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

June 10, 2003

37th Parliament, 4th Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2003-Jun-10 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 10 June 2003 Mardi 10 juin 2003

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

NORTHERN HEALTH SERVICES

MATTAWA VOYAGEUR DAYS

PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRY

BSE

NEW BRUNSWICK ELECTION

TORONTO CITY SUMMIT ALLIANCE

ANDRÉ MAK

PORTUGUESE CANADIAN COMMUNITY

TOBERMORY CHI-CHEEMAUN FESTIVAL

VISITORS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

PREVENTING PARTISAN

ADVERTISING ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 VISANT À EMPÊCHER LA PUBLICITÉ À CARACTÈRE POLITIQUE

CELEBRATION OF HELLENIC HERITAGE ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA FÊTE DU PATRIMOINE HELLÉNIQUE

TRADITIONAL CHINESE MEDICINE PRACTITIONERS, TRADITIONAL CHINESE MEDICINE HERBALISTS AND ACUPUNCTURISTS

ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LES PRATICIENS DE MÉDECINE CHINOISE TRADITIONNELLE, LES HERBORISTES DE MÉDECINE CHINOISE TRADITIONNELLE ET LES ACUPUNCTEURS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

PORTUGUESE CANADIAN COMMUNITY

ORAL QUESTIONS

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

SARS

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

SARS

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

REFUGEES

SCHOOL SAFETY

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

BEER AND LIQUOR SALES

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

LONG-TERM CARE

NEW HOME INSPECTION

PETITIONS

ABORTION

EDUCATION TAX CREDIT

WASTE MANAGEMENT

ITER FUSION PROJECT

INSURANCE RATES

HIGHWAY 407

ONTARIO DISABILITY

SUPPORT PROGRAM

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

LONG-TERM CARE

HUNTING IN WILDERNESS PARKS

VISITOR

HOME CARE

OPPOSITION DAY

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Tuesday 10 June 2003 Mardi 10 juin 2003

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

NORTHERN HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): The fact that the Tories don't give two hoots about northern health care has reared its ugly ahead once again,

this time in a survey complied by the Canadian Institute for Health Information. Of the 57 communities surveyed across Canada, northern Ontario communities ranked almost at the very last. Thunder

Bay ranked 48th out of 57, Sudbury and the Soo ranked 52nd and the ex-Premier's own riding of North Bay-Huntsville ranked 55th. When you think about this, the one area that ranks the worst in

health care across Canada is northern Ontario.

The reason for this lies across the way. Like anything, if you neglect, if you fail to nurture and support, if you don't care, things go by the wayside and

everyone suffers the consequences. Since 1995, the northern Liberal caucus has urged the Harris-Eves government to put more money into health care in northern Ontario. Our protestations manifest

themselves today in this poor ranking of northern Ontario health care across Canada.

I tell this government: start putting the necessary resources into health care in northern Ontario. Try to make a difference before you're voted out of

office.

MATTAWA VOYAGEUR DAYS

Mr AL McDonald (Nipissing): I'd like to personally invite everyone to Mattawa Voyageur Days, July 24 through 27. The town of Mattawa is located

about 45 minutes east of North Bay on the beautiful Mattawa River. This festival has so much to offer everyone -- all family members -- including the Voyageur's Marketplace, the Haunted House at

Champlain Park, the new Royal Ontario Museum Dinomobile, Survivor Kidz, dam tours, golf tournaments, Fun in the Sun, Eau Claire Gorge guided hiking tours, an antique vehicle show, a kids' fishing

derby, treasure hunting, a reptile show, a North Bay to Mattawa canoe race and a 100-kilometre "Lost in the Rocks and Trees" mountain bike enduro race.

You can see there's lots here to do, and awesome entertainment, including the Ennis Sisters; Trooper; Charlie Major; La Franco, with Chuck Labelle and Robert

Paquette; children's entertainer Fred Penner; and many, many more for the entire family. You can have all this. For the low price of $20, you can buy your wristbands.

I want to congratulate Mayor Dean Backer, Jacques Begin, the committee and all the volunteers who make this festival such a great attraction to Nipissing

region.

For all those here and those watching on TV, you can get further information at www.voyageurdays.com or phone the Mattawa information centre at

1-800-267-4222.

PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRY

Ms Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): On April 14, 2003, a major power failure impacted the petrochemical industry in Sarnia-Lambton. Four

major refineries had to go on a code 8, all of Sarnia-Lambton was under a "take shelter" call, and the whole area was blanketed with a toxic cloud due to the power failure.

Yesterday, June 9, 2003, there was yet another power failure that forced the shutdown of Imperial Oil, Dow, Bayer, and Nova. Again, code 8s were sounded, and

although the power outage was restored within 20 minutes, it took hours for the plants to be up and running again. Millions of dollars are lost and, more importantly, the dangerous consequence of

an environmental disaster can become a reality.

What is concerning about these power failures is that they haven't been seen before in the area, according to officials and long-time residents, and are rare

occurrences, according to a Hydro One spokesperson. In just two months we have had two major incidents of power failure. The minister should be well aware of the importance of the power supply to

the petrochemical industry. This industry is the largest user of electricity in the province. Because of this government's track record on electricity, my biggest concern is reliability. I have

requested a detailed report on this matter from the minister and will be watching carefully as to what steps will be taken to ensure that the power supply is reliable to the petrochemical industry

in Sarnia-Lambton

BSE

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): Three weeks ago, Canadian farmers and the Canadian public were shocked to hear that a case of mad cow disease

had been found in Alberta. Almost instantly, the United States closed its borders to Canadian beef and cattle, with many of our other trading partners following suit.

Since then, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency has been tracing the history of the infected cow and quarantining any herds with which it may have had contact.

Cattle from many of these herds have been tested and, so far, all the tests have come back negative. So far, the initial case is the only diseased animal. This investigation began immediately after

the case of mad cow disease was discovered and appears to have been very thorough. I want to thank all the employees of the CFIA, who have been working overtime to demonstrate that Canadian beef is

safe for our consumption and for export to the United States and elsewhere.

I particularly want to make mention of Stratford veterinarian Dr Tom Cox, who has travelled to Alberta to assist in this investigation. Dr Cox works for the CFIA

in Woodstock and he, along with 13 other Ontario employees of the CFIA, has been working on this investigation in western Canada. I'm sure that all members here join me in lending our support and

encouragement to Dr Cox and his colleagues at the CFIA.

NEW BRUNSWICK ELECTION

Mr George Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale): It was in New Brunswick last night that exciting things happened. In one fell swoop, the people

of New Brunswick took the Tory wonder kid from hero to zero. Just months ago, we heard that Bernard Lord was the next Prime Minister of Canada and last night, and maybe in recounts yet to come, he

will be a former Premier, because only 109 votes, at the last count, separated his party from defeat and the Liberal Party from majority government in the province of New Brunswick.

Why? Because the government of New Brunswick has been carrying on in the same way as the government of Ontario with respect to the issue of automobile insurance.

While the Minister of Finance, talks and talks and talks, regulations long overdue fail to be brought forward. Seven years and a few days to the anniversary of that government's rate stabilization

for auto insurance legislation, the residents of Ontario are suffering through massive increases in their insurance -- 19.2% was the average rate of insurance increase in the last quarter alone.

When we ask the government for action what do we hear? That they are out doing focus groups around their proposed regulations in the hope that they can find some way to hang the responsibility on

some party other than themselves.

We know this won't work, because we know the Minister of Finance, who is here with us today, has no attention span for the matter of auto insurance and no

interest in protecting consumers against what they've been experiencing. We call again on the government to act in this most highly regulated sector to protect consumers.

TORONTO CITY SUMMIT ALLIANCE

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): This past week, literally hundreds of people attended the Toronto City Summit Alliance: hundreds of people

from business, from academia, from social work, from politics, from labour; hundreds of people committed to reversing the downward spiral that has become Toronto today. As a result of the twin

demons of amalgamation and downloading, the city of Toronto is not one of the world's great cities any more. But those hundreds of people gathered, trying to find a way out, a way that the city of

Toronto can properly finance itself.

They discussed a gas tax, a hotel tax, land transfer taxes, GST rebates and toll roads. They discussed many things that would be necessary for the city of

Toronto to right itself in this period of downturn, and all they got from this government was non-commitment -- some would even say hostility -- from Minister Flaherty.

There were some bright spots, of course. Former Tories Mr Crombie and Mr Davis -- and I say "former" because they appear to have moved quite a way from this

particular party -- had some very exciting things to say. Overall, though, everyone came to the same conclusion; that is, this government's time is up, and Torontonians who love this city,

including David Pecaut, know that the first change for the better for the people of Toronto will be a change of government.

ANDRÉ MAK

Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): It gives me great pleasure to congratulate André Mak as the recipient of the 2003 Mississauga

Citizen of the Year Award.

Applause.

Mrs Marland: Thank you. This prestigious honour is a fitting tribute to André's remarkable volunteer efforts. His many accomplishments have

also been recognized with the Ontario Medal for Good Citizenship and the Mississauga Civic Award of Recognition.

Since immigrating to Canada in 1969, André Mak has devoted a great deal of his personal time and talent to the Chinese business community and to the broader

communities of Mississauga and Toronto. A co-founder, with Dr Joseph Wong, of the Mississauga Board of Chinese Professionals and Businesses, André Mak has been at the head of many successful

fundraising campaigns. Many institutions and local community groups have benefited immeasurably from André's incredible work ethic and his gentle, compassionate personality.

André is also very successful in the world of business. He has a printing company where he works with his wife, Teresa. They are the loving and proud

parents of three wonderful and talented adult children -- Patricia, Lawrence, and Benjamin -- who are following in the steps of their successful and generous parents.

André, on behalf of all the residents of the city of Mississauga and the members of this Legislature, thank you for your dedication and hard work. You are

an example to all of us of the power of voluntarism to make our community a better place, and we are very proud of you.

PORTUGUESE CANADIAN COMMUNITY

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): On behalf of Dalton McGuinty and the Liberal caucus, I rise for the purpose of recognizing an important day in the

history of mankind, Portuguese national day.

The celebration of the national day of Portugal is special and unique in the pages of history. Unlike some of the dates that commemorate an important political

event, such as a declaration of independence, on this historic occasion we ask the people of Ontario to join our Canadians of Portuguese heritage in the remembrance of a great, world-renowned poet

and writer, Luis de Camões. Although he passed away more than 400 years ago, Camões left a living legacy of meaningful poetry of immortal beauty that has not withered with age.

Especially those of you who participated in this great Portuguese national day and its parade just a few days ago were mostly impressed with the energy and the

vitality of this great community, which has made a tremendous contribution to the lives of every Ontarian and of every Canadian.

I had the pleasure to sit next to our leader, Dalton McGuinty, and he said to me, "Look at these people. Look at the contribution. Look at the wonderful floats.

Look at the energy that pulses throughout this parade." We're delighted to stand here today and recognize their event.

Finally, let me simply say in Portuguese:

Remarks in Portuguese.

TOBERMORY CHI-CHEEMAUN FESTIVAL

Mr Bill Murdoch (Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound): I rise in the House today to let everyone know about an upcoming event in my riding of Bruce-Grey-Owen

Sound. On June 19 to June 22, Tobermory will be celebrating its 29th annual Chi-Cheemaun Festival. It is organized by the Tobermory Chi-Cheemaun Festival Committee in conjunction with the Tobermory

Firefighters Association. It includes the efforts and hard work of a group of people in the area who dedicate countless hours of their time to help make this event memorable.

I encourage all members in this House to gather their family and friends and partake in this annual occasion. It promises to be a fun-filled weekend for

everyone. Enjoy the many events scheduled, such as fireworks displays, the silent auction, and the antique and classic car show. Also included are the Olde Tyme Jamboree, various kids' events, the

dunk tank and the firefighters' pancake breakfast.

Interjections.

Mr Murdoch: Along with numerous volunteers who make this possible, a big "thank you" also goes to the Owen Sound Transportation Co, the Rotary

Club of Tobermory, and the many local businesses who donate financially and the various items to the silent auction. They truly make this a community-based event. The money raised over the weekend

is used for community projects such as school trips, Chi-Cheemaun Cub Scouts, Tobermory Place Daycare, and a new soccer program after school.

I wish to thank all the volunteers and the community of Tobermory for another successful Chi-Cheemaun Festival.

VISITORS

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I would like to welcome Adam Daifallah, who is a rising young star

with the New York Sun and former president of the Ontario PC Campus Association, right here in the gallery.

Mr George Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I would be remiss if I didn't draw the members' attention to

the presence of my uncle, Doug Wood, in the members' gallery.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): We welcome our guests.

Just before the member for Mississauga South, joining us in the Speaker's gallery is Mr Frank Bonello, who is in charge of central scouting for the National

Hockey League. I have warned Frank, who has seen many, many hockey games, that question period may be a little bit worse than even some of the worst hockey games that he has seen in his career.

Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I just wondered why today there was so much heckling of my revered

friend from the county of Grey --

Interjections.

Mrs Marland: No, it's very hard on him. You have no idea. I think all those interjections -- I could hardly hear what he was saying. We don't

usually do it during members' statements, I ask with respect.

The Speaker: I thank the member for her help.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

PREVENTING PARTISAN

ADVERTISING ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 VISANT À EMPÊCHER LA PUBLICITÉ À CARACTÈRE POLITIQUE

Mr Bradley moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 91,

An Act to end government spending on partisan advertising / Projet de loi 91, Loi mettant fin aux dépenses du gouvernement en matière de

publicité à caractère politique.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it. Carried.

The member for St Catharines.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): You would like the explanation now?

The bill establishes standards for government advertising, including that it be in the public interest and be non-partisan. A member of cabinet may ask the

Provincial Auditor of Ontario to decide if specified government advertising meets the standards before the advertising is made public.

A member of the assembly may make a complaint to the auditor that specified government advertising does not meet the standards. If the auditor decides after a

complaint that specified government advertising does not meet the specified standards, the governing party may be ordered to reimburse the crown for the cost of advertising.

The bill requires the auditor to report annually to the Speaker of the assembly on government advertising.

CELEBRATION OF HELLENIC HERITAGE ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA FÊTE DU PATRIMOINE HELLÉNIQUE

Mrs Bountrogianni moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 92,

An Act to proclaim a day and a month to celebrate Hellenic heritage in Ontario / Projet de loi 92, Loi proclamant un jour et un mois de fête du

patrimoine hellénique en Ontario.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mrs Marie Bountrogianni (Hamilton Mountain): The Hellenes, the Greeks of today, are the proud descendants of a culture that originated in the

glorious civilization of ancient Hellas. Many of the ideas, ideals and institutions upon which modern civilization is based, such as freedom and democracy, were first developed by the ancient

Greeks.

The month of March and the day of March 25, in particular, have traditionally been a great time of celebration by the Greek community. March 25 commemorates

the anniversary of the commencement of the Greek War of Independence that resulted in the birth of the modern Greek state.

TRADITIONAL CHINESE MEDICINE PRACTITIONERS, TRADITIONAL CHINESE MEDICINE HERBALISTS AND ACUPUNCTURISTS ACT,

2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LES PRATICIENS DE MÉDECINE CHINOISE TRADITIONNELLE, LES HERBORISTES DE MÉDECINE CHINOISE TRADITIONNELLE ET LES ACUPUNCTEURS

Mr Colle moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 93,

An Act to regulate practitioners of traditional Chinese medicine, herbalists in the practice of traditional Chinese medicine and acupuncturists /

Projet de loi 93, Loi réglementant les praticiens de médecine chinoise traditionnelle, les herboristes praticiens de médecine chinoise traditionnelle et les acupuncteurs.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): This bill, if passed, would help ensure that only well-trained and qualified practitioners of traditional

Chinese medicine and acupuncturists can practise in Ontario. At present, anybody can claim to be an acupuncturist, without any regulation. This would enhance the safety of the public and, at the

same time, establish high standards of care and training for practitioners of this 5,000-year-old successful alternative medical practice.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

PORTUGUESE CANADIAN COMMUNITY

Hon Carl DeFaria (Minister of Citizenship, minister responsible for seniors): I am delighted to declare that today, June 10, is Portugal Day.

It is my great pleasure to join all Ontarians in celebrating the second official Portuguese History and Heritage Month in Ontario. This is our opportunity to acknowledge the contributions that

Canadians of Portuguese background have made to this province.

In June 2002, our government took the initiative to recognize the first official Portuguese History and Heritage Month in Ontario. This month, and particularly

Portugal Day, allows us the opportunity to give special recognition to the rich heritage, history and accomplishments of the Portuguese people.

This is a particularly personal celebration for me, for, as my colleagues know, I came to Canada from Portugal as a young man.

I am proud to call Ontario my home. I have raised my family here, established my career, and have been honoured to serve the residents of Mississauga East as

their member of provincial Parliament since 1995.

As Ontario's Minister of Citizenship and as an immigrant to this great province, I know how important it is to value one's heritage and one's cultural roots. I

also know how important it is that we all reach out and share that heritage and culture to build understanding and acceptance among all Ontarians.

This year, Portuguese History and Heritage Month is a particularly special one because this is the 50th anniversary of the start of Portuguese immigration in

large numbers to Canada. In the 1950s, the Portuguese arrived in Canada in large numbers, mainly from the Azores and in particular from the island of San Miguel. The initial settlement of the

Portuguese in Toronto began in Kensington Market and Alexandra Park, neighbourhoods immediately west of the downtown core.

By 1991, most Portuguese in central Toronto lived in a tightly defined cluster comprising social, cultural and religious institutions, as well as the two most

important Portuguese commercial strips along Dundas and College Streets. The Portuguese community has expanded from its original location. The Portuguese community in Mississauga has grown

considerably in recent years. In northern Ontario, Portuguese newcomers can be found in Sudbury, Sault Ste Marie and Thunder Bay. West of Toronto, the communities of Kitchener, Cambridge, London,

Leamington, Chatham and Sarnia are home to significant Portuguese populations.

The history, culture and traditions of the Portuguese people, however, have enriched Canada for more than 500 years. It was Gaspar Corte Real who arrived at

the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador in the 1500s. With all deference to my colleagues here, there is a saying from a Portuguese writer, "An ocean with an end will be Greek or Roman, but an ocean

without an end is Portuguese."

Portuguese Canadians have played a pioneering role in many facets of today's society. When mail service was first established in Canada in 1693, it was a

that Pedro da Silva was the first mail service in Canada. It was Portuguese fishermen who began cod fishing off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador in 1504.

The Portuguese community is an integral piece of the cultural mosaic that makes our Canada so vital and wonderful. It is important to celebrate the significant

cultural and historical heritage of this vibrant community. Their rich heritage underlines the wealth of ethnic diversity that lends to Ontario's economic and cultural strength. Our government

supports Portuguese History and Heritage Month as a way to highlight and commemorate these accomplishments.

Today I was joined by members of the Portuguese community to raise a flag outside this Legislature officially recognizing Portugal Day, and I had the

opportunity to have a lot of my colleagues with us. We had a reception here, and I'd like to acknowledge Angela Murdoch, the daughter of Bill Murdoch, our colleague here, who performed the capoeira

dance at our event. I wish to indicate my appreciation for her performance.

I ask all members of this Legislature to continue celebrating the Portuguese History and Heritage Month in Ontario in their communities. To all of them, and I

want them all to join me in saying, "Viva Portugal, viva Canada."

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Ministerial statements? Seeing none, responses?

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): On behalf of Dalton McGuinty and my colleagues, I am delighted to respond to the statement on Portuguese

national day.

Today we had over 1,000 persons of Portuguese-Canadian background helping us to raise the flag. I only want to say at the beginning that, unfortunately, none

of them are here. They were here half an hour ago. A thousand people were here. I would have expected that this minister would have asked them to be here to listen to the statement he made. He's

saying that he's proud of his background, he's proud of their contribution, he's proud of all Portuguese-Canadians, but yet, we don't see them in the Legislature sharing this pride. I would hope

that next time he will invite them here to listen to him.

When we raise this flag, we are also conscious of the contributions Portuguese-Canadians have made. They came, indeed, from all over Ontario. They came from

important cities, such as Kingston and Ottawa --

Mrs Marie Bountrogianni (Hamilton Mountain): Hamilton.

Mr Ruprecht: -- and Hamilton, Burlington, and Mississauga. They came from as far away as Cambridge, Thunder Bay, London, Leamington, Chatham,

Sarnia, Kitchener, Sudbury, and on and on we could go.

There are literally thousands of Canadians of Portuguese background who have made a tremendous contribution in all of our cities across Ontario. When we saw

the flag go up today and we saw their faces, especially when their national anthem was sung right here in this Legislature, I observed one person as tears came streaming down their cheeks because

of their condition that they thought they were here in Canada being grateful Canadians and having contributed so much.

Today, while we celebrate this national day, we're also very mindful of Portuguese children. What are they celebrating today? They are celebrating not only an

important day in the history of Canada and Portugal but they're also celebrating a great, renowned poet. This man, Camões, has left a living legacy and, from ocean to ocean, left wonderful

poetry that these children are commemorating today.

As we celebrate this day, we're also reminded of Canada's own artistic communities, of our own poets and our own writers. I hope that his living legacy will

also leave a remnant to Canadians, because Canadians too will be inspired by Luis de Camões as he left his living legacy for Canadians of Portuguese background as well.

The clubs that we saw participating in the great parade that was over a mile and a half long, that lasted over two hours, made a tremendous contribution as

well, and here they are -- I'm just going to read some of them: Amor de Pátria Community Centre; Arco-iris, the association from Toronto; Arsenal do Minho, Asas do Altlântico, Association

25 de Abril, Association Cultural do Minho, Migrante de Barcelos, Comões Soccer Club, Casa Cultural Vila do Conde, Casa da Madeira, Casa das Beiras, Casa do Alentejo, Casa do Benfica. All

these clubs and their floats and their contributions to this parade goes beyond the parade. Indeed, it goes beyond not only this parade but beyond access to trades and professions because it is

these very people who deserve to have access to trades and professions if they are going to make a contribution in the future.

Let me continue: Casa dos Poveiros, Portuguese Club of Mississauga, Santa Clara Cultural de Toronto, Connections Soccer Club, the First Portuguese Club of

Canada, Futebol Clube do Porto, Escola Portuguesa do Clube Transmontano, the Kitchener Portuguese Club, Liga da Amizade, the Northern Portugal Club, Operário Sports Club, the Oshawa Portuguese

Club, the Peniche Community Club, the Portugal 2004 Soccer Club, the Portuguese-Canadian democratic association, the Portuguese United Soccer Club, Tricanas, Ethnográfico de Portugal, Rancho

Folclórico, Províncias e Ilhas de Portugal, Sociedade dos Deficientes Portugal, Sport Clube Angrense, Sport Clube Lusitânia, and on and on it goes. We are proud in this Legislature

that we have so many Portuguese Canadians making such a tremendous contribution.

Therefore, let me simply say that as the Canadian national anthem was played today, we know that Canadians of Portuguese background were not only proud of

their own country and heritage, but also proud to be great Canadians, and we want to thank them for their contribution to Canada.

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I want to say that New Democrats celebrate with Carl DeFaria and many other members of his community on

this occasion of Portugal Day.

I say as well that the community celebrating the 50th anniversary of the start of Portuguese immigration are celebrating and honouring the pioneers. I want to

say to the pioneers that New Democrats appreciate the hard work and the long hours many of our pioneers put in, the overwork and underpayment of so many of our early immigrants, who worked hard

trying to find work all over Ontario.

In those early years it was very difficult finding work. My father had a similar kind of experience. It didn't matter to him what he had to do. He knew he had

to find work and needed to work to be able to make some money to call his family. My father was here in 1956 and we came in 1962. So some of us are very familiar with the sacrifices they made for

us, to be strong for themselves and to become strong Canadians. It wasn't very easy. Many of their children and our children forget the sacrifices our early pioneers made, so these are

opportunities for everyone, in every community, to remember what immigrants did and the sacrifices they made for themselves and their families to become active and very strong Canadians.

Carl, with you, I celebrate and honour those pioneers, as you have done over so many years. I celebrate as well the role that ACAPO has made. ACAPO is the

central coordinating organization of all the clubs and associations, and they have put in a great deal of time to create the parade we've seen. It was lively and showed tremendous vitality and

colour. I enjoyed, we enjoyed and Howard Hampton enjoyed taking

part in and being able to witness those celebrations, along with many others -- our friend Jordan Berger, who was there -- and the

diversity, colour and strength of multiculturalism.

I wanted to take the time to congratulate ACAPO because they put in, at their own expense, time and money to share the pride of their history, their roots, and

their strength as Canadians with all of us.

I congratulate as well Consul General Perestrello, who is leaving us. I want to take the opportunity on behalf of New Democrats to congratulate him on his

elegance and intelligence, his ability to coordinate with everyone so that whatever he does in representing Portuguese Canadians is passed on to us in ways that are honourable, and that he and I

can be proud of. I thank him, and his charming and intelligent wife, Jane, for the sacrifices she makes as well.

We take pride in the fact that many of our early Portuguese Canadians went to the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador in 1504, where they started cod fishing. I

just want to add, incidentally, that Marilyn Churley, our friend and colleague from Toronto-Danforth -- that was her home and she has a great affinity with the history that Portuguese Canadians

brought to Newfoundland and Labrador. I wanted to share that with everyone, in case they don't know, Marilyn.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): They don't know. Thank you.

Mr Marchese: As well, I want to congratulate Carl DeFaria for sensitizing his caucus to the strength, the vitality, the richness and the

contribution of Portuguese Canadians in Ontario. I'm sure you did a good job of that, Carl, with all the activities we have done and everything you've done in your own caucus to share that

history.

So, to you, Carl DeFaria, to ACAPO, to all Portuguese Canadians in my riding and every riding across Ontario, I wish every Portuguese Canadian --

Remarks in Portuguese .

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: We were given to understand that the government House leader would be at

question period today.

The Speaker: I believe the member will be here. Yes, he's on his way.

We'll hear from the member for Sudbury as we rag the puck.

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): On a point of order while we're waiting, Mr Speaker: I move unanimous consent for second and third reading of

Bill 44,

An Act to amend the Occupational Health and Safety Act to require the appointment of a workplace carcinoma committee.

The Speaker: The member has asked for unanimous consent for second and third reading. Is there unanimous consent? I'm afraid I heard some

noes.

Mr Duncan: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I seek unanimous consent for second and third reading of Bill 76,

An Act to amend the Health

Insurance Act.

The Speaker: The member has asked for unanimous consent for second and third reading of Bill 76. Is there unanimous consent? I'm afraid I

heard some noes.

Mr Bartolucci: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I move unanimous consent for second and third reading of Bill 51,

An Act to amend the

Occupational Health and Safety Act with respect to acts of workplace violence.

The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent on Bill 51? I'm afraid I heard some noes.

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I seek unanimous consent for second and third reading of

Bill 42,

An Act to bring health and safety programs to Ontario students -- a very good bill.

The Speaker: The member has asked for unanimous consent. I'm afraid I heard some noes.

ORAL QUESTIONS

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Minister of the Environment. On April 28, 1992, Ernie Eves stood in this

House and called for Shelley Martel's resignation, saying, "Most people I talk to understand that lying is a very serious offence. They understand that there are serious consequences to be paid if

they lie.... They don't understand how a cabinet minister ... doesn't seem to have to live by the same rules ... they do in their day-to-day lives."

Yesterday, Minister, rather than admit the truth, you said you never said things which in fact you did say.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. I would ask the leader of the official opposition to be careful. As you know, we're treading very finely

here. We're going to ask the table as well. I would ask him to be very careful. As you know, implying that somebody lied is also unparliamentary, and I would ask the member to continue and keep

that in mind, please.

Mr McGuinty: Along the way, you resorted to attacking a reporter's professional integrity because he blew the whistle on you.

Today that reporter produced a tape of your interview. Your voice is clearly heard saying exactly what he reported and what you said you did not say.

Given what the Premier has said about these matters in the past, you would have thought that he would have demanded your resignation.

Minister, my question to you here today is, why have you not offered your resignation?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): I think this is a bizarre situation. You're suggesting to me that

what I said outside with respect to an interview I had, which I didn't agree with, is somehow grounds for a resignation of a minister.

I still say that the story was torqued; I still say it was unfairly written. If he has a dispute with me with respect to whether or not the story was fair,

which I don't think it was, then he should take it up with me. I stand by what I said.

I can also suggest to you that there are comments attributed to me in here which I did not say. So that's my position.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, you were interviewed by Mr Mittelstaedt. He kept very, very careful records. You said that he "totally torqued and

fabricated that story -- absolutely torqued and fabricated." Could you tell us today, then, which words, audible in your voice, recorded on a tape recorder, you are now claiming you never said.

Hon Mr Stockwell: I don't have the original story here. I wish someone could grab it for me. The tone and tenor of the story was torqued, in

my opinion. Torqued. The tone and tenor of the story was worked up over some six months that he suggested. He wrote the story with an idea of putting the situation in the worst possible light he

could possibly put it in. I believe it was torqued. He attributed to me comments, which I don't have with me at this time, such as -- and I'm working from memory -- that the work regime or whatever

was so light -- here we go: for instance, "But later ... he conceded that the stay in Paris had so little official business that he decided to pick up" the six nights of the hotel cost on his own.

I never said that. I never said that that stay in Paris had so little official business I decided to pick up the costs on my own. I never said that. That's what he wrote. That's what he said I

said. "But later in the interview, he conceded" -- it was like I was conceding this. I didn't say that.

Mr McGuinty: Let's understand what happened here. You went to Europe. You spent a lot of money there: $27,000 that was expensed to the

ministry. You then hid $5,000 to $10,000 in additional expenses through OPG.

The Speaker: The member is going to have to withdraw the word "hidden," please.

Mr McGuinty: I withdraw, Speaker.

Instead of admitting what you did was wrong, you attacked that reporter's professional integrity and you claimed you never said what he had accurately

reported.

I think, Minister, it was wrong for you to put expenses through OPG. I think it was wrong for you to claim that you never said things we later learned were in

fact accurate, based on a tape recording. I think it was wrong for you to attack a whistle-blower's integrity. I think the right thing for you to do today is to resign. Will you now stand up and

resign?

Hon Mr Stockwell: This line of questioning is totally, unbelievably bizarre. To suggest that I hid anything is so untrue. To suggest that I

didn't answer the questions directly and up front is not the case. I answered all these questions, and I think even the most reasonable person would say that this

article was torqued. He wanted me

to look bad. He spent six months trying to get me to look bad and all he came up with was some ground transportation in Paris. I paid those bills -- or the government didn't pay any of those bills;

didn't charge OPG. Yes, I think it's torqued. That's what I believe. I still stand by that.

Listen, you have Mr Mittelstaedt and you put him up here and you hold him in such high esteem. Maybe I don't hold him in as high esteem as you do. That's a

difference of opinion; it's not a resigning offence.

The Speaker: New question, the leader of the official opposition.

Mr McGuinty: I have a question to the same minister. Ultimately it's not about Mr Mittelstaedt; it's about you and your integrity and

information that you conveyed to the Ontario public. That's what this is all about.

You were interviewed by Mr Mittelstaedt. He kept very careful records. You said that he "totally torqued and fabricated that story." That's your quotation. You

went on to say it was "absolutely torqued and fabricated." Again, that is your quotation.

I'm asking you again, Minister, which words, available in your voice, recorded on that tape recorder, are you now claiming you never said?

Interjection.

Hon Mr Stockwell: "But later in the interview, he conceded" --

The Speaker: I'm sorry to interrupt the minister. This is the last warning for the Minister of Colleges and Universities. If she says any

more, I'm going to throw her out. I'm not going to put up with it. You've been yelling since the first question. I will not put up with it. This is your last warning. If you want to be thrown out,

keep it up, and the Sergeant at Arms will remove you. Sorry, Minister.

Hon Mr Stockwell: "But later in the interview, he conceded that the stay in Paris had so little official business that he decided to pick up"

the six nights of the hotel cost himself.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, you know that in the matter of Shelley Martel it wasn't just Ernie Eves who stood in his place and demanded a higher

standard of integrity. Do you forget what you used to say on this side of the House? Is that what you're telling us, Minister? I will remind you of some of the things. Apparently the ethical

standards which you so embraced on this side of the House you have chosen to abandon over there. Let me remind you of what you said.

After the Martel incident, you said, and I quote, "I would have dusted her so fast, it would have made your head spin." That's what you said. Since Ernie Eves

has failed to live up to the ethical standards he once held in opposition, I'm now asking you, Minister, what about the ethical standards you embraced on this side of the House? Why don't you stand

up, tell us you still embrace those same standards and that you will now resign?

Hon Mr Stockwell: The Integrity Commissioner is reviewing this issue. I'm going to wait for his response.

As far as the questions you're asking me today, how much clearer could I be? I read the paragraph to you. I read it to you. I didn't say that.

I know we're in a partisan place. I know it's up to everybody in here to be political, and I know it's up to everybody in here to reach down to levels that

I've never seen before in order to score political points. I'm going to tell you right now, Mr Leader of the Opposition, I didn't say that. I don't know what more I can tell you. He didn't put it

in quotes. Why? Because I didn't say it. He said it, not me. I know this story was designed and built in that fashion. I'm going to tell you, Mr Leader of the Opposition, when I got asked questions

from Mr Mittelstaedt, I responded. I know what I said. I didn't say that.

Mr McGuinty: Again, Minister, it's about more than this story. I think you should resign. The right and honourable thing for you to do is to

resign, and I'll give you four reasons why you should do that: first of all, because you put expenses through OPG, and I think that is wrong. You claimed you never said things which you in fact did

say. I think that was wrong. You attacked a whistle-blower's integrity because he blew the whistle on you. I think that was wrong. Finally, you should resign, Mr Stockwell, because on this side of

the House you would have insisted, you would have demanded that that individual over there who did these kinds of things resign. You should stand up now and do the right thing and resign.

Hon Mr Stockwell: I'm not going to. I don't think I should. I don't think I did anything wrong. I think I was pilloried. I think the story did

pillory me. If you listen to my answers -- I gave them as clearly as I could. I didn't say that. If you have some evidence to prove I did say that, then bring it forward. Otherwise, I stand by my

comments, Mr Leader of the Opposition. I didn't say that. I think the story was torqued, and I live with those comments.

I have not had a single person in my caucus come to me and say, "You should resign." I've not had a single person in the Premier's office tell me, "This is a

resigning offence." All they've said to me has supported the position I put forward.

Do I believe we're at a stage now where I think stories get written like this because we're closing in on an election and there are two leaders' questions

coming to me about this thing, when there are issues in the province that we could be talking about? Sure I do. I know what this is all about. This is what they taught you in Chicago, wasn't it?

This is what they taught you in Washington. This is what they taught you for $27,000 of taxpayers' money. It won't work here.

SARS

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Health.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. The leader of the third party has a question.

Mr Hampton: Minister, today your press release says, "Eves Government Launches Independent SARS Commission." I know you're doing your best to

spin your announcement as a public inquiry. But when we look at the details of it, we find that significant aspects of the Public Inquiries Act are omitted. For example, under

part III of the act,

a commissioner would have the power of search and seizure. He would be able to go into a hospital's records or, say, the Ministry of Health's records and would be able to obtain documents or

directives. But you have omitted that power. This will be an investigation without the power to, in effect, search for documents, directives or evidence. Maybe you can tell us what kind of

investigation doesn't have the power to search for documents or take those documents that they find are relevant to the inquiry. What kind of investigation is that?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'd be happy to educate the leader of the third party on what I think is an

announcement that is important to the people of Ontario, who frankly have a right to know what goes on in the Ontario health care system and what we can do to ensure that the health and safety of

Ontarians is first and foremost.

I can tell you that Justice Campbell has the powers of a commission under the Public Inquiries Act,

part II. He can issue summonses, he can compel production

of documents, he can receive evidence and he can administer oaths. There is whistle-blower protection for those who need that kind of protection so that they are not subject to adverse employment

action for providing information to Justice Campbell and the commission. Those are the protections in place.

I say to the honourable leader of the third party: is he in some way suggesting that Justice Campbell cannot do his job? I think he can, and I think he

will.

Mr Hampton: The commissioner will not have the power of search and seizure. Yes, he may summon a witness under your restricted terms, but if

the witness refuses to turn up, then the commissioner has to go off to court for a very lengthy court process. You have effectively hamstrung the commissioner in that respect. Further,

part I of

the Public Inquiries Act states very clearly that all hearings of an inquiry are open to the public except where the commissioner conducting the inquiry is of the opinion that they involve, for

example, public security.

These will not be public hearings. You will not provide for public hearings. You will not provide for the examination of a witness in public. What you've

designed by omitting

part I and

part III of the Public Inquires Act is exactly what we said it was going to be: something that will take place in a backroom. Nurses who are sick, nurses who are

dying, nurses who are going above and beyond the call of duty in our hospitals are asking for a public inquiry. Why won't you give it to them?

Hon Mr Clement: Let me read

part 4 of the terms of reference for the SARS commission: "Mr Justice Campbell shall hold such public or private

meetings as he deems advisable in the course of his investigation" -- public or private, leader of the third party. He has the discretion, he has the power, he has the right to make the

determination. Why are you trying to do the job of an independent commissioner? Why don't you let him do his job instead of trying to second-guess the independent commissioner? Why don't you do

your job rather than trying to do his job?

Mr Hampton: You would know there's a difference between a public meeting and a public hearing. But here you are trying to confuse a public

meeting with public hearing. They are not the same at all. What you've designed here would not give standing to the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, for example. It would not give standing

to the Ontario Nurses' Association to bring a lawyer to examine witnesses and cross-examine witnesses. Everything we expect to see in an independent inquiry, where people get to test the truth of

the other side, you have very carefully omitted. What you've designed here is a backroom process that will not result in public hearings, will not result in the cross-examination of witnesses, will

not result in the kind of public process that we saw in Walkerton.

Minister, nurses out there are risking their lives. You should at least be decent enough to grant them the public inquiry they've called for. Will you finally

do that, or are you going to try to hide behind this smokescreen?

Hon Mr Clement: This is a commission under the Health Protection and Promotion Act and

part II of the Public Inquiries Act -- issue summonses,

independent judge, independent review, compel production of documents. He can give standing to each and every person he so chooses. I ask the honourable member again, why will you not let the

independent Mr Justice Campbell do his job and find the answers that we all in this chamber want to hear and want to find out? Why don't you let him do his job? Why don't you let him be the

independent commissioner that we want him to be? Why don't you stop being the judge and jury of the people of Ontario? Quite frankly, you're not very good at it.

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Attorney General. Today the Ontario Court of Appeal, headed by your

predecessor, Roy McMurtry, reached an important decision in terms of equality. The court ruled that same-sex marriages must be registered in Ontario. This is a good day for equality in Ontario. Yet

the Premier seems reluctant to agree with the court's decision. He says he has no plans to register same-sex marriages at any time soon. Attorney General, will you confirm that the government of

Ontario will obey the court ruling and will register same-sex marriages immediately, as the court ordered?

Hon Norman W. Sterling (Attorney General, Minister Responsible for Native Affairs): I've only received the decision, and I haven't got all the

way through this particular decision. Marriage is defined by our federal government, and it is their decision whether they want to appeal this particular decision, whether they want to deal with it

in a legislative manner or whether they want to do something else within the law to deal with it. As a government, we will follow whatever the court has directed us with regard to this issue,

because this issue, as I said before, is within the realm of our federal Parliament.

Mr Hampton: My question was, what will your government do? It struck me as a bit odd that the Premier would say he had no intention of

following the law as set down by the Court of Appeal of Ontario. We'll get to that in due time, but I want to ask you this: the Liberals in Ottawa may in fact, unfortunately, appeal this to the

Supreme Court of Canada, so I'm asking you, in following the court's order, will you join with me today and write to the federal Attorney General and ask the Liberals in Ottawa to obey the law as

well?

Hon Mr Sterling: I believe the Premier said that he wanted to review the decision of the Court of Appeal, which I have in front of me. It

would be, of course, within the realm of the federal Minister of Justice, who I believe is going to indicate later today whether he is going to appeal this decision or not. It will be up to the

federal government to decide, as they were the main litigant in this matter, as to whether or not they are going to appeal it to the Supreme Court of Canada. As I said in my previous answer, we

will of course follow what the court says in the decision and follow the letter of the law.

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): My question is to the government House leader. There is going to be no ruling, no adjudication, no review from

the Integrity Commissioner, as you and the Premier have suggested, and you know it. The Integrity Commissioner is going to provide you with a confidential advisory letter, and you can do with that

letter whatever you wish. That's what the statute says, and you know that. You should also know that you're supposed to get that confidential advisory letter before you go on the trip, not

afterwards to exonerate yourself after the expense has been made.

There are not going to be any hearings, there are not going to be any affidavits, there is not going to be any submission from one side or the other. There is

going to be a letter from you to the Integrity Commissioner, and he will provide his advice based upon the facts as you present them to him. I say to you that you are abusing this particular

process. I say to you, Minister, that you are the one who is torquing and prevaricating as to what the Integrity Commissioner --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. I'm afraid you're going to have to withdraw both of those comments.

Mr Bryant: "Torquing" and "prevaricating"?

The Speaker: Yes. You have to withdraw.

Mr Bryant: Withdrawn.

The Speaker: It may be what the member said about somebody else in the press; it's different with a member.

Mr Bryant: I say then to the House leader, you are ratcheting up what in fact is in place here and you are ratcheting up and abusing the

Office of the Integrity Commissioner with this effort.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): Oh, my goodness. Look, he can make it public or he can do it

privately. He can make a decision --

Interjection.

Hon Mr Stockwell: Oh, yes. Do you know what? I've said it in the past and I'll say it again: whatever decision comes out of the Integrity

Commissioner's office I will abide by. If the Integrity Commissioner says I made a mistake, then I made a mistake -- I admit it. If the Integrity Commissioner says we need a policy change but

there's no mistake here, I'll abide by that too.

I give you my undertaking: whatever he provides me with as far as a written response, I'll give it to you.

Mr Bryant: I say to you, nice try. Stop using the Integrity Commissioner's office for your political purposes to shield you from

accountability. I say to you, Minister, stop pretending that we need an inquiry when we've already got a taped and signed confession. He did it. We know what the facts are. We don't need an opinion

from the Integrity Commissioner into what happened, just like we don't need an opinion letter from him as to who won the Stanley Cup.

We need accountability. We need to have disclosed to the public the ministerial expenses from the ministers here who have put them through government

corporations. We need to have the loopholes filled. If there needs to be any inquiry by anybody here, it ought to be into your judgment, into this government's standards and into this Premier's

lack of leadership.

The Speaker: Minister?

Hon Mr Stockwell: Mr Speaker, I don't know what the question was.

The problem is that you think Anaheim won the Stanley Cup. That's the difficulty you've got. You are so out of touch and so distorted with respect to what's

going on.

The Integrity Commissioner is there to do just this. He's there to take requests referred to him by members of this House. I'm trying to tell you that I did

what I thought any other honourable member would do.

I want to remind you of something. I remember when your member got referred to the Integrity Commissioner.

Interjections.

Hon Mr Stockwell: Let me just finish. Not once, not one time between referring that and to its happening did I say a word, not a heckle -- I

didn't. I have great faith in the Integrity Commissioner. Justice Coulter Osborne is the second-highest jurist in the province of Ontario. I've spoken to his office. I will tell you flat out: I

don't think he feels the least bit abused.

SARS

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): My question is for the Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing responsible for urban

affairs. We all know that the effects of the current SARS outbreak are being felt in many sectors of Ontario's economy, and Scarborough, being the centre of the storm, certainly has borne the brunt

of many of these effects.

Many people's incomes are being affected, either directly or indirectly, by a downturn in economic activity. I know our government is effectively dealing with

this challenge on many different levels, but when it comes to tenants, of whom there are many in my riding affected by this outbreak, paying rent is an immediate concern. What is our government

doing to stop tenants from being evicted because they have lost income due to quarantine from SARS?

Hon Tina R. Molinari (Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I want to thank the member for Scarborough Centre, who works very

hard for her constituents, for this very important question.

Our government believes that tenants should not be unfairly evicted. That's why the Tenant Protection Act gives the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal the power

to refuse evictions if they are deemed unfair. I am pleased to report that the chair of the tribunal has shown initiative on this very issue. The tribunal has issued an emergency policy to

reschedule cases until quarantine periods have passed. The TPA ensures that tenants are protected. Any landlord who illegally evicts tenants is subject to a fine of up to $10,000 individually or

$50,000 corporately.

Although this penalty is in place, I would still appeal to all landlords to consider the effects that SARS is having on their tenants. They should give tenants

who have lost income because of quarantine or SARS-related layoffs time to pay their rent.

Ms Mushinski: Thank you for that response, Minister. I know that's important information for tenants in my great riding of Scarborough Centre.

It's appropriate guidance, hopefully, for landlords as well.

While we're on the subject of the Tenant Protection Act, I wonder if you can clarify for renters in my riding, because they want to know what safeguards are in

place to protect them against unreasonable rent increases as a result of spikes in utility costs that landlords realize from time to time.

Interjections.

Ms Mushinski: Can you tell me, and I hope the Liberal opposition will listen to this, because clearly they don't have any answers, what

mechanisms are in place to make sure tenants aren't unfairly burdened with this type of case?

Hon Mrs Molinari: This government is committed to ensuring that rent increases are fair to both tenants and landlords. The Tenant Protection

Act is strong legislation that protects tenants against unfair rent increases and allows landlords to recoup extraordinary increases in their operating costs when necessary.

Through an amendment to the regulation in the act, which was announced on December 31 last year, tenants are protected. Our government recognizes that when a

landlord applies for an above-guideline rent increase, they may receive a refund or a rebate. That's why we've amended the regulations under the TPA to ensure that any utility refund or rebate will

be deducted from the landlord's costs if they apply for an above-guideline rent increase. This regulation change is fair to all tenants.

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

Mr George Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale): My question is to the Minister of the Environment. Minister, yesterday you used the word

"fabrication" to describe quotes that were attributed to you by Martin Mittelstaedt. Earlier today in questioning from my leader, you attempted to read a paragraph into the record that was in fact

not a quote. Yesterday, very clearly, you said that quotes attributed to you -- quotes; that's where things like that are around them -- were a fabrication.

In questioning from my leader today, you defended yourself by reading a paragraph into the record that was, I believe, not a quote at all. Mr Minister, proof

has been offered by Martin Mittelstaedt today that the quotes that were attributed to you were said by you.

I would ask you, in light of your past record on this matter, dealing with the member from Sudbury in 1992 and the strength of your position then, why would

you not do the honourable thing and resign?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): I guess because I consider that to be attributed to me. I think

when people read a story and it says, "But later in the interview, he conceded that his stay in Paris had so little official business that he decided to pick up the six-night hotel [cost]" -- to

me, an average person reading that would say, "He said that. The reporter says that he conceded that." I think anyone who would read that, any third party, impartial person, would say, "Boy, he

said that?" I didn't say that.

Mr Smitherman: All that we need to go with that dance is a little song, because this member, who has spent almost his entire adult life in

public service, very well knows the difference between something that may be attributed in an editorial way and something that is a quote. Today he seeks to convince this House, because it suits

his story today, that he was talking about a paragraph that was in fact not a quote.

So I say to the minister one more time: since yesterday you said that quotes that were attributed to you were a fabrication, and since it has been proven by

the reporter that that is not the case, will you stand in your place and do the honourable thing and resign?

Hon Mr Stockwell: Listen, I just think there's a quantum leap in your logic. I think you're arguing about how many angels or fairies can dance

on the head of a pin. I think your position is bizarre. You're asking me to resign because you think that he said this, and it isn't in quotations. I disagree with it because I suggest it was a

quotation, and what he said was, "But later in the interview, he conceded." If this is it -- this is it, folks. We've now been reduced to this: I said it was a quotation, when in fact he said, "But

later in the interview, he conceded," and they're asking for a minister's resignation. This is not believable.

Did you hear about Tony's and the Premier's announcement with respect to the SARS issue? Did you hear about that? They've appointed someone to look into the

SARS issue. I don't know if you heard about that, but that's a really important announcement today. The public is very interested, and they would like to know what you think. You know what I think

the public thinks about whether it's a quotation or this or that? I think this is so infinitesimal, so minor that I'm not even answering the question.

REFUGEES

Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): My question is for the Minister of Public Safety and Security. Approximately three weeks ago,

federal Auditor General Sheila Fraser revealed that the federal government has lost track of about 36,000 failed refugee claimants, individuals who had been ordered removed from this country. The

Auditor General also said that these cases may pose a safety concern.

The federal government has dismissed the Auditor General's concerns about security. I ask the Minister of Public Safety and Security what our government's

position is with regard to this situation.

Hon Robert W. Runciman (Minister of Public Safety and Security): I thank the member for the question. We are very concerned about the risk

that these individuals might pose to the people of our province, and we're not alone. The Toronto Police Association has also echoed those concerns. Federal Minister Coderre has dismissed the

Auditor General's concerns, but a check of CPIC indicates that, as of today, there are almost 37,000 prime warrants for these individuals, with an additional 50,000-plus alias entries attached to

them. This is clearly a legitimate public safety and security matter.

The Auditor General was correct. The federal government has handled the immigration system in a haphazard and dangerous way.

Mr Tascona: I thank the honourable member for his answer.

Several months ago, we all read about the "yo-yo bandits," convicted criminals deported from this country on three separate occasions, only to return and be

engaged, or allegedly engaged, in criminal activity once again.

Last week, the Liberal member for Hamilton Mountain said that any political party supportive of a made-in-Ontario immigration policy, similar to the program

currently in place in the province of Quebec, is "scapegoating immigrants and insulting all Ontarians."

I ask the Minister of Public Safety and Security, what is his view?

Hon Mr Runciman: As you know, I can't comment on any specific case, but allow to me to respond to the accusations of scapegoating made by the

member from Hamilton Mountain.

Let me be clear: this government believes that Ontario's prosperity has been, and continues to be, strengthened by immigration and the diversity of our people.

Let no member opposite be confused. The Ernie Eves government is battling illegal immigrants, such as these nearly 37,000 prime warrants being hunted. Allegations like the one from the member

opposite are indicative of the Liberal Party's propensity to slander and throw mud at anyone who attempts to deal with this issue.

The truth of the matter is that not nearly enough is being done from the moment these illegal immigrants land on Canadian soil. In recent weeks, the people of

Ontario have been alerted to improper medical screening procedures at points of entry into Canada, potentially exposing Canadians to infectious disease. Last week, there were allegations brought

forward that federal immigration officers --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The minister's time is up, I'm afraid.

SCHOOL SAFETY

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): My question is to the Minister of Education. Parents are really concerned about the safety of their

children. When we asked this question yesterday, your Premier made no commitment to address the issue of safety. Instead of dealing with this issue, you made an announcement to bring in so-called

outside experts, ie non-certified teaching staff. You were willing to find dollars for this, but there is no funding to bring back caretakers, lunchroom supervisors, educational assistants,

principals and vice-principals -- the people who keep our kids safe. Minister, explain this to me and to many of the parents across Ontario.

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): I find the remarks and allegations of the member opposite unfortunate, because

when our government introduced, first, the Safe Schools Act in 2000, both the NDP and the Liberals voted against the Safe Schools Act.

Interjection.

Hon Mrs Witmer: I'd also like the member to know that the Toronto District School Board has today sent out, to principals, streetproofing tips

for parents. I'd also like you to know that the Toronto District School Board -- all across Toronto, local communities -- they are jointly meeting with the police. They have been advised that

security staff and safe school coordinators are working with the police on heightened alert and are ready to assist. I would say to you that the Toronto District School Board is taking all the

action it possibly can in order to ensure --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The member's time is up.

While I'm up, this is the last warning for the member for Windsor West. If she continues, she'll be asked to leave as well. We can't have you continuing to

yell across.

I apologize to the member for Trinity-Spadina. And the supplementary?

Mr Marchese: Minister, it seems you have money for all the wrong things and no funding to do the right thing. Ontario parents like Cathy

Dandy, who is here today with her child, want you to look out for the safety of their children. Your board supervisor is looking at replacing 300 caretakers and cutting kindergarten education

assistants by half. What kind of government are you, I ask, when you care more about finding money for non-qualified teachers than for caretakers, education assistants, lunchroom supervisors,

vice-principals and principals, who are the eyes and ears of school safety?

Hon Mrs Witmer: Unfortunately, the statements the member opposite is making are not founded on fact. We've made no announcements regarding

teachers who are not qualified to teach in the classroom. We made an announcement yesterday about the fact that volunteers could participate in after-school activities. They were unpaid volunteers,

so you are wrong.

I would say to you today that you probably owe the principals in the city of Toronto an apology. They are working diligently in co-operation with the police to

ensure the safety of children. Letters have gone home. They're taking every precaution necessary. They're having daily consultations with the safe schools office. An adviser from the safe schools

office is visiting schools. I would just say to the member opposite that when we introduced the Safe Schools Act in 2000 to protect the safety of our children, you and the Liberals first voted

against it.

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): The question is to the Minister of the Environment. Minister --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): If you could just stop the clock for a quick moment.

Continue, leader of the official opposition.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, you continue to maintain that the reporter got it wrong, that he fabricated his story. You take issue with a particular

sentence, the one where Mr Mittelstaedt wrote: "... he conceded" -- talking about you -- "that the stay in Paris had so little official business that he decided to pick up his six-night hotel...."

What you in fact said was, "Because we had a prolonged stay in Paris, we arranged meetings that were a little sparse, so I decided it was better I paid them." Minister, can you tell me what is the

difference? Mittelstaedt says, "...he conceded that the stay in Paris had so little official business that he decided to pick up his six-night hotel," and you said, "Because we had a prolonged stay

in Paris, we arranged meetings that were a little sparse, so I decided it was better I paid them." What's the difference?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): I guess we have a difference of opinion, leader of the official

opposition. He also said during that same interview that he thought the meeting

schedule was a little sparse, as they said. I said, no, it was a very heavy meeting schedule. We had 12 meetings in

14 days. That was also part of the context of the column. So why on the one hand would I have said, "Yes, it was a busy schedule. We were meeting quite a bit," and on the other hand say, that I

conceded so little official business that "he decided to pick up his own tab"? It doesn't make any sense. Why would I say, yes, we were very busy, and then on the other hand, when I was talking

about the tail end of the trip and why we picked up the tab, because on the tail end of the trip we couldn't get a connecting flight -- that's what I said.

Mr McGuinty: You talk about trying to figure out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. The issue here is you can't justify sending

$5,000 to $10,000 worth of expenses over to OPG. That's what this is all about. You've got trouble admitting that, you've got trouble facing up to that, and you've got trouble recognizing that that

is wrong. So a reporter blew the whistle on you. "Big deal. Those things happen from time to time." I think the way you should have reacted was to say, "I got it wrong. I did something that was

wrong. I should not have sent $5,000 to $10,000 worth of expenses through OPG. It was wrong for me to claim that I never said those things. It was wrong for me to attack the personal and

professional integrity of a reporter." That's what you should have done. I think the right thing for you to do is to stand up today, given all those wrongs, and resign.

Hon Mr Stockwell: I guess this is the fundamental question. I don't think I did anything wrong.

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): That's the problem.

Hon Mr Stockwell: Maybe you're right. I say to the member, Mr Parsons, that may be right. You have an opinion that I did; I have an opinion

that I didn't. So what did I do? I went to the adjudicator, Justice Coulter Osborne, and said, "Please, Mr Osborne, as the Integrity Commissioner for Ontario" -- that we've all appointed --

Interjection: Unanimously.

Hon Mr Stockwell: Unanimously -- "Please, could you settle this dispute, because the opposition thinks I'm wrong and I don't. What do you

think?" You know what I'd like to know before we start going into this much further? I'd like to know what he thinks?

BEER AND LIQUOR SALES

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): My question today is for the Minister of Consumer and Business Services. Constituents in my riding of

Simcoe North and other Simcoe county ridings and across Ontario want government to deliver services more conveniently and closer to home. I know that this government has been a leader in making

government work for working families. I know that the LCBO, which reports to your ministry, has been working hard to improve the service it provides to Ontarians. In fact, one of the most

successful programs currently underway is the expansion of the agency store program in Ontario. Could you please let the House know how this program has been progressing here in our province?

Hon Tim Hudak (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): The agency store program is an important and exciting program that helps out

consumers and small businesses in rural Ontario, a partnership between the LCBO and The Beer Store and existing private enterprise, to allow people who live in small-town Ontario who have a longer

drive into the city to go to an LCBO or Beer Store to have access within their own communities. It's been a very successful program. The ball started rolling under my predecessor, the Honourable

Norm Sterling. I know it's a very popular program that has seen money being kept in small-town Ontario, and I can tell you some good stories about stores that have seen an increase in their

businesses as grocery stores, variety stores etc, as a result.

I know the member for Simcoe North has been a very strong advocate for this program on behalf of rural Ontario. I know he's advocated for communities in his

riding. He's probably very excited about Friday's announcement that Joyland Beach and Warminster are new agency store communities. I congratulate the member on his efforts.

Mr Dunlop: These agency stores are great news for communities in my riding and across the province. For example, in Simcoe-Grey, Minister

Wilson's riding, Minesing, Feversham, Singhampton, Thornton and Beeton all have new agency stores, and they're working out very well.

Communities like Craighurst are already enjoying the benefits of an agency store. Last summer, I was very pleased when the minister joined me to officially

open the agency store in Craighurst. The owner of that particular facility actually spent $1.5 million and included the agency store as part of that.

I understand that the other new stores opened by this government have also been very successful. With these new LCBO outlets opening up in existing stores, I'm

certain that there will be questions about young people accessing their products. For these new stores to be truly successful, they will have to provide the same high standards of service and

social responsibility as a regular LCBO store.

Minister, please let us know how you're ensuring that agency stores follow the same high standards as regular LCBO stores.

Hon Mr Hudak: I enjoyed the trip to Craighurst. I know it has been a big boon, as consumers are spending more dollars in small-town Ontario as

a result.

This is an important question from the member in terms of how we check to make sure minors don't have access to alcohol: the exact same standards that exist in

the LCBO or the Beer Store -- for example, the Check 25 program -- are enforced at the agency stores. The retailers themselves must go through this intensive training. I'm pleased to report, as

well, that while no instances were brought to my attention, there are strong penalties in case they are: fines up to $500,000 or a potential loss of a licence. I am pleased to say we have not heard

of these incidences in my office, but those penalties are in place. Whether you're in Stevensville or the Summerhill flagship of the LCBO, there are very high standards to ensure that there is no

access to alcohol for minors in these programs.

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): My question is for the government House leader. You said that the inquiry process under the Members' Integrity

Act was a similar process as you are currently invoking from the Integrity Commissioner. You will know that under the Members' Integrity Act, there is the possibility of an inquiry with submissions

and affidavits submitted and an opportunity for meetings. It's a fairly elaborate process. It takes many, many weeks, if not months. It involves a tremendous amount of evidence.

That's one process, but that's not the process that you're invoking. The process that you're invoking is the same process that a number of us invoke all the

time. We ask the Integrity Commissioner for some advice, confidential advice, and we can do with it what we will. You are wrong to say that he can release it or not release it, and you are wrong to

say that the process that you are invoking, the confidential advice, is the same as a full-blown inquiry, and you know it.

So I would ask the minister, would you please clarify to this House exactly the process that you're invoking with the Integrity Commissioner with respect to

your OPG expenses?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): I simply phoned the Integrity Commissioner and suggested, "I saw

this story, and this is the query. Would you please investigate it and report back to me? If I can be of any service or help or provide you with any information, I will do so readily and

quickly."

I then noticed that you had a press conference on Friday last and you said you wanted to broaden the scope of it. People asked for my comments, and I said,

"Great; jim-dandy. Broaden the scope of it; I've got no problem with it." I simply called the Integrity Commissioner when I saw it, and asked him to review it and look into it.

I don't know what else you'd expect. I have great faith in the Integrity Commissioner, Coulter Osborne. I don't think he's going to be abused. I don't think he

feels abused. I don't think he's feeling that it's a whitewash. From any conversations I've had with his office, they seemed perfectly happy with what I did, and they said that to me: "You've done

the exact right thing. The minute this was brought to your attention, you brought it to our attention. That's exactly what you're supposed to do, and we will investigate."

They've asked me for help. I said, "I'll be more than happy to co-operate. You ask me if I will show you what he wrote to me; I'll show it to you. I don't know

what more you want.

Mr Bryant: I want you to tell the truth.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): You have to withdraw that.

Mr Bryant: I withdraw.

I want you to be totally accurate. You said you asked him to investigate, and you're leaving everybody in this House and everybody out there with the

impression that he is investigating this matter. He's not investigating anything. He's looking at a letter you wrote, he's taking your words at face value and he's providing an opinion to you.

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Finance): How do you know that, Michael?

Mr Bryant: I know that because I can read a statute and that's how the process works.

You are trying to lead people in this province into believing that there's an adjudication, that there's a process and an investigation and an inquiry. There's

none of that. None of that is taking place.

The Integrity Commissioner can't rule on this dispute. There's only one place that we can get to the bottom of this: it's in this Legislature, it's by you

being held to account and by this government raising its standards to the standards that Ontarians expect from their ministers.

Hon Mr Stockwell: I want to say that I take great offence at what you have said. I find great offence in your suggesting that I should tell

the truth.

I'm trying to be as cooperative and forthright with you as possible. The first thing I did was phone the Integrity Commissioner. They said that's the right

thing to do. They asked me then to write them a letter; I wrote them a letter. They said to me that they will investigate. They've asked for information. I've supplied them with some information

already.

Don't mouth that you know it's not true; don't mouth that to me. I take great offence at that. That's exactly what the office said. They've asked me for

further information that I'm supposed to provide them with. I said yes. You asked me, if it isn't made public, could you have it? I said, "Yes, I'll give it to you." I don't know what more I could

do. When the report comes out, I will give you what he tells me to do. I won't be able to hide behind anything.

I know you to be an honourable member. I don't think your comments in the beginning of your statement were fair or honourable.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough): My question today is for the Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. I recently met with the board

of directors of Anson House, a 42-bed long-term-care facility in Peterborough. Anson House is in the process of relocating to a new facility in Peterborough, St Joseph's at Fleming. The board told

me they're looking forward to moving to the new site, where they'll able to provide even better care for residents. The board of directors also thank their government for its support and funding

and for overcoming the challenges they face during the transition.

Minister, I would like to ask if you could provide some details on the new St. Joseph's at Fleming long-term-care facility and why it will mean even better

care for residents.

Hon Dan Newman (Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I thank the member for Peterborough for his question. I'm very pleased to

hear that the board of directors of Anson House is looking forward to moving into their new home. I know that the member for Peterborough has worked very hard on their behalf.

The new St Joseph's at Fleming long-term-care facility will be home to some 200 redeveloped beds that will be eligible to receive up to $15 million in

provincial funding over 20 years to help with the cost of construction. These upgraded beds at St Joseph's will meet our government's new design standards for long-term-care facilities. These

standards will provide more than quality care; they will provide a real home for these residents.

Mr Stewart: Minister, I would have leaned over and asked you, but I want all of Ontario to hear what a unique facility we are creating in

Peterborough. I'm very pleased to hear that the new St. Joseph's facility will mean even better care for residents. Quality long-term care is important to my constituents, and it is important that

our government make the investments to meet the needs of our growing and aging population. Ontario's seniors spend their lives building a prosperous province that we enjoy today. I'm proud to be

part of a government that's working hard to improve the quality of life for all seniors in Ontario.

I would like to ask the associate minister what other improvements in long-term care are taking place in my riding and what is the status of the construction

of long-term-care beds across Ontario?

Hon Mr Newman: I once again thank the very hard-working member for Peterborough for his question. It's my pleasure to say that a total of some

514 new and redeveloped long-term-care beds have been awarded in the member's riding of Peterborough. This is all part of our government's unprecedented $1.2-billion commitment to build 20,000 new

and redevelop 16,000 older long-term-care beds across our great province.

So far, 314 new and redeveloped beds have been built or are in operation within Peterborough. In fact, since 1998, more than 18,500 new long-term-care beds

have been build or are being developed across our province, and more than 8,000 existing beds have been, or soon will be, redeveloped. I'm proud to say that these investments will mean that seniors

in Peterborough, and indeed throughout Ontario, will have access to the care they need when they need it.

NEW HOME INSPECTION

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. People should be confident in their new

homes or in a renovation that is done in their home. Your privatization of building inspection means that the same person who builds has his own agent inspect.

John Wright of the Large Municipalities Chief Building Officials says that your position is reckless. He also says, "It is absurd to expect these agents to be

able to counteract the commercial pressure that will be put upon them."

You chose privatization and the potential conflict of interest. Given the events at Dominion Cement, do you now believe that public safety has been

compromised?

Hon David Young (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): The member knows well or should know well, given that he has been in the

Legislative Assembly for a considerable period of time, that it is most inappropriate to ask a question of or expect an answer from a minister about a case which is pending in front of a court. So

I will presume that he is not expecting an answer to that question, although his words would suggest otherwise.

What I will tell you is that Bill 124, which has not come into effect yet but will shortly, is a bill which will add additional guarantees to consumers to

ensure they have protections. It will ensure that whoever is doing the inspection passes the highest possible tests and will ensure that those individuals fulfill all criteria. It will ensure that

those individuals, whether they work independently or for a municipality, have insurance in place so that if something goes wrong, if all of those additional tests and standards don't prevent

something from going wrong, there will be insurance in place for the consumer.

Mr Prue: Municipalities across Ontario have been put in a straitjacket. They are forced to contract out because this government has chosen to

download many costs upon them which they cannot bear. People are losing out and families are suffering because of shoddy work, particularly the people who purchased these homes from Dominion Cement

or in which Dominion Cement was a contractor. These homes are structurally unsafe.

Will you reverse this bad law? Will you insist on public inspectors whose loyalties are with the consumers and not with those whose interests are only speed

and profit?

Hon Mr Young: Clearly the member doesn't want to let the facts get in the way of a good rant. Talk about mixing apples and oranges, he's

talking about an unfortunate occurrence that happened well in advance of a bill that hasn't come into effect yet.

What we are saying to you, sir, and to the people of this province is that we are bringing in tighter standards. We are bringing in the toughest standards in

the world. We are ensuring that all parties will have sufficient insurance so that in the future, should anything go wrong, there will be a remedy for consumers. They will be able to get their

money back. They will be able to get their house repaired.

Don't try to turn things upside down. That doesn't serve you well, and it doesn't serve the people of this province.

PETITIONS

ABORTION

Ms Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): I'm very happy to introduce a petition on behalf of Mark Morin from my riding, who has gone to enormous

trouble to collect some five pages of petitioners. I'm happy to table that today.

EDUCATION TAX CREDIT

Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): I am pleased to present a petition to the Legislature. It's signed by in excess of 75

constituents, and it reads as follows:

"Whereas the province of Ontario has delayed the second phase of the equity in education tax credit for parents who choose to send their children to

independent schools; and

"Whereas prior to the introduction of this tax credit, Ontario parents whose children attended independent schools faced a financial burden of paying taxes to

an education system they did not use, plus tuition for the school of their choice; and

"Whereas the equity in education tax credits support parental choice in education and makes independent schools more accessible to all Ontario families;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, respectfully request that the government of Ontario reintroduce the second phase of the tax credit forthwith and continue --

without delay -- the previously announced timetable for the introduction of the tax credit over five years."

I affix my signature.

WASTE MANAGEMENT

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas we strenuously object to the proposed Richmond landfill expansion by Canadian Waste Services; and

"Whereas fractured limestone is an inappropriate location for a landfill; and

"Whereas the town of greater Napanee produces less than 1% of the waste sent to Richmond landfill and has indicated that it is not a willing host of the

proposed expansion; and

"Whereas the Ernie Eves government has indicated that they will break their promise that no community should have to accept waste against their will;

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

"We request that the Conservative government keep their promise, stop the expansion of this landfill and make waste reduction a priority for Ontario."

I will affix my signature to this petition, because I am in full agreement.

ITER FUSION PROJECT

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I'm pleased to present a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario on behalf of my constituents in the riding

of Durham.

"Whereas the proposed ITER fusion research facility would result in 68,000 person-years of employment and an estimated $9.4 billion in foreign investment;

"Whereas ITER would bring international scientists and researchers to Canada and place our nation in the forefront of new developments in research and

technology;

"Whereas ITER is strongly supported by business, labour, educators, elected officials and citizens throughout Durham region, the host community;

"Whereas the province of Ontario has already recognized the economic importance of ITER to Canada and the world by committing $300 million to support the

Canadian ITER bid;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows: that the Parliament of Ontario take the necessary steps

to strengthen the Canadian bid for the ITER research facility, including the commitment of more funds and other resources to support a successful Canadian bid; and that the province of Ontario ask

the federal government to show the leadership and commitment necessary for Canada to win the ITER bid."

I'm pleased to sign this, endorsing my support for this very, very important project.

INSURANCE RATES

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Progressive Conservative government of Ernie Eves has failed to protect Ontario consumers who are experiencing skyrocketing automotive, home and

commercial insurance rates; and

"Whereas the Ontario government has failed to create the regulatory environment that would adequately protect loyal customers in a tough insurance marketplace;

and

"Whereas the Harris-Eves government has twice introduced ineffective legislation which has done nothing to stabilize insurance rates in the province of

Ontario; and

"Whereas average individual increases in auto insurance rates over the past four years have increased by over 40%; and

"Whereas the people of Ontario are having difficulty obtaining reasonable insurance coverage or are being dropped as customers -- even in cases where there has

been no change in the risk factors;"

Therefore we, the undersigned, ask the following:

"

(1) Introduce effective legislation to ensure those injured in automobile collisions have fair and rapid access to appropriate medical-rehabilitation

services;

"

(2) Reduce, then stabilize, insurance premiums in Ontario; and

"

(3) Improve access to automobile insurance coverage through a more competitive marketplace."

I affix my signature to this petition.

HIGHWAY 407

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): Again, I am pleased to stand in this House and present a petition on behalf of my constituents in the riding of

Durham.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the timely and efficient movement of people and products is crucial to the success of the Ontario economy;

"Whereas the province of Ontario is meeting the challenge of traffic congestion in the greater Toronto area by improvements to our highway networks and by

improved public transportation;

"Whereas the further construction of Highway 407 eastward into the Durham region would improve the flow of traffic in Durham region and throughout the GTA;

"Whereas the citizens and municipalities of Durham region have faced uncertainty over the final alignment of the proposed 407 highway for many years and are

entitled to a timely resolution to this matter;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows: that the Parliament of Ontario take" all necessary "steps

to fast-track the extension of Highway 407 eastward, into the regional municipality of Durham, while ensuring that all the necessary environmental assessment and public consultation processes are

followed" according to the law.

I'm pleased to sign and endorse this on behalf of my constituents.

ONTARIO DISABILITY

SUPPORT PROGRAM

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North):

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the recipients of benefits under the Ontario disability act have not received a cost-of-living increase since ... 1987; and

"Whereas the cost of living in Ontario has increased in every one of the years since, especially for basic needs such as housing, food, utilities,

transportation, clothing and household goods; and

"Whereas disabled Ontarians are recognized under the Ontario Disability Support Program Act, 1997, and as such have the right to have their basic needs met,

including adequate housing, a proper and healthy diet, a bed that does not make them sicker and clothing that fits and is free of stains and holes; and

"Whereas their basic needs are no longer being met because the Ministry of Social Services has not increased the shelter and basic needs allowances of disabled

Ontarians eligible to receive benefits under the Ontario disability support program to reflect the increased costs of shelter and basic needs (and in fact have reduced these benefits for those

recipients who receive a disability benefit under the Canada pension plan); and

"Whereas the Ontarians with Disabilities Act does not protect the thousands of vulnerable people in Ontario who are dependent on others for their basic needs

and care and who are eligible for benefits under the Ontario Disability Support Program Act, 1997;

"Therefore we, the undersigned citizens of Ontario, request the Ontario Legislature to urge the government to respect their own definition of basic needs and

provide a cost-of-living increase to recipients of benefits through the Ontario Disability Support Program Act that is sufficient to cover the increased costs of their basic needs as of 2001

prices, and that this benefit not be reduced as a result of increases in the Canada pension plan benefit."

A couple of hundred people signed this petition, and I am very happy to add my name to it as I'm in full agreement with it.

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): Again I'm receiving a number of petitions from my constituents. They know I will present them on their behalf.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Oak Ridges moraine is an ecological treasure that warrants protection and careful stewardship now and in future generations;

"Whereas the province of Ontario has recognized the importance of the moraine with the passage of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, 2001, to protect

natural and water resources, preserve agricultural lands and provide clarity on where development can and cannot occur; and

"Whereas the act has resulted in certain limitations on citizens' use of their property within the moraine;

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

"That the Parliament of Ontario take action to ensure there are no undue restrictions on Oak Ridges moraine residents making minor improvements to their homes

and property; and

"That the province of Ontario work together with municipalities and landowners to ensure the

interpretation and enforcement of the act continues to fully

protect the moraine while also giving residents the right to fair and reasonable enjoyment of their property."

I'm pleased to sign this in support of my constituents in the riding of Durham.

AUDIOLOGY SERVICES

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it's entitled "Listen: Our Hearing is

Important!

"Whereas services delisted by the Harris-Eves government now exceed $100 million in total; and

"Whereas Ontarians depend on audiologists for the provision of qualified hearing assessments and hearing aid prescriptions; and

"Whereas new Harris-Eves government policy will virtually eliminate access to publicly funded audiology assessments across vast regions of Ontario; and

"Whereas this new Harris-Eves government policy is virtually impossible to implement in underserviced areas across Ontario; and

"Whereas this policy will lengthen waiting lists for patients and therefore have a detrimental effect on the health of these Ontarians;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Harris-Eves government move immediately to permanently fund

audiologists directly for the provision of audiology services."

Of course I affix my signature as I am in complete agreement.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): This petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Eves government has increased the fees paid for by seniors and the most vulnerable living in our long-term-care facilities by 15% or $7.02 per

diem effective August 1, 2002; and

"Whereas this fee increase will cost seniors and our most vulnerable more than $200 a month; and

"Whereas this increase is 11.1% above the rent increase guidelines for tenants in the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas the increase in the government's own contribution to raise the level of long-term-care services this year is less than $2 per resident per day;

and

"Whereas the increase in the government's own contribution to raise the level of long-term-care services this year is less than $2 per resident per day;

and

"Whereas according to the government's own funded study, Ontario ranks last among comparable jurisdictions in the amount of time provided to a resident for

nursing and personal care; and

"Whereas the long-term-care funding partnership has been based on government accepting the responsibility to fund the care and services that residents need;

and

"Whereas government needs to increase long-term-care operating funding by $750 million over the next three years to raise the level of service for Ontario's

long-term-care residents to those in Saskatchewan" back "in 1999; and

"Whereas this province has been built by seniors who should be able to live out their lives with dignity, respect and in comfort in this province;

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

"Demand that Premier Eves reduce his 15% fee increase on seniors and the most vulnerable living in long-term-care facilities and increase provincial government

support for nursing and personal care to adequate levels."

I affix my signature. I'm in complete agreement.

HUNTING IN WILDERNESS PARKS

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Minister of Natural Resources has confirmed that the province is considering allowing hunting in Ontario's wilderness parks, including Quetico,

Killarney, Wabakimi and Woodland Caribou;

"Whereas the provincial government made no mention of opening up wilderness parks to hunting when it came up with the Ontario Living Legacy policy ... for a

vast area of publicly owned land across northern Ontario;

"Whereas the province's wilderness parks were originally established to be sanctuaries where the forces of nature would be permitted to function freely and

where visitors could travel by non-mechanized means and experience solitude, challenge and personal enjoyment of that protected area; and

"Whereas opening wilderness parks to hunters undermines the principles the parks were established to fulfill, threatens animals and exposes the public to

risk;

"Therefore we, the undersigned citizens of Ontario, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand that the Ministry of Natural Resources renew and reconfirm its

ban on hunting in all of Ontario's wilderness parks."

I am pleased to add my name to this petition.

VISITOR

Mr AL McDonald (Nipissing): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'd like to introduce a friend of mine who drove down from the city of North Bay,

a very successful businessman, Theo Margaritis.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Welcome to the Legislature.

Further petitions?

HOME CARE

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it's very short. It simply says:

"Whereas we are outraged by the community care access centre's decision to cut homemaking services to seniors in Sudbury;

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

"

(1) Demand that the homemaking services be restored; and

"

(2) Demand that Associate Minister Dan Newman accompany Rick Bartolucci, MPP for Sudbury, to Sudbury for a meeting."

Of course, I'm in agreement so I affix my signature to this petition.

OPPOSITION DAY

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Ms Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): I would like to introduce this opposition day motion:

The Legislative Assembly of Ontario directs the government to address public concerns of cronyism and patronage by releasing full details of all dealings

between the Cortellucci-Montemarano group of companies and the government of Ontario, its agencies, boards and/or commissions, for public scrutiny.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The member has introduced opposition day number 4. The member for Windsor West.

Ms Pupatello: It's very important that this House have an opportunity to address this issue, which we have been raising in this House for

these last two weeks.

To give the public a

summary of what this issue is about, we in this House addressed the Premier of Ontario and asked him very pointed questions about a

relationship between the Conservative government's largest party donor, Mario Cortellucci and his companies, and the Ontario Pension Board, which is chaired by Don Weiss, a government appointment

to that chairship, an individual who before being appointed chair was executive director of the Progressive Conservative fund, the fundraising arm of the party.

We've discovered since then, and introduced in this House, that when he came to committee -- which he had to appear before in order to be sanctioned for this

appointment and which is a majority Conservative MPP committee, so of course it was going to pass -- Liberals at that committee raised concerns about that link being far too close, for an

individual to be chair of the Ontario Pension Board, which is responsible for investing the pension funds of employees of the Ontario public service, having just stepped from the PC Party

fundraising arm, only to discover at that committee that he in fact was going to, for some period of time, have both positions, be both initially a board member of the pension board and continue on

at the PC fund. For a period of nine months, he continued both roles. He eventually moved from being on the board of the pension board to being the chair of the pension board. In that time, some

very interesting changes took place at the Ontario Pension Board where their investments were concerned.

It's interesting to note as well for the record that not only was he chair of the pension board, but he also sat on a number of committees at that pension

board. He was the CEO overseeing the day-to-day operations of the fund; he was a member of the audit committee of that board, which ensures the financial probity of those decisions; a member of the

investment committee of the board that scrutinized individual investments; a member of the pension policy committee, which sets the general investment policies; and a member of the human resources

committee, which weighs in on the hiring of fund employees. So you see, Don Weiss is in a key, critical position and is a significant decision-maker. He's not only a decision-maker, but then sits

on an audit committee to determine if those decisions were appropriate and sits on the policy-deciding committee as to how policies might change.

In fact, the policies did change. When Don Weiss arrived at the Ontario Pension Board, the policy of investment changed. It changed in the kinds of dealings

and investments in property, which were typically income-generating properties they might invest in. Other pension boards do that as well: apartment buildings, land that generates income. It was

stated in the annual report of the Ontario Pension Board that they've made a change to that policy. They've decided recently that they would invest in high-risk investments -- very unusual. Here is

a pension board that oversees a fund of some $11 billion -- certainly small compared to, say, the teachers' pension board, maybe six times as small. The teachers' pension board does not invest in

these kinds of high-risk investments. But Don Weiss made this change, and the policies did change.

When those policies changed, what we realize is that they have made high-risk property investments. They didn't do it before Don Weiss got there; they have

done it since. But they've only done it with one individual, and they have told us now that they've had seven property dealings of this nature with Mario Cortellucci, who is also the PC Party's

largest donor. So you see, what is at question here is, is there a conflict of interest in an individual who chairs a pension board that makes decisions on how an investment fund will be invested

making an arrangement with the individual who is the PCs' largest donor? Moreover, they changed the policy to allow for this kind of deal, and they've only used that kind of deal once, with one

individual, and that one individual happens to be the PC Party's largest donor.

We introduced in this House the conflict-of-interest guidelines that drive the behaviour of these top civil service positions, which is what it is. Don Weiss

is guided by that public service guideline, which states that an individual will not have special privilege for his friends or for his family.

I ask this House to consider: what is considered a special privilege? Well, it's something that is not available to everyone. It's not available to me. It's

not available to any other land developer in Ontario. I marvel every time the television comes on and I watch Ernie Eves talk about the economic plan for Ontario, if you want to invest in Ontario.

Why does his TV ad not say, "Call the Ontario Pension Board, because have we got a deal for you. We can finance you up to 90% of the value of that land cost," 90% on the cost of land?

Well, this is what the land looks like. It's farmland, and, according to the Brampton plan, this farmland is outside the urban area for Brampton. In the plan

for development of Brampton, it is not considered to be up for development until well into the year 2020; in fact, they said 2023. It could be developed 25 years from now, if it's going to be

developed.

When we introduced this information in the House, Mario Cortellucci was quoted as saying that he might be able to do this in five to 10 years. If he did that,

it would be against what the Brampton plan is. Is there some information that all of us in this House and perhaps the Brampton city council might want to know, in terms of the speed with which this

particular land might be developed? We asked this House to consider how one land developer could access the kind of financing that he did, that makes most land developers green with envy; that they

could have at 90% of the cost of that land.

We have the deals that they struck. Four were introduced in this House. Just for these four that we introduced, the land cost totalled over $11 million. Of

that $11 million, the cash down by Cortellucci was $1.2 million. The balance of the loan from the pension board was $9.7 million. There was a second loan on those properties totalling $140

million.

We asked these questions in the House. The minister stood up on his feet and tried to talk about the details of those arrangements, which are not public. The

agreement that makes these loans happen is not a public document, so we can't see that what the minister is telling us is true. We asked him to table those agreements in this House. In fact, in our

motion today, we asked him to table all agreements with Mario Cortellucci and the Montemarano companies in this House; dealings with the government, with its agencies, boards and commissions. The

links here are clear. Don Weiss was appointed by the government. Ernie Eves was the finance minister at the time. The finance minister would be very interested in who is appointed chair of the

Ontario Pension Board. Why? Because Ontario taxpayers are on the hook for those pension funds. If the pension board funds fail, the Ontario taxpayers have to cover them. They have to guarantee them

for the employees. So we have a vested interest in knowing that they're making good and valuable decisions.

Are they good and valuable decisions? Well, the Ontario Pension Board has an audit process to see that they're making smart investments. But Don Weiss sits on

that committee as well, and he suggested in interviews, after we raised this issue, that they had an ad hoc committee that made this decision. Now, is that a discussion over a water cooler in the

morning? Who participated in those discussions, to see this is where they should go?

Why is it that before Don Weiss was at the pension board, they did not invest in high-risk land speculation deals? Don Weiss arrives at the board; they are now

investing in high-risk land speculative deals -- but only with one developer. That one developer happens to be the largest donor to the PC party.

I want someone to tell me how that doesn't smell.

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): It's just a coincidence, I guess.

Ms Pupatello: It is too much of a coincidence.

We have a right to ask these questions and demand answers from this government. That is just too cozy. The minister suggested in this House that they will

investigate to see that no laws were broken. Do you know what the conflict of interest guidelines say? The conflict of interest guidelines say you can't just follow the law; you have to be seen not

to have a conflict.

There's the rub. We can't just put people in positions and hope that they do what's right, in an integrity-minded way, in the functioning of the government and

in the overseeing of that pension board. It has to be seen to be at arm's length and on the basis of good decision-making and investments. What we have instead is an opportunity for only one land

developer to access financing, the likes of which land developers don't see anywhere else in Ontario. Only one land developer got this kind of a deal.

How can the government actually defend this? We want to know: was Don Weiss acting in the best interests of the pension board, and therefore of the taxpayers,

or was he acting in the best interests of where he was also working at the very same time as he was on the board, as a board member of the pension board, with his hand out to Mario Cortellucci?

We then found that in that time period, Cortellucci had donated more than $20,000 during a by-election that occurred there, when the law allows you to double

up on your various donations to the party. While Don Weiss was out asking for money of Mario Cortellucci, he was in a position within the pension board to be making arrangements to change the

policy that allows investment in high-risk speculative land deals. The first order of business, the one development that he's prepared to engage in, has to do with Mario Cortellucci, the single

largest donor to the PC Party, who has donated over $1 million to leadership candidates, to the PC Party by-election candidates, you name it. It is just too cozy.

It's a terrible saying around here to say, "It's who you know," because it's supposed to be about fair government. Government's role for all of us is that it's

supposed to be fair. If that is the kind of investment that the pension board is going to be getting into, then it has to be fair and accessible to everyone. Everyone has to have that same

opportunity. Was there an ad that went out? Was there a mailing that went out to all developers that said, "Look at how much money can be available to you"? The seven land deals that they made with

Mario Cortellucci, totalling under or just over $40 million for the purchase of land -- do you not think every land developer wants to have that kind of opportunity? But they didn't. Before Don

Weiss arrived at the board, they didn't do that kind of deal. Don Weiss arrives and they do that kind of a deal. The only land developer to benefit from that kind of deal is Mario Cortellucci. In

that same time frame, a conflict of interest was there because Don Weiss was the head of the PC fundraising arm, hand out to Mario Cortellucci for money to put in the PC coffers, at the same time

his policy was changing to allow for this kind of high-risk investment.

We have an obligation to the public here. The government has an obligation when they put names forward. They can't just follow the rules; they have to be seen

to follow the rules. Conflict of interest exists every day, and it should be the government's priority to be seen to have integrity, to act on these matters so that you will have integrity, so that

an individual like Don Weiss cannot be appointed to such a board, because it is so sensitive in terms of what kinds of dealings happen at that board.

We have asked these questions repeatedly in this House. First, the Premier suggested there was going to be some kind of an investigation. The minister

responsible for the investigation, by the time the end of the day is through, says he called his deputy minister and was assured it was fine. There you go; the deal's over. It's a drive-by review

that he apparently is satisfied with. At the same time as he suggests the drive-by review is fine, the Premier is up in Barrie somewhere making some kind of an announcement and suggests I haven't

seen a report yet to understand that we've unearthed all there is to unearth, and that we're satisfied with this.

We say today in this House with this motion that we insist that these deals be tabled so we can all look at them. We are, after all, responsible for all of the

11 million or 12 million people in this province who are responsible for that pension board, for those employees who are expecting a pension, and that the decisions that are being made are being

made because they're good business decisions, not because you're doing something for someone who has just far too cozy a relationship with the individual that this same government appointed to head

that Ontario Pension Board. That is not on. We expect a government to act with integrity. Maybe you didn't realize the kind of conflict that could exist, but when we ask these questions in this

House, we expect some kind of action. I call on this government to stop this kind of conflict and act with integrity.

Mrs Julia Munro (York North): It is always a pleasure for me to rise in the House to speak to the people of Ontario about the important issues

of the day that should be debated in this House. We do that every day. But I should also say that it is unfortunate that I and my colleagues must repeatedly stand to dispel what can only be

characterized as baseless rumour and innuendo.

I can respect a member who stands to debate the merits of policy. That's really why we are here. We're supposed to be debating the merit of a policy and then

ultimately letting the people decide. I regret that I have not yet seen that from the members across the way in this debate. So far, I have only heard what I can call irresponsible rumours. There's

no interest in the truth. There is no interest in really getting at the issues.

I need to clear the air on this and set some context for what we are really talking about here, and that is the Liberal Party's complete lack of respect for

this House and what I believe is an abuse of their parliamentary privilege and immunity from libel for things said in this House.

Let's look at some of the examples from just last week. On Monday, the member for Windsor West stood in her place and said that the Ontario Pension Board

loaned $150 million to a friend of the party. She said she had legal documents that showed the Ontario public service pension plan, an arm's-length agency that makes independent investment

decisions in the best interests of its members and pensioners, gave $150 million to a friend of the party, putting taxpayers and pensioners at risk.

Let's take a closer look at that. I recall very clearly that the member for Windsor West said this was a $150-million loan. I think most members of the House

remember this quite well. This is, of course, completely wrong. First of all, this was not $150 million; it was much less. It was $36.3 million, to be precise. That makes a difference of more than

$113 million. That's more than four times the amount. I find that absolutely outrageous. As if this were not bad enough -- and I think it's pretty bad to make an accusation that's so wildly

exaggerated -- the member for Windsor West did not even have enough courage to stand in her place and apologize for this. That would be bad enough. To put forward inaccurate information such as

this inside or outside the