mines staff involved in

this whole process. I know that when I was up at the opening of the North American Palladium mine, the NDM staff were complimented, in the case of that mine, with the work they did in expediting

the opening of the mine.

As was pointed out in the minister's statement, "The road to Ontario's first diamond mine has necessarily been a long one," so we should give credit where

credit is due, and that is to the programs and the ministers involved, they being the former Minister of Northern Development and Mines, Tim Hudak, former minister Jim Wilson, and former minister

Dan Newman, who implemented such programs, and there were some key ones that brought about this mine; for example, the new remote mines that were provided with a 10-year tax exemption by the former

PC government, and reduced tax rates to encourage mine development in remote parts of the province.

I would say that that was a critical part of attracting De Beers to spend the huge dollars involved in investing to make this mine possible. We brought in

programs like freezing taxes and fees on mines, reducing the mining tax rate by 50% and providing reduction of corporate income tax for resource companies. We implemented a new flow-through tax

regime for mineral exploration and provided other programs, like the $29-million Operation Treasure Hunt, a geoscience initiative to ensure that high-quality geological data were available to spur

on other new mines. We also initiated a four-year, $8-million innovation technology program and contributed $1.6 million through the NOHFC to set up the world-class innovation centre in Sudbury

through MIRARCO.

Those are just some of the programs that the former ministers, Mr. Hudak, Mr. Newman and Mr. Wilson, put into place that very much contributed toward the

opening of this new diamond mine west of Attawapiskat.

I hope this is the first of many diamond mines to open in northern Ontario. It will certainly be a great benefit to the province and especially to those First

Nations communities in the immediate area. I look forward to more announcements of more new mine openings.

HEALTH PROMOTION

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): With regard to the Minister of Health Promotion's announcement, it's pretty hard to be against

motherhood and apple pie and giving millions of dollars to worthwhile groups, but let me make a few comments. First of all, the provinces have the responsibility for delivering the health care

system, and it's an expensive health care system. Heretofore, or before this government took office, the federal government was in large part the purveyor of health promotion. They did it with a

great deal of aplomb, and this present federal government, under Stephen Harper, has done even more with regard to health promotion, in giving a $500 grant per child for children to actually be

involved in active recreation.

The minister says that he is going to encourage the federal government to be involved in Participaction, and I think that's a good program, but why not put all

of the responsibility for health promotion in the right hands -- the federal government's -- save $100 million, and spend it on hip replacements, knee replacements and all those things that our

population needs --

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

MINING INDUSTRY

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): I want to take this opportunity to congratulate the community of Attawapiskat, which has worked very

hard to be able to deal with how to become the neighbours and hopefully the benefactors of what will be the first diamond mine to operate in the province of Ontario.

I want to say to the House that this is a project that has been a long time coming. As I've said in the House before, the diamonds were there long before any

of us got elected, and De Beers has been exploring in that area and others for the better part of 20 years, so it's not as if this project has come out of nowhere.

I've got to give some credit to De Beers, because they said to the community up front that they would not establish a mine operation until such time as they

had negotiated a benefits impacts agreement with the community of Attawapiskat. They held to that promise. The community, through a lot of discussion, a lot of soul-searching and trying to figure

out exactly what a benefits impacts agreement should look like, finally negotiated the agreement and had it ratified in the community not so long ago. So I say to the community of Attawapiskat --

to Chief Mike Carpenter, the former chief, Theresa Hall, band council and others -- congratulations.

I do say to this government, however, that one of the key components that has not been dealt with is the issue of training. De Beers has tried the best it

could as a mining company to provide opportunities to the people of Attawapiskat and surrounding areas to participate in training in order to qualify to get the jobs that will be created there, and

unfortunately it's not enough. We need the province to do its bit, and this government has been very reluctant, as was the previous government, to get involved in a very serious way when it comes

to training in order to ensure that the people of Attawapiskat and area, the Mushkegowuk Cree, are able to benefit from the jobs that will be created during both the construction phase of that

project and the operation.

I say to the Minister of Northern Development and Mines, it was interesting, however, that in his own backyard just recently, Allison Dempster from CBC and

others were trying to get the minister to pronounce himself on what he plans to do or what he thinks about when it comes to the Xstrata deal that's going on on the takeover of Falconbridge. The

minister at the time said, "Oh, I can't comment, no, because if I do, the stock market will be affected. I've got to hide behind something called the sub judice rule." I just remind the Minister of

Northern Development and Mines that in fact that is not the case. In fact, I've got an opinion here, a legal opinion, that says the following: that the minister can comment if he should so choose.

Why he doesn't -- he does what Liberals do best -- is because he's trying to stay on both sides of the bid at the same time.

To the point, it says, "Ontario's securities laws do not address the subject of ministerial comments or government announcements that might influence the stock

markets." And this is the important part: "Such statements attract legal liability only" -- the word is "only" -- "if they are made with fraudulent intentions."

So I say to the minister: The people of Sudbury and the people of Ontario want to know where you stand on the Xstrata deal, and we're asking you to come clean

and to say where you're at on that particular deal.

HEALTH PROMOTION

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): The announcement made by the Minister of Health Promotion today is billed as the government's response to

Dr. Basrur's report, which was released on November 25, 2004. It's worth noting that the report was produced by Dr. Basrur in her capacity as the chief medical officer of health for the province of

Ontario. She was appointed by the Liberals. I supported that appointment. She also serves as the assistant deputy minister for the public health division at the Ministry of Health. So why did it

take almost 19 months for this government to finally respond to Dr. Basrur's report? I have to say that the McGuinty government did not put much of a priority on her report or on her ability if it

took them 19 long months to actually respond to what she had to say.

In truth, she did some very good work and made a number of recommendations that affect not only the government of Ontario but the health system, the food

industry, workplaces, school boards, individuals, parents and caregivers. We hope that the government's announcement today actually does respond to some of the recommendations she made with respect

to the Ontario government's role and responsibility here. We need to see which of these initiatives are actually new, because I see a number of initiatives outlined that are previous announcements

that essentially have nothing to do with Dr. Basrur's report.

I also hope that there's going to be sufficient funding to actually support those new initiatives that we hope are in the announcement today. I should just

point out, the pilot project the government's talking about to ensure that northern students get access to fresh food and vegetables: If this includes students in aboriginal communities in northern

Ontario, you'd better hope you have a lot of money to do that, because prices in northern stores are four and five times what they are anywhere else in Ontario.

Finally, we know that a number of recommendations have been made with respect to nutrition by both the Ontario Public Health Association and the Ontario

Society of Nutrition Professionals in Public Health, and I would hope that we are going to get a government response to those recommendations, which were made in some cases almost two years ago as

well.

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: Last week, I introduced Bill 129,

An Act to amend the Auditor

General Act. I explained to the Legislature that this act is put in place with the intention of retaining Mr. McCarter as the Auditor General of this province until at least December 2007. It was

necessary to make amendments to the Auditor General Act. Therefore, at this time, I now seek unanimous consent to proceed with orders for second and third reading of Bill 129 and for the questions

to be put immediately without debate or amendment.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Mr. Sterling seeks unanimous consent to proceed with the orders for second and third reading of Bill 129,

An Act to amend the Auditor General Act, and for the questions to be put immediately without debate or amendment. Agreed? Agreed.

AUDITOR GENERAL

AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR

LE VÉRIFICATEUR GÉNÉRAL

Mr. Sterling moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 129,

An Act to amend the Auditor General Act / Projet de loi 129, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur le vérificateur général.

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

AUDITOR GENERAL

AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR

LE VÉRIFICATEUR GÉNÉRAL

Mr. Sterling moved third reading of the following bill:

Bill 129,

An Act to amend the Auditor General Act / Projet de loi 129, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur le vérificateur général.

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

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

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent

to move a motion without notice respecting the issue of the fiscal imbalance, and for each party to be allowed to speak to the motion for up to five minutes, following which the Speaker shall put

every question necessary to dispose of the motion.

The Speaker: Mr. Bradley seeks unanimous consent to move a motion without notice respecting the issue of the fiscal imbalance, and for each

party to be allowed to speak to the motion for up to five minutes, following which the Speaker shall put every question necessary to dispose of the motion. Agreed? Agreed.

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES /

POLITIQUES FISCALES

FÉDÉRALES-PROVINCIALES

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I would like to move the following motion:

That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario recognizes and affirms the importance of the province of Ontario continuing to play a constructive leadership role

within Confederation, as it has done since 1867; and

That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario recognizes that the fiscal imbalance exists; and

That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario calls on the federal government to address the fiscal imbalance in a manner that is fair to all Canadians.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Mr. McGuinty has moved:

That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario recognizes and affirms the importance of the province of Ontario continuing to play a constructive leadership role

within Confederation, as it has done since 1867; and

That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario recognizes that the fiscal imbalance exists; and

That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario calls on the federal government to address the fiscal imbalance in a manner that is fair to all Canadians.

Debate?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Pursuant to the motion, I rise to speak on the importance of solving the

fiscal imbalance in a way that is fair to all Canadians, including those who live in Ontario. Solving the fiscal imbalance is a very real and a very important challenge facing Canada today. It

deeply affects the lives of all Canadians and the future of our great country. As members of this Legislature, we all know that Canada succeeds when Ontario succeeds, and Ontario families are

depending on us to stand up for them, their province and their country.

Les familles ontariennes veulent ce que veulent toutes les autres familles canadiennes : de bonnes écoles, d'excellents hôpitaux et leur juste

part de succès au sein d'une économie forte. Elles -- c'est-à-dire nos familles -- travaillent fort, observent les règles et paient leurs impôts. En retour, elles

s'attendent à ce que leur gouvernement investisse dans l'éducation, les soins de santé et les fondements d'une bonne économie, ce qui inclut des routes, des autoroutes et

d'autres infrastructures.

Ontario families simply want what other Canadian families want: good schools, excellent hospitals and a fair shot at success in a strong economy. They work

hard, play by the rules and pay their taxes. In return, they expect their government to invest in their education, their health care and the foundations of a strong Ontario economy, including roads

and highways and other infrastructure.

But right now, Ontario families simply aren't getting their fair share of federal funding for these important programs and services. For example, this year

Ontario will receive $86 less per person for health care and education compared to Canadians living in other provinces. That means Ontarians are receiving over $1 billion less than they should

under the Canada health and social transfers. At the same time, the federal government is sitting on large budget surpluses. It has more money than it needs to meet its responsibilities, while the

provinces and territories don't have enough to meet ours.

So when Prime Minister Harper acknowledged the fiscal imbalance between the federal government and the provinces and territories, Ontario families had a right

to be pleased. They had a right to assume that a fair share of their money would be coming back to Ontario so it could be invested in their kids' school, their mom's health care, or the roadway or

transit system they use every day.

Yet two proposals that the federal government is considering recommend fixing the fiscal imbalance by putting more money into equalization. This would only

help some Canadians, not all Canadians. Given that equalization has grown by 30% in the last four years and that it is scheduled to grow at 3.5% every year, there is no need to further enrich

equalization at this time.

People in Ontario have a strong, passionate, abiding sense of their responsibility to Canada. We're proud to pay $4.9 billion into equalization this year to

support quality education and health care services in other provinces.

Venir en aide à autrui est une valeur canadienne fondamentale. Mais nous avons besoin d'une solution au déséquilibre fiscal qui traite de

manière équitable tous les canadiens et canadiennes.

Helping others is a fundamental Canadian value. But we need a solution to the fiscal imbalance that treats all Canadians equally, so we can invest more of

Ontarians' hard-earned dollars in the things that are most important to them, like their schools, their hospitals, their roads and their public transit, because when we build a stronger Ontario, we

can build a stronger Canada.

The members of this House need to speak with one voice to our fellow Canadians. We need to work together to solve the fiscal imbalance in a way that helps all

Canadians succeed and prosper, so we can compete and win in a global economy and so we can ensure the best quality of life for all our people. Solving the fiscal imbalance is not about us in this

place. It's about the people of Ontario and their fellow Canadians right across this magnificent country. They all deserve fair funding for the programs and services that matter most to all of

us.

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): I rise to speak in support of this motion, which reaffirms the support of the Progressive

Conservative Party for the principle of addressing the fiscal imbalance. Simply put -- and I think the Premier said this in different words -- a strong, viable and united Canada requires a strong,

viable Ontario. I've also always been of the view -- I think we all have -- that a strong, viable Ontario requires a strong, viable and united Canada.

The interconnection between the strength of Ontario and the strength and unity of Canada is deep and important, and I believe must guide us both in the

substance and in the tone of our approach to this issue. That is why, in building a consensus on the wording of this resolution, we asked for wording to be included that recognized the constructive

leadership role that Ontario has played in Confederation from the beginning, and I think it was an important inclusion.

Lorsque nous voterons pour cette résolution, je suis soulagé par le fait que nous ne voterons pas seulement pour l'avancement des intérêts

de l'Ontario, mais également pour reconnaître le fait que nous avons une responsabilité spéciale et historique à travailler pour aborder les aspirations du Canada en

entier. Ceci est bon pour le Canada ainsi que pour l'Ontario.

When we vote on this resolution, I'm comforted by the fact that we'll be voting not just to advance and support Ontario's interests, but also to recognize that

we have a special and historic responsibility to work to address the needs and the aspirations of the rest of Canada as well, because that is good for Canada and because that too is good for

Ontario.

That, of course, is the essence of the words contained in the last paragraph of the motion, namely that the ultimate resolution to the fiscal imbalance should

be fair to all Canadians. To me, that means fair to the needs and aspirations of all of Canada, which must include an arrangement that is fair to Ontario and respects, concurrently, our needs and

aspirations, as well as those of Canadians living in other parts of Canada.

We believe that the achievement of that fair result for all Canadians will require us, as a province, to conduct ourselves in a fair, constructive and

straightforward manner in these discussions. I strongly believe that the fair and constructive putting forward of Ontario's case means we might have to look at doing a few things differently, and I

put these forward in the constructive spirit of this debate.

First, I think we should be careful and conscious of the way in which we make our case. I genuinely believe that while we have to be clear on what we seek and

what can work for both us and for all the rest of Canada, we must also recognize that Canada is a partnership, which means we have to persuade other partners to consider and ultimately to support

our interests at the same time as taking theirs into account. We have to acknowledge and respect as well the needs and aspirations, for example, of our municipal partners.

A recent headline said, "McGuinty Discovers Diplomacy." While I would suggest that it doesn't rank up there with Banting or Columbus, it was a welcome

discovery nonetheless and one that I believe should remain an important part of Ontario's approach going forward.

In the same vein, while we all understand the need to use numbers to make a point, they should be up-to-date numbers; they should bear some relationship to

what we really seek to achieve in these discussions, so that people can distinguish between our positioning and our actual, defensible position as to what we think would be fair for the province of

Ontario.

I base the following comment -- and the preceding one, for that matter -- on what we were told in the public service briefing we were provided with on this

issue. They told us that the $23-billion number often in use is not up to date and confirmed that it's not the number we seek. I would suggest, just as an example, it's probably not a number we

should continue to use.

Secondly, I think we should look back at the times when Ontario has been successful in the past in not just making a case, but in achieving real results for

Ontario and for Canada. At those points in time, Ontario was a leader in putting forward thoughtful, professional proposals, which were meant to find resolution, not to identify conflict. We have

the resources and we have the expertise in our public service in this province to put forward those kinds of proposals, and I think we should do so.

Third, I think we can go beyond having a debate on a resolution once in a while in this House and fully engage members of the Legislature on all sides to help

formulate and put forward Ontario's case. I think it strengthens our case not to have it seen as one person's or one party's cause, but Ontario's cause.

Nation-building in Canada has never been easy. Why should we expect that it would be easy now to create something as unique and spectacular as we have in

Ontario and Canada? It was a difficult challenge in the past, but it was done. So our party commits itself here today, yes, to doing our job as the official opposition to hold the government to

account on this issue and on other issues, but at the same time never losing sight of our overarching responsibility to build and maintain a strong Ontario within a strong and united Canada.

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I'm pleased to participate in this all-party resolution today. New Democrats support a Canadian

fiscal framework that treats Ontarians and indeed all Canadians fairly.

One year ago, my federal colleague Jack Layton used the vulnerability of a Liberal minority government to force amendments to the federal budget that made

important gains in post-secondary education funding, housing funding, transit funding and funding for the environment for Ontario and for other provinces.

This is an issue which has some history. I think it's important to remember some of that history and to acknowledge what this is all about. In the federal

budgets of 1994, 1995 and 1996, the federal government of the day and the federal finance minister of the day made substantial cuts to federal funding for health care, for universities and

colleges, for social assistance and for training and adjustment, and severe cuts to employment insurance.

This hurt all provinces. All provinces across the country found it very difficult to fund health care and education at the post-secondary level. They found it

especially difficult to look after their lowest-income citizens. It was grossly unfair to workers and especially unfair to workers who lost their jobs in Ontario. Every government since then, here

in Ontario and across the country, has struggled to get the federal government to assume more of its share of the responsibility for important things like our health care system, our colleges, our

universities, looking after our lowest-income citizens, and treating workers fairly, especially when they've lost their jobs. We want to see the federal government assume today, and going forward,

more of that responsibility that was cut in the federal budgets of 1994, 1995 and 1996.

I especially want to focus on the issue of employment insurance. In part, I want to focus on it because I hardly ever hear the Premier talk about employment

insurance. But let me tell you just how unfair that system is to Ontario workers. Most people would be shocked to know that only 27% of the workers in Ontario today are eligible for employment

insurance should they lose their jobs. Only 22% of the workers in the city of Toronto are eligible for employment insurance should they lose their jobs. That, to me, speaks of incredible

unfairness. In fact, I'm told that Ontario workers contribute about $1.8 billion more to the employment insurance fund than ever comes back to Ontario workers when they are laid off. I think that

is terribly unfair.

I want to urge the Premier to start raising this issue, because I have not heard him raise this issue yet. You may have your differences with the current

federal government and with the immediately past federal government, and those differences may go on for some time, but it seems to me there is an opportunity here to make a real difference for

Ontario workers, many of whom have lost their jobs. We have lost 100,000 good-paying manufacturing jobs in this province over the last two years. Imagine the surprise of many of those workers when

they find out that they're not eligible for employment insurance under the current system. Imagine the surprise of new Canadians who have come and who have worked and they find out that when they

lose their job, they're not eligible for employment insurance.

We want to see some changes. That's why we are supporting this motion here today.

The Speaker: Mr. McGuinty has moved:

That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario recognizes and affirms the importance of the province of Ontario continuing to play a constructive leadership role

within Confederation, as it has done since 1867; and

That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario recognizes that the fiscal imbalance exists; and

That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario calls on the federal government to address the fiscal imbalance in a manner that is fair to all Canadians.

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

ORAL QUESTIONS

NATIVE LAND DISPUTE

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Premier. Late on Friday, your government announced that it had purchased the

principal piece of property in dispute in Caledonia. No purchase price was disclosed at that time.

We asked then, I understand we asked the Acting Premier yesterday, and now I will ask you: What was the price paid on behalf of the people of Ontario for that

land? Reports have suggested the number may have been as high as 50 million in public taxpayers' dollars. Don't you think the public has the right to know this information? How much will the

government be paying for this piece of land?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): We have undertaken to the vendor of the lands not to make that

information public at this time. Of course, and I say this with sincerity, you can seek that information directly from the vendor, but it's my understanding that they're not prepared to make that

information public at this point in time.

I think that there are heavier, more pressing issues weighing on the minds of Ontarians when it comes to the circumstances at Caledonia. I think they can take

some heart and comfort in knowing that we are making some real, measurable progress in getting barricades down and providing yet more financial assistance to the community.

I know that Minister Cordiano visited the community again just yesterday, I believe. I had a chat myself with the mayor of Haldimand county last week. We are

working together, all parties involved, and, I can say -- and I say this with some pride -- hand in hand with the federal government every single step of the way as we continue to seek a peaceful

resolution.

Mr. Tory: I would agree with the Premier that there are some higher principles that are at stake down there. There's been discussion we've had

here about the rule of law. But there's also the important principle of accountability.

I think the people of Ontario deserve to know how much this part of the Caledonia episode will cost them. They deserve to know what the price tag is. It is not

your money; it is the public's money that we're dealing with here. It belongs to them and it is managed in trust by you and by your ministers on their behalf. As a result I would argue, and we

would argue, that you have no right whatsoever to keep this information from Ontarians.

You're hiding, as you said in your answer, behind the supposed request to keep this secret made by the seller for supposedly competitive reasons. I would ask

you: Since when did the competitive concerns of a particular business in Ontario -- the seller of land -- override the public interest in knowing about the expenditure of millions of their dollars?

I would ask you, will you ensure that this information is immediately made available even if you have to ask the seller -- you're the Premier of Ontario -- if they will agree to have this

information made public, in the public interest?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: No, I will not give an undertaking. Let me quote from a news release put out just recently by Henco Industries Ltd., the

people who own the land. When they were informed that we were going to work with them on an agreement to purchase the land, they said:

"We are encouraged by this news. We appreciate the good-faith negotiations on the part of the province to resolve our issues over the native occupation of our

property since late February. We're also pleased that the government is continuing discussions with the builders who purchased lots in our subdivision, is providing additional funding to help local

businesses in Caledonia, and has committed to help residents most directly affected by the current situation as well as the community at large."

We are working, and we are working well with the community, with the affected parties to resolve this in a manner that is peaceful.

Mr. Tory: No one is taking issue with what can be done to resolve the issue in a peaceful manner. But I'd say, with respect, sir, that if the

landowners were insistent that in the case of a multi-million-dollar deal the details remain secret, you should have said to them, "We cannot negotiate in that manner because we are dealing here

with public money and with the important principle of accountability to the public. There has to be transparency and openness about this magnitude of public dollars."

It is estimated, as I said earlier, that this could cost as much as $50 million, and that's before you take into account what you yourself mentioned a moment

ago: namely, the purchase of other properties. Your own minister responsible for aboriginal affairs said that this won't be the last of these kinds of deals that are made going forward, and I think

that makes it more important than ever that we know what the first deal cost.

Will you commit that you will not enter into any land negotiations in respect of any of these claims whatsoever, including any more on this one, where you will

not put the principle of openness and transparency and public disclosure --

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

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The principals behind that company are two local brothers from the community who put, I think, their life savings in this

project. I thought the members opposite would have wanted to champion some local interests in that regard, but obviously they're taking a different tack.

Let me tell you what else was put out last week by way of a release from Haldimand county: "Haldimand county is pleased with the announcements made today by

Economic Development and Trade Minister Joe Cordiano, minister responsible for aboriginal affairs David Ramsay, and Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister John Gerretsen, publicizing the expansion

of the financial assistance program for businesses in Caledonia, financial relief for residents directly impacted by the situation in Caledonia ... the acquisition of the Douglas Creek Estates

property by the province of Ontario.

"Haldimand county appreciates the measures announced today. These positive steps will greatly assist in the implementation of the recovery phase, not only for

the community of Caledonia but for all of Haldimand county."

ENVIRONMENTAL BILL OF RIGHTS

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question again is for the Premier. I point out that not one of those people thanked you for

keeping the purchase price secret that was paid for with their money.

Premier, you were once quoted as saying, "I think it's perfectly clear that this minister has not assumed her own special responsibility, and that is to

advance the cause of the environment at the cabinet table. It is apparent that nobody on that side of the House has assumed that responsibility, but there is only one person in particular who is

charged with that responsibility, and that's the minister herself." That was you talking about a previous Minister of the Environment.

Premier, what specific efforts were made by your Minister of the Environment, in dealing with your latest energy scheme, to ensure that the Environmental Bill

of Rights was upheld and complied with? What efforts were made by her in those discussions?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Let me tell you a little about the process we've instituted here, and

that was already under way with respect to our energy plan, by way of public consultation.

Leading up to the development of the plan, there were Ontario Power Authority public hearings last year; that was the first opportunity for the public to

participate. Our government then led town halls in 12 communities; that was a second opportunity to participate. We also provided a listing on the Environmental Bill of Rights registry; we've

received responses there. We set up an energy ministry website as well, seeking advice from the public there; that was the fourth opportunity. We're now going to send this plan to the Ontario Power

Authority, which is going to develop the integrated power supply plan. They will be meeting with groups in the public throughout the summer and the fall; that's the fifth opportunity for public

input. The OPA will then send this plan to the Ontario Energy Board, which is a process that takes about one full year; that will be the sixth opportunity. Then each and every project that's to

move ahead by way of new generation will be subject to an environmental assessment.

Those are seven separate opportunities for Ontarians --

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

Mr. Tory: I would say to the Premier that that's a very interesting compendium of meetings, many of which the public didn't even know how to

find, but which had nothing to do with the question, which is what efforts your Minister of the Environment made, who has sworn to uphold the environment as her responsibility, and which you

pointed out, when you used to talk about this in opposition, was her responsibility. What did she do to uphold and to put forward the law, the Environmental Bill of Rights and its requirements in

particular?

Yesterday, the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, an independent and respected officer of this Legislature, berated your government for "escaping its

responsibility to be transparent and accountable" and went on to say that no government in the 12-year history of the Environmental Bill of Rights had tried to pull the type of environmental

skulduggery that your Minister of Environment has allowed to happen here.

Premier, the Environmental Bill of Rights is one of the most important foundations of the Ministry of the Environment. Your job, and that of your minister, is

to uphold that law and to respect that law. Why did you, instead, allow yourself to be bamboozled into skirting that law, and why would your own Minister of the Environment not have objected to

this side-stepping of the law? Why didn't somebody speak up for the Environmental Bill of Rights in the process you just talked about but where you didn't answer my question? Why did nobody speak

up for the Environmental Bill of Rights?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Again, the leader of the official opposition is having difficulty with the fact that he's staring into the face of a

government that is determined to move ahead with a new plan for energy to ensure that by 2025 we have safe, clean, reliable electricity. He wants us to freeze in our tracks.

We've created seven separate opportunities for Ontarians to comment. We think there is ample opportunity, in the past, today and going into the future, with

respect to making sure we get this plan right. The members opposite, somehow, for some reason -- notwithstanding the fact that we find ourselves behind the eight ball in Ontario -- are determined

to grind this to a halt. We are bound and determined to move ahead. There are seven separate opportunities for public comment. We think that is more than adequate.

Mr. Tory: There's still no answer on the Environmental Bill of Rights, and the province of Ontario is frozen in its tracks because of the weak

leadership that began with irresponsible promises you made in the 2003 election. Now, the lack of respect for the Environmental Bill of Rights is simply another example of you and your government

saying one thing before the election and doing exactly the opposite after --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop the clock. Order. I'm having great difficulty hearing the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: One day, you're a steward of the environment and the next day you're finding ways, with your dithering and broken promises and so

on, to skirt the law of the land.

The former Minister of the Environment, Leona Dombrowsky, wrote in an editorial in 2004 that the Environmental Bill of Rights is "one of the most effective

pieces of legislation in Canada" and that "it has done more than just enshrine environmental values in legislation; it has given citizens the means to make their voices heard." She goes on from

there.

As with my previous question on Caledonia, what do you and your government have against transparency, accountability and openness? Why are you not prepared to

be open with the taxpayers of Ontario? Why are you and the Minister of the Environment now ignoring and side-stepping the law in terms of what was required of you to do in this instance under the

Environmental Bill of Rights? Why were you a big advocate for the environment before the election and now, any chance to skirt the law, that's what you find? Why the switch?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: It is just a little bit rich to hear from the leader of the official opposition, representing a party which seemed to go to

great lengths in government to absolutely decimate the Ministry of the Environment. We picked up that Ministry of the Environment, got it off the ground, onto its knees, on its feet and back in the

race. We are proud of the recovery effort we made to the Ministry of the Environment. I'm proud of my Ministers of the Environment, whether they were Jim Bradley, Leona Dombrowsky or Laurel Broten.

When it comes to the environment, I'll put our record up against that previous government's record any day. Seven separate opportunities to comment on our plan -- we look forward to moving ahead

with that plan and receiving those comments.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of the Environment. Minister, yesterday, Ontario's Environmental

Commissioner, an independent, respected, neutral, third-party environmental advocate who is appointed by all of us here in the Legislature, said that you, as Minister of the Environment, were

involved in an unprecedented violation of Ontario's environmental laws. The Environmental Commissioner said that you, as minister, breached the legal requirement of Ontario's bill of rights when

you, the minister, secretly exempted the McGuinty government nuclear mega scheme from a provincial environmental assessment. You failed under the Ontario Environmental Bill of Rights.

My question, Minister, is this: Will you stand up and admit that what you did is wrong, rescind the secret exemption, guarantee that the $40-billion nuclear

mega scheme will go before a thorough and proper environmental assessment under the laws of Ontario, and comply with Ontario's Environmental Bill of Rights, the law of Ontario?

Hon. Laurel C. Broten (Minister of the Environment): As Minister of the Environment, I want to be very clear with Ontarians. Every single

project that will be built in this province, as we do what those governments before have not done and build a new supply of clean, green energy, will be the subject of an environmental process.

That process will take place in their community. They will be able to participate in that process, have their voices heard, raise their issues and concerns, participate close to home, talk about

those issues, and not a single project will be built in this province if I have any concerns that the health or the environment of Ontario is at risk. That's my commitment to the people of Ontario.

That's our obligation: to lead forward to a future without coal, to get windmills built, to get new power supply online, and protect the environment at the same time.

Mr. Hampton: Minister, you can refer to all kinds of issues outside of answering the question, but here's the reality. On June 14 in this

Legislature, you said there was no legal requirement in the Environmental Assessment Act of Ontario for the McGuinty nuclear mega scheme to undergo a provincial environmental assessment. But even

as you spoke the words here in the Legislature, you had signed a secret exemption order on June 12 to enable the McGuinty nuclear mega scheme to escape the legally required provincial environmental

assessment, and at the same time you shirked your responsibility to notify the people of Ontario about your secret regulation, about your secret exemption, even though it's the law of Ontario under

the Environmental Bill of Rights that you do so.

Minister, you have broken and undermined Ontario's environmental laws, not once but twice. How can you --

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

Hon. Ms. Broten: I'll repeat to my friend opposite what I have said in the past. We have been entirely consistent in our approach to this

subject matter. Broad government policy direction is not the appropriate subject matter of an environmental assessment. That's the decision I made with respect to the coal replacement plan. You

didn't have any concerns about that. That's the decision that has been made with respect to the integrated power supply plan, which will be a reflection of that broad government policy.

What will be the subject matter of very vigorous environmental assessment will be every single project that might or might not be built in this province. At

the same time, we have put forward a requirement on the OPA and the OEB to consider the environment as they make their decision with respect to a long-term supply plan. They will look at rationale.

They will look at needs and alternatives. They will raise the issues of the environment as we build a new, clean, green supply of energy. The regulations put in place are simply to confirm the

decision and the position --

The Speaker: Minister. Final supplementary?

Mr. Hampton: You talk about the Ontario Power Authority. The OPA has already made up their mind on both nuclear and coal. That's like saying

that you, as Minister of the Environment, turn it over to the fox to look after the chickens in the henhouse. They've already made their decision. They're pro-nuclear; they're pro-coal.

Here's the absurdity of your position, as quoted today in the press. You said that the government chose a step of including by way of designation to exclude.

It makes no sense at all. Here's the reality. The Environmental Commissioner doesn't have to kowtow to Dalton McGuinty to keep his job. He's independent and he's respected. He said you undermined

Ontario's Environmental Assessment Act and you failed to comply with Ontario's Environmental Bill of Rights. You have failed as Minister of the Environment. When are you going to do the honourable

thing and resign?

Hon. Ms. Broten: I know it's very confusing to my friend opposite, but the law is very clear: Broad government policy is not the subject

matter of an environmental assessment. In order to confirm that decision and make it very clear, as I indicated -- again, apparently very confusing -- we had to designate it in order to exclude

it.

That being said, our position has been absolutely consistent. The regulation is administrative in nature. What it says to Ontarians who may want us to change

the law is that we are confirming the law. We will apply the law and we will continue with the law that exists in this province. We will have an environmental assessment of every single project

that is going to be built in this province, and we will ensure that Ontarians are protected as we build a new future, with 10 times the conservation we have at present, double the renewables, less

greenhouse gases, less mercury and less pollution going into the environment. That's the future I want for my kids, and we're moving toward that future.

The Speaker: New question. The leader of the third party.

Mr. Hampton: My question is to the Premier. I don't think Ontario's Environmental Commissioner is confused. He knows what's going on. This is

really about your leadership and your standards as Premier. Maybe you believe that watering down Ontario's environmental laws is acceptable. Maybe you believe that signing an order in secret, in

the backroom, to escape a proper Ontario environmental assessment is acceptable, but I think the majority of people in Ontario don't think it's acceptable at all. And maybe you believe that an

environment minister who undermines and breaks Ontario environmental laws deserves to be in your cabinet, but I don't think people across Ontario believe that.

Premier, they're your standards. Do you believe that someone who undermines Ontario's environmental laws, who breaches Ontario's Environmental Bill of Rights,

can continue as your Minister of the Environment?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Again, I'm pleased to inform the leader of the NDP, and to confirm for

the people of Ontario, that throughout this procedure -- we're talking about building new nuclear reactors here; that takes 10 years -- there are going to be seven separate opportunities for the

people of Ontario to comment on this plan. We think that's ample opportunity to get the very best advice and to allow our public to lend shape to this plan so it's the best it can possibly be.

What this is really all about is that the leader of the NDP is opposed to the construction of any new generation in Ontario. That's what it's all about. We are

charged with a special responsibility on this side of the House, which is to keep the lights on, and we will do what it takes to get that done.

Mr. Hampton: Here's what it's about: It's about a Premier who is desperate to have his $46-billion nuclear mega scheme escape any kind of

proper environmental assessment in the province. It's about a Premier who likes to give speeches filled with platitudes about the environment, but who isn't prepared to follow Ontario's own

environmental laws.

Here is what the Environmental Commissioner said: "This is the first regulation under the Environmental Assessment Act that has not been posted on the

Environmental Registry for public review and comment in the 12-year history of the Environmental Bill of Rights. This decision goes against the whole principle of government accountability and

transparency enshrined in the act."

Premier, is that acceptable conduct for a Minister of the Environment in your government? Is that acceptable conduct for the McGuinty government?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: It's interesting to note that the regulation which the leader of the NDP is commenting on was posted on the public website

for regulations. That's where he found it. There's no particular secret there. That regulation was passed in cabinet. It's not a secret room. It's not a secret process. That's where it was

done.

Again, I think what this is really all about -- and we need to be up front about this -- is that the leader of the NDP is intent on doing whatever he possibly

can -- he has been pretty straightforward about this until now -- to ensure that there's no construction of new generation in Ontario, ever. I understand that. That's his position. He thinks that

is progressive; I see it as antiquated. We have a different sense of the future here. We think that we've got a responsibility to make sure we have a plan in place, which we now have in place, to

ensure that the people of Ontario, through to 2025, have a reliable supply of clean, safe, affordable electricity. And that's what we're doing.

Mr. Hampton: Premier, this is about a Dalton McGuinty who doesn't want his nuclear mega scheme to go before a proper Ontario environmental

assessment, where the people of Ontario might be able to suggest some positive alternatives rather than building risky, expensive and unreliable nuclear plants. This is about a Premier who's

looking for a place to hide.

I want to quote a question that was asked: "I think it's perfectly clear that this minister has not assumed her own special responsibility, and that is to

advance the cause of the environment at the cabinet table.... It's apparent that there's nobody over there taking any interest in preserving our environment, and we're going to pay for that for a

long time to come." Premier, those are your words. Those are the standards you set in opposition.

I'm asking you now, Premier: Is it acceptable for you, Dalton McGuinty, to have a Minister of the Environment who not only undermines the Environmental

Assessment Act but disobeys --

The Speaker: The question has been asked. Premier?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Just on one front, to give you some indication of what this particular Minister of the Environment has accomplished for the

people of Ontario so far: She has reduced reliance on coal by 17%, reduced sulphur dioxide emissions by 28%, reduced nitrous oxide emissions by 34%, reduced carbon dioxide emissions by 15% and

reduced particulate smog emissions by 28%.

Again, I accept that the leader of the NDP will do everything he possibly can to ensure that our province and this economy do not have the benefit of a clean,

safe, reliable supply, long into the future, of electricity. I understand that. That is his position. On the one hand, he talks about the loss of manufacturing jobs, he talks about the problem of

getting reasonably priced electricity, but on the other hand he will not support us in our efforts to ensure we have those kinds of things in place.

We have a plan in place now. We've submitted it to the Ontario Power Authority. There will be seven separate opportunities for Ontarians to comment on the

plan, and we look forward to moving ahead with our plan.

BAIL VIOLATIONS

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): A question to the Premier: Yesterday, CTV News reported a story about the significant number of

individuals living in our midst out on bail charged with very serious crimes, including murder. The report specifically referenced two men, Sammy Bellissimo and Andrew Khan. Khan is accused of

killing a man and shooting a 16-year-old witness to the crime, and Bellissimo was the focus of a six-year manhunt for another shooting. Premier, do you think bail for people with this kind of

record is appropriate?

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

Hon. Monte Kwinter (Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services): I'm sure the former Solicitor General knows the process. The bail

that is set is set in the courts. That is a judiciary responsibility. We have no input into it whatsoever. That is something that is done, as he well knows, and if you have a concern with that, you

should take it up with the judiciary.

Mr. Runciman: We'd better get the blackboard out for the minister. You have very significant involvement through the Attorney General, who's a

minister of the crown. You can oppose bail, and if a decision is made for bail, you can appeal that decision.

Premier, according to CTV, some of the accused in the Boxing Day shooting death of Jane Creba were also out on bail. Stats Canada states that there were over

100,000 bail violations in 2004. The courts can't tell us how many accused gunmen and sex offenders are walking the streets right now.

Minister, do you agree that the crowns have to get tougher on bail applications for violent and dangerous offenders, and if so, how and when is your government

going to get tougher?

Hon. Mr. Kwinter: The judge determines what the disposition of the case is going to be. I also have to caution the member to know that these

people are accused; they are not convicted. The judiciary makes that decision --

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Kwinter: Oh. I would ask you, I would ask any of the members, I'd ask the Leader of the Opposition, who is a lawyer: Would he be in a

position to determine, before someone has been absolutely convicted, what the disposition should be? This is something that is determined by the judiciary, and if you're asking me to interfere with

the judiciary, that is something that I'm not prepared to do.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. Here's the situation that your nuclear mega scheme now presents to

the people of Ontario. Shawn-Patrick Stensil of Greenpeace says, "What are they trying to hide? A good plan could withstand scrutiny." Dr. Mark Winfield of the Pembina Institute says, "The

government is attempting to deny Ontarians their right to know the real costs and risks associated with the government's electricity plan." Keith Stewart of the World Wildlife Fund says, "Premier

McGuinty is telling Ontarians they have to pick their poison -- coal or nuclear -- while ramming through a plan that forces us to accept both."

You've been trying to avoid a proper Ontario environmental assessment. The question I have, Premier, is: Now that you've got your Minister of the Environment

undermining our environmental laws and breaching some of our environmental laws, don't you think it's better, more open, more honest and more transparent to just obey Ontario's environmental laws

rather than trying to hide from them?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I can understand why the leader of the NDP would have Ontarians believe

otherwise, but in fact there's going to be an environmental assessment for our specific projects. I think he's very much aware of that, but somehow he would have us believe otherwise.

That's just the culmination of a series of opportunities, and I listed them earlier. The environmental assessment on a project basis will be preceded by six

separate opportunities for Ontarians to have a say and to have comments.

Putting up a new nuclear reactor would take 10 years. Again, I understand that the leader of the NDP is dead set against more nuclear energy in the province of

Ontario. I understand that; I accept that. But on this side of the House, we are charged with making sure that we keep the lights on; making sure that we put in place a plan to ensure that we have

a reliable supply of clean, safe, affordable electricity. That's what we are doing.

Mr. Hampton: Premier, you can try that line on people; the fact is, it takes 10 years to build nuclear plants, so building nuclear plants over

the next 10 years is not going to do anything to keep the lights on this summer or next summer or the summer after that. This is about your attempt to hide from Ontario's environmental protection

laws.

This is what Jack Gibbons of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance says. He calls your scheme "a huge betrayal." Dr. Rick Smith of Environmental Defence says, "The

government [is] sucking up to the nuclear industry acolytes, coal barons, [and] well-heeled development lobbyists." Rick Lindgren of the Canadian Environmental Law Association says, "The Ontario

government knows that the provincial energy plan is unlikely to survive the rigorous scrutiny and public interest test under the" Environmental Assessment Act.

Anybody who knows anything about the history of cost overruns at nuclear power plants in Ontario knows what you're trying to do here. You're trying to escape

the law; you're trying to hide from Ontario's environmental laws. Premier, why don't you stop the manipulation? Why don't you just submit --

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

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: If we are so determined to keep this from public view and to do this under cover of darkness, then why is it that we have

been so public with our plan? Why is it we're talking about ensuring that we meet the energy gap that's going to arise between 2014 and 2025? We're talking about that today. There are at least two

elections between now and 2014. We don't have to proceed with this plan at this point in time, but we are because we feel a responsibility to do so.

The leader of the NDP would have us shy away from this indefinitely. I can tell you that when I have the opportunity to travel on behalf of Ontarians outside

this province, one of the pieces of information that members of the investment community are looking for is, "Will you have a long-term, reliable supply of clean, safe, affordable electricity?"

We are taking this on. The leader of the NDP would prefer that we not do that. He prefers to bury his head in the stand, as did the previous Conservative

government. We are going to take this on. We are going to have this debate. It will surely be a most important part of the election, but we will move forward in Ontario with a good plan for safe,

clean, reliable electricity.

EDUCATION FUNDING /

SUBVENTIONS DESTINÉES

À L'ÉDUCATION

Mr. Bruce Crozier (Essex): My question is for the Minister of Education. Since coming to office, our McGuinty government has increased per

pupil funding by almost $1,600. That's 21% above the previous government's per pupil funding -- a 21% increase in just three years.

Our government has made education one of its main priorities. We're taking steps to ensure that primary class sizes keep shrinking; reading, writing and math

achievements keep improving; and more students graduate from school.

Minister, you've said yourself that the bigger the investment we make in education, the bigger responsibility we have to the people of Ontario. Can you explain

to the House how our government's recent $17.4-billion new grants for students' needs investment will show that we take our responsibility to the people of Ontario seriously?

Hon. Sandra Pupatello (Minister of Education, minister responsible for women's issues): I'm very happy that this member from the great riding

of Essex and I had an opportunity last week to announce new schools for the county of Essex, and in particular the schools that this member has been working on for a long time: Maplewood and Sun

Parlor. Congratulations to all of those families and schools.

On this $17.5-billion investment, you know that we are focused in particular on lowering class sizes: 1,300 more teachers for that smaller class size and 300

more student success teachers to move those students through to high school. We're proud of our investment and we know it's making a difference for families.

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

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): Minister, I believe that these education initiatives will be successfully implemented; that they will

have a positive effect on the students in my riding and the entire education system of Ontario.

Our Liberal government realizes the unique challenges that French-language school boards face in helping students succeed. Minister, can you please tell me

what our government is doing to ensure the quality of French-language education and the success of French-language students?

L'hon. M me Pupatello: J'étais très contente d'être dans votre circonscription lundi pour rencontrer les écoles

Je suis heureuse aussi de voir les augmentations de tous les examens de ces élèves. Je suis fière de ça. Je sais aussi que le gouvernement

In particular, we know that a $10-million announcement especially focused on these early years will help the retention rate of our French-language students.

This is particularly important to this member, who sees the kind of growth that we have in these French-language boards. So we're proud of our investment, and we intend to do more.

NIPISSING UNIVERSITY

Mr. Cameron Jackson (Burlington): My question is to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Tens of thousands of students

received confirmation letters all across Ontario in April of this year, and some as early as March. In fact, at the faculty of education at Nipissing University, over 1,200 acceptance letters were

sent out and over 900 students from Ontario accepted the offer from that university. The problem is that there are just under 700 spaces available to these students. Therefore, approximately 250

students are sitting there with a full acceptance and yet unable to find a space at that university.

Minister, are you aware of the magnitude of this situation at Nipissing, and is there anything that you're doing on behalf of those students?

Hon. Christopher Bentley (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): The McGuinty government record in terms of access to

post-secondary education is unrivalled, if I can put it that way. In the last three years, 75,000 new spaces have been created in programs of post-secondary education throughout the province. For

the last couple of years, we have actually funded an additional 1,000 spaces for teacher education at various institutions around the province of Ontario -- an additional 1,000 over and above what

the institutions fund themselves.

What we have to make sure of is that, in providing access to teacher education, there be some relationship between the number we accept and fund for the spots

and the opportunities available in the school boards in Ontario. We're having that conversation with the Minister of Education and her people at this very time. But we are pleased to be supporting

Nipissing and all of our other post-secondary education in encouraging more students and making sure those students are properly and fully funded at our Ontario institutions.

Mr. Jackson: Minister, you seem to be completely unaware of the magnitude of the problem at Nipissing. In fact, Nipissing responded by sending

out a letter to the first group of students who were contacted, and they culled the herd by choosing them by their postal codes, where they lived in Ontario. They said to them, "Would you be

interested if we set up a satellite campus in Brantford?" They didn't get a response from that, so then they offered them a guaranteed admission in two years if they would agree not to go to

university this year. Then they got a third letter, which recommended, "Would you be interested in a two-year plan, taken part-time, to get your bachelor of education?" And finally, with five days,

they said, "If you'd like a full refund, you've got to notify us immediately."

Minister, on behalf of the students who have contacted me, I'll read the question they want to raise: "Given that these students who accepted to Nipissing have

missed the deadline to any other post-secondary institution in our province, is the student entitled to request that Nipissing and your ministry find them a suitable spot in another facility?"

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

Hon. Mr. Bentley: I thank the member very much for raising the specific issues for me today. It's the first time I've heard of them, and I

will certainly look into them. But I have to say again, the Nipissing campus in Brantford has been in existence for a number of years. In Brantford alone, we now fund more than 2,400 students for

post-secondary education programs -- Nipissing, Mohawk and Laurier --

whereas, five years ago, there were none. Access to teaching education opportunities in the province are at very high levels.

We have been funding an additional 1,000 for the last couple of years, over and above the levels the institutions otherwise believe are appropriate. There are many opportunities for students in

post-secondary education, including teacher training, in the province of Ontario. The fact of the matter is, we're doing as much as ever before. We'll continue to do as much as we can. We'll look

into the specifics and are encouraging all students to access post-secondary education opportunities in the province of Ontario, because that's where the future jobs are.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto-Danforth): My question is for the Minister of the Environment. Minister, on June 14, I directly asked you when you

would announce the provincial environmental assessment of the McGuinty government's energy supply mix plan, as required under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act. You replied "that broad

government policy, abstract in nature, is not subject to the Environmental Assessment Act." Yet two days earlier, on June 12, you signed this cabinet order creating regulation 276/06, exempting the

McGuinty government's energy supply mix plan from a provincial environmental assessment. You exempted it from requirements for thorough public scrutiny. Minister, will you admit you failed to do

your job, which is to protect the environment, and that you caved to the Premier and the energy minister?

Hon. Laurel C. Broten (Minister of the Environment): My position has been very consistent throughout, and I repeat what I said to you on June

14: that broad government policy direction is not the appropriate subject matter of the environmental assessment. What is the appropriate subject matter of environmental assessment are specific

projects. This is the same position that the ministry had with respect to the coal replacement plan, the same decision that the ministry had with respect to the IPSP. It's consistent with the

Electricity Act and it's consistent with the Environmental Assessment Act.

Some may want us to change the Environmental Assessment Act. The regulation that cabinet has put forward clearly indicates that we are going to uphold and

apply the law. For your information, we are not going to change the law. That's why the decision is an administrative one in nature. We're not seeking consultation on a proposal to change the law,

but rather indicating a clear and consistent -- we have had the same consistent position throughout. We are going to apply the Environmental Assessment Act,

an act which does not apply to broad

government policy.

Mr. Tabuns: Minister, you knew full well when you answered my question that the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act applied and that you had

already moved to exempt the energy supply mix plan from a provincial environmental assessment. Minister, you lied to this House. When --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I need you to withdraw that comment.

Mr. Tabuns: No.

The Speaker: I'll give you one more opportunity to withdraw that comment.

I name the member, Mr. Tabuns.

Mr. Tabuns was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. New question.

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): It's clear on the record. It's right there in Hansard.

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: The

leader of the third party used the term "The minister lied in the House." I think he should withdraw that.

The Speaker: I did not hear the member say that, but if he did, he should withdraw.

Mr. Hampton: I said it's on the Hansard record, Speaker.

Interjections.

The Speaker: I did not hear it, so new question.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop the clock. Order. The leader of the third party will come to order. New question.

GLOBAL SUPPLY MANAGEMENT

Mr. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): My question is for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. As you know, the

supply management sector of our agriculture industry has proven itself to be an effective way of ensuring that farmers earn a stable, profitable income and that Ontario consumers have access to

high-quality product at a fair price. Over the weekend, I met with dairy farmers from the eastern-gateway-to-Ontario riding, Glengarry-Prescott-Russell. They want their elected representatives at

both the federal and provincial levels to continue to defend the interests of farmers dependent on supply management. Recently we heard from other Canadian jurisdictions that supply management is a

hindrance at current international trade negotiations. Minister, what is our government doing to protect the interests of supply management producers?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs): I'm so very pleased that the member from Glengarry-Prescott-Russell,

who is a tireless advocate for farmers in his region, has asked the question. It gives me an opportunity --

Applause.

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: Yes, he is.

It gives me an opportunity to remind the members of this House that, as an assembly, all three parties in December supported the supply management system of

operation in the agriculture industry in Ontario. I had the privilege of advocating that position in Hong Kong. However, negotiations at the World Trade Organization talks were not able to

conclude. We have now been called to Geneva, as ministers of agriculture, along with our federal minister, to again ensure that the interests of the agriculture industry with respect to trade talks

are considered and protected at these very important negotiations. So I can commit to the honourable member that our government will be there to ensure that the interests of all agriculture

sectors, certainly including supply management, will be vigorously defended so that, going forward --

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

Mr. Lalonde: Thank you, Minister. Farmers in my riding, and indeed across Ontario, will be reassured to know that our government is strongly

defending their interests. They do not want to see our supply management system become a bargaining chip. It must not be negotiated away.

We all know that last December, you and Minister Bountrogianni were in Hong Kong defending the interests of our farmers. They surely recognize the work that

you have done. Minister, what do you expect to accomplish at next week's Geneva WTO meeting?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: There will be three key points that will be of concern, of interest, that our province is going to advocate for. First

of all, we're going to advocate for improved market access for Ontario agriculture products. The second issue we're going to address is with respect to domestic subsidies in foreign countries that

have created an unlevel playing field for farmers in the province of Ontario. The third issue that we're going to vehemently defend is the supply management system.

We are looking for a balanced agreement with all of the 150 nations that are participating in the World Trade Organization talks. We don't believe we should be

sacrificing one of the very important issues, a sensitive products issue, the supply management issue, in order to gain more market access. We're looking for balance. That's what our goal is in

going there. We know that there are many other provinces in Canada that will be working with us, along with our federal minister --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

BAIL VIOLATIONS

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier. The member for Leeds-Grenville did not ask your Minister of

Community Safety to declare anyone innocent or guilty, and I'd like to try again on what he did ask, because we got no answer for that particular question.

What he did ask: Is your government, which is responsible for representing the people of Ontario in court on bail applications, prepared to get much tougher

when it comes to opposing and then appealing, if necessary, decisions with respect to bail involving people accused, especially, of serious violent crimes? The people of this province don't want to

see these people accused of serious violent crimes sipping martinis on their sun porch, out on bail. Is your government prepared to get tough on this, oppose more of these applications, and appeal

them when necessary to send a message that we are not going to have these people out any more often than necessary while they're awaiting trial on these serious crimes?

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

Hon. Monte Kwinter (Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services): The point of my answer is this: An accused appears in court with

a defence lawyer, and the crown is there to present the crown's case before a judge. If the bail hearing is held in such a way, obviously the defence is going to want the least bail and the crown

is going to want the most bail, in most cases. So I would suggest that those arguments are made before a judge and the judge makes that determination. If you're saying that we in some way should

interfere with that process, I'm saying to you that that is not the role for politicians to play.

Mr. Tory: To be clear, we're not suggesting that you go and take the position on the least or the most. We're suggesting that in some of these

cases, where people are accused of serious violent crimes, you go and oppose any bail at all and say these people should be kept in custody pending their trial.

In the very same report carried on CTV, they said there were tens of thousands of bail violations in Ontario, out of a total of 100,000 across the country.

Will you agree with me that the notion that you can have tens of thousands of people wilfully violating their bail conditions when they are granted bail is a disgrace, and that your government, the

McGuinty government, is going to do something about this to send a message saying that, "When you do get bail, we take the conditions seriously and we're not just going to let you laugh it off and

treat it like it's some kind of joke"? Are you going to get serious about this or not?

Hon. Mr. Kwinter: The Leader of the Opposition is giving anecdotal examples, and I can't really respond to specific cases. All I can say to

you is this: In the system that goes forward, the crown, if they feel very, very strongly, will make that case. They will make the case before the court that this bail should not be granted. The

final determinant as to whether they succeed or not is in the judiciary, and we have no ability to tell that judge how he should respond to the crown's appeal.

ENVIRONMENTAL BILL OF RIGHTS

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. This is what Ontario's Environmental Commissioner has to say: "The

Environmental Bill of Rights requires ministries to post on the Environmental Registry any proposed new regulation that will have a significant effect on the environment -- before the regulation is

passed -- to allow the public a meaningful opportunity to review and comment on the proposal."

Your proposal is for a $46-billion nuclear scheme. Is it your position, Premier, that your government's $46-billion nuclear mega scheme will have no

significant effect on the environment and therefore didn't need to comply with the Environmental Bill of Rights?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Clearly, the leader of the NDP considers seven separate opportunities for

public comment to be less than adequate. I know that he in fact would not be happy with 70 separate opportunities for the public to comment because he remains adamantly opposed to putting in place

any new kind of generation in the province of Ontario. We see things differently. I expect that we will continue to have this important debate through the campaign and beyond.

I just want Ontarians to know where we're coming from on this particular matter. We are mindful of our special responsibility in government to ensure that we

have in place a plan that will, long into the future, ensure that Ontarians have access to safe, clean, reliable electricity. We will do what is necessary, again while being mindful of our

responsibility also to ensure that Ontarians have continuing opportunities to have input into that plan.

Mr. Hampton: I'd be happy, and I think the majority of Ontarians would be happy, if the McGuinty government would just obey the law of

Ontario.

I want to quote again the Environmental Commissioner: "This is the first regulation under the Environmental Assessment Act that has not been posted on the

Environmental Registry for public review and comment in the 12-year history of the Environmental Bill of Rights. This decision goes against the whole principle of government accountability and

transparency enshrined in the act. Exempting the province's long-term electricity plans from the environmental assessment process -- to consider the possible impacts of those plans -- is clearly

environmentally significant and should have been posted on the registry for public comment." That's the Environmental Commissioner, a neutral advocate to ensure that Ontario's environmental laws

and processes are observed.

Premier, do you think it's acceptable for your government to break not only the Environmental Assessment Act but the Environmental Bill of Rights?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: To the Minister of the Environment.

Hon. Laurel C. Broten (Minister of the Environment): The Environmental Commissioner and I had an opportunity to have a discussion today and

for me to indicate to him that, yes, there is a history of precedent in this province: 21 times, regulations have been posted for information only. And they've been regulations like this one,

regulations where we're confirming that we will apply the law, that we are not proposing to change the law. It's as simple and straightforward as that.

That being said, in light of a very good discussion with the Environmental Commissioner -- and I'm aware of his indication yesterday that he'd like Ontarians

to have yet another opportunity to review and comment on the regulation, confirming that the IPSP is not the subject matter of the Environmental Assessment Act. In the spirit of the EBR, I've

instructed my ministry to make that opportunity -- yet an eighth opportunity -- available for Ontarians to log on to the Ministry of the Environment website, find the link to the Environmental

Registry, and provide comments and information that they might like to provide us with, with respect to this regulation. There's ample opportunity for Ontarians to participate over the next 10

years as we build --

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

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne (Don Valley West): My question is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. As you know, we recently celebrated

held hearings on that act, and it certainly was a profound experience for me and for people who came to speak about the changes we were going to make.

and the whole concept of universal design seems to be taking hold.

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for francophone affairs): First, let me thank the MPP

from Don Valley West for her contribution to helping us achieve a fully accessible Ontario.

the government with organizations and businesses that are leaders in the community to facilitate increased awareness and understanding of the AODA. As a result of this program, we have partnered

with the Canadian Standards Association, which works with eight champion businesses and organizations across the province to test and implement a customer service training program.

I recently visited the Shaw Festival and Cineplex Entertainment, two business champions that have worked with the Canadian Standards Association and made their

establishments more accessible.

We are on the side of Ontario businesses, and I encourage more large and small businesses to work with the disability community, their local organizations and

municipalities to make more of these changes possible. And we will --

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

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: Given the disruption earlier today during question period, I'd ask

for unanimous consent to extend question period by three minutes.

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous consent for an additional three --

Interjections.

The Speaker: We do not.

VISITOR

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean-Carleton): Today in this chamber we have a distinguished guest who spent many years on Parliament Hill when I was on

Parliament Hill working for the PC Party of Canada: former Reform, Alliance and Conservative Member of Parliament Deborah Grey. Please welcome her, everyone.

Applause.

PETITIONS

SCHOOL FACILITIES

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

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the parents of St. Paul's elementary school in Alliston have raised many issues regarding the security, cleanliness and state of repair of their

school; and

"Whereas a 2003 condition assessment completed by the Ontario government identified the need for $1.8 million in repairs to St. Paul's elementary school;

and

"Whereas the Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board has approached the Ministry of Education with the intention of having the school deemed prohibitive

to repair as they believe the school requires $2.28 million in repairs, or 84% of the school replacement cost; and

"Whereas there are ongoing concerns with air quality, heating and ventilation, electrical, plumbing, lack of air conditioning and the overall structure of the

building, including cracks from floor to ceiling, to name a few;

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

"That the Minister of Education immediately deem St. Paul's elementary school prohibitive to repair, secure immediate funding and begin construction of a new

facility so that the children of St. Paul's can be educated in a facility that is secure and offers them the respect and dignity that they deserve."

I went to this school from K to grade 8. My mother taught there for some 33 years. I want to thank Milva Biffis for sending me this petition and for

spearheading this initiative.

IDENTITY THEFT

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition addressed to the Parliament of Ontario and specifically the Minister of Government Services.

It reads as follows:

"Whereas identity theft is the fastest-growing crime in North America;

"Whereas confidential and private information is being stolen on a regular basis, affecting literally thousands of people;

"Whereas the cost of this crime exceeds billions of dollars;

"Whereas countless hours are wasted to restore one's good credit rating;

"We, the undersigned, demand that Bill 38, which passed the second reading unanimously in the Ontario Legislature on December 8, 2005, be brought before

committee and that the following issues be included for consideration and debate:

"

(1) All consumer reports should be provided in a truncated (masked-out) form, protecting our vital private information such as SIN and credit card

numbers.

"

(2) Should a credit bureau discover that there has been a breach of consumer information, the agency should immediately inform the victimized consumer.

"

(3) Credit bureaus should only report inquiries resulting out of actual applications for credit and for no other reasons.

"

(4) Credit bureaus should investigate any complaints within 30 days and correct or automatically delete any information found unconfirmed or inaccurate."

Since I agree with this petition 100%, I'm delighted to sign it as well.

ORGAN DONATION

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): The petition I am presenting to the Legislature was signed at the Aurora street sale and the Richmond Hill

heritage festival. It's addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and reads as follows:

"Whereas 1,920 Ontarians are currently on a waiting list for an organ transplant; and

"Whereas the number of Ontarians waiting for an organ transplant has virtually doubled since 1994; and

"Whereas hundreds die every year waiting for an organ transplant; and

"Whereas greater public education and awareness will increase the number of people who sign their organ donor cards and increase the availability of organ

transplants for Ontarians; and

"Whereas the private member's bill proposed by Oak Ridges MPP Frank Klees will require every resident 16 years of age and older to complete an organ donation

question when applying for or renewing a driver's licence or provincial health card, thereby increasing public awareness of the importance of organ donation while respecting the right of every

person to make a personal decision regarding the important issue of organ donation;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to pass Bill 67, the Organ and Tissue Donation Mandatory Declaration Act, 2006."

I'm pleased to affix my signature to this petition. As you know, this is a private member's bill that I presented, and I do hope that the Legislature will move

quickly to pass this legislation.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): I have a petition from the residents' council at Woodland Villa in Long Sault, and it

reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas long-term-care funding levels are too low to enable homes to provide the care and services our aging seniors and parents who are residents of

long-term-care homes need, with the respect and dignity that they deserve; and

"Whereas, even with recent funding increases and a dedicated staff who do more than their best, there is still not enough time available to provide the care

residents need. For example, 10 minutes, and sometimes less, is simply not enough time to assist a resident to get up, dressed, to the bathroom and then to the dining room for breakfast; and

"Whereas those unacceptable care and service levels are now at risk of declining;

"We, the undersigned, who are members of family councils, residents' councils and/or supporters of long-term care in Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly

of Ontario to increase operating funding to long-term-care homes by $306.6 million, which will allow the hiring of more staff to provide an additional 20 minutes of care per resident per day over

the next two years (2006 and 2007)."

I affix my signature and send it with Mitchell.

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I have a petition here to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, signed by a great number of my constituents

involved with the Woodingford Lodge in Ingersoll, in Woodstock and, I believe, some from Tillsonburg.

"Whereas long-term-care funding levels are too low to enable homes to provide the care and services our aging seniors and parents who are residents of

long-term-care homes need, with the respect and dignity that they deserve; and

"Whereas, even with recent funding increases and a dedicated staff who do more than their best, there is still not enough time available to provide the care

residents need. For example, 10 minutes, and sometimes less, is simply not enough time to assist a resident to get up, dressed, to the bathroom and then to the dining room for breakfast; and

"Whereas those unacceptable care and service levels are now at risk of declining;

"We, the undersigned, who are members of family councils, residents' councils and/or supporters of long-term care in Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly

of Ontario to increase operating funding to long-term-care homes by $306.6 million, which will allow the hiring of more staff to provide an additional 20 minutes of care per resident per day over

the next two years (2006 and 2007)."

I affix my signature as I agree with this petition.

FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition in support of skilled immigrants and in support of Bill 124. It's to the Parliament of

Ontario, and it reads as follows:

"Whereas the McGuinty government is committed to establishing measures that will break down barriers for Ontario newcomers; and

"Whereas these measures will ensure that the 34 regulatory professions in Ontario have admissions and application practices that are fair, clear and open;

and

"Whereas these measures will include the establishment of a fairness commissioner and an access centre for internationally trained individuals; and

"Whereas, through providing a fair and equitable system, newcomers will be able to apply their global experience, which will not only be beneficial to their

long-term career goals but also to the Ontario economy as a whole;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislature of Ontario as follows:

"That all members of the House support the Fair Access to Regulated Professions Act, 2006, Bill 124, and work to ensure its prompt passage in t