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

October 3, 2006

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2006-Oct-03 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 3 October 2006 Mardi 3 octobre 2006

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

MANUFACTURING JOBS

THORNHILL JOB FAIR

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

DAVID BREECH

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

KOREAN NATIONAL

FOUNDATION DAY

CLASS SIZE

RESIGNATION OF MEMBER

ANNUAL REPORT, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER OF ONTARIO

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

LONG-TERM CARE HOMES ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LES FOYERS DE SOINS DE LONGUE DURÉE

PATIENT-TO-DOCTOR RATIO ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LE RAPPORT ENTRE PATIENTS ET MÉDECINS

TRANSPARENCY IN

PUBLIC MATTERS ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LA TRANSPARENCE

DES QUESTIONS D'INTÉRÊT PUBLIC

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

LONG-TERM CARE

SMALL BUSINESS

LONG-TERM CARE

SMALL BUSINESS

LONG-TERM CARE

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

HOSPITAL FUNDING

BOTTLE RECYCLING

LONG-TERM CARE

EDUCATION FUNDING

HOSPITAL FUNDING

WASTE DIVERSION

LAVAL BRIDGE COLLAPSE /

EFFONDREMENT DU VIADUC À LAVAL

BOTTLE RECYCLING

HOSPITAL FUNDING

ARTS AND CULTURAL FUNDING

GREATER TORONTO

TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

WINDSOR RACEWAY

AMATEUR SPORT

PROCLAMATION OF BILL 86

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

PETITIONS

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

CAFETERIA FOOD GUIDELINES

LONG-TERM CARE

CHILD PROTECTION

CAFETERIA FOOD GUIDELINES

HEALTH PROTECTION LEGISLATION

CHILD CUSTODY

WATER QUALITY

AGGREGATE EXTRACTION

PROPERTY RIGHTS

CAFETERIA FOOD GUIDELINES

FAIR ACCESS TO PROFESSIONS

ORDERS OF THE DAY

FAIR ACCESS TO REGULATED

PROFESSIONS ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR L'ACCÈS ÉQUITABLE

AUX PROFESSIONS RÉGLEMENTÉES

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

MANUFACTURING JOBS

Mr. Ted Chudleigh (Halton): Three years of broken promises are hurting Ontario's economy. It seems that not a month goes by in this province without there being a slew of layoff and plant

closure announcements. September was no different when it was announced that scores of workers in the auto sector will be laid off in the coming months: Sterling Truck in St. Thomas laid off 600 people; International Truck in Chatham laid off 500

people; Wallaceburg Preferred Partners laid off 250 people; Accuride in London laid off 40 people; Dura Automotive Systems in Stratford laid off 280 people; Dana Corp., St. Marys, laid off 100; Tower Automotive in Toronto closed, 180 people out of

work; Dana Corp., Barrie, closed, 90 people out of work; and of course, Ford's Essex engine plant in Windsor has announced its closure, with 700 people losing their jobs. That's 2,700 jobs in the month of September alone.

Ontario has lost close to 90,000 manufacturing jobs since the beginning of 2005. Ontario is rapidly becoming a non-competitive jurisdiction with jobs flowing out of the province to the US, to other provinces and

even to China.

It is quite clear that the situation in the manufacturing sector is getting worse under the McGuinty Liberals. They have no plan other than to announce, reannounce and reannounce again the small successes they

have stumbled across, hoping that Ontarians won't notice.

Not that we are surprised: After three years of broken promises, Dalton McGuinty will say anything -- anything at all -- to get re-elected.

THORNHILL JOB FAIR

Mr. Mario G. Racco (Thornhill): Job creation has been a priority of the McGuinty government since day one. I am proud of the fact that 268,000 net new jobs have been created in Ontario since

October 2003.

In my riding of Thornhill, where job opportunities are plentiful, local businesses are in need of workers. This is why I decided to organize a Thornhill job fair. After several months of planning and

organization, the first Future-Focused Thornhill Job Fair took place on September 21 at the Promenade Mall. In total, we had 20 vendors participate in the job fair, representing a variety of companies and employment sectors, including Tim Hortons,

York Regional Police and the YMCA, among others.

Hundreds of people either participated in the job fair or acknowledged the service we were providing to the community. The response was even greater than expected, and many businesses had to be turned away. In

order to accommodate everyone, we intend to hold another job fair in the future.

I would like to thank the Promenade Mall for kindly hosting the event. I would also like to thank the businesses that participated in the job fair, as well as all the volunteers and community members who helped

make this event possible.

The McGuinty government has increased net new jobs in the last three years by 268,000. That's quite an achievement. We are pleased, and I'm certainly pleased, to see so many jobs available in Thornhill.

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

Mrs. Julia Munro (York North): With a year and a day until the next provincial election, people throughout Ontario are getting ready to cast their verdict on the Liberal government. Radio

station CFRA in Ottawa, a station the Premier avoided visiting or talking to for the first three years, asked its listeners to rate the first three years in office of the McGuinty government. The Premier will be happy to know that of the 2,362

people who responded to the poll, only 36% think he is doing an unsatisfactory job. Unfortunately for the Premier, another 38% of people in Ottawa think he is doing a terrible job.

Maybe people in Ottawa think the Liberal government is doing a bad job because Premier McGuinty will not help with Ottawa's gridlock. Maybe it's because of the increasing wait times at the Children's Hospital of

Eastern Ontario. Maybe it's because of the children over six waiting for autism treatment. Maybe it's because of the failure to meet the goal of a 60% diversion rate of municipal garbage.

CFRA's poll is a local report card on the McGuinty government from the Premier's own hometown. It's a failing report card because of the government's record --

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

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE

Mr. David Orazietti (Sault Ste. Marie): I'm pleased to rise in the House today to take this opportunity to comment on the continued effort of our government to improve and repair transportation

infrastructure in Ontario and in my riding of Sault Ste. Marie, after many years of neglect. This past Friday, I had the opportunity to welcome the Minister of Transportation, Donna Cansfield, back to Sault Ste. Marie for the opening of Carmen's

Way, a needed truck traffic route linking our International Bridge to the TransCanada highway. After more than 40 years of transports traveling in our downtown core, damaging our city streets, compromising public safety and creating local

congestion, our government provided $5.6 million towards this necessary infrastructure project.

The new truck traffic route will also have positive economic impacts in my riding because it furthers Sault Ste. Marie's position as an attractive alternative border crossing; 130,000 commercial trucks carrying

about $3.5 billion worth of goods now cross our International Bridge every year. That's up 227% in the last 20 years.

Sault Ste. Marie has also been the beneficiary of a number of other investments: $9 million toward our connecting link road improvement project, $4.7 million through the Move Ontario program for roads and

bridges, $1.4 million in new provincial gas tax funding and $1.4 million in COMRIF funding for local road improvements.

The McGuinty government is delivering better, safer highways, roads, bridges and public transportation across Ontario. These investments continue to demonstrate our unwavering commitment to our

municipalities.

GOVERNMENT'S RECORD

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): In many ways, it seems like yesterday that Dalton McGuinty was handed the keys to the Premier's limousine, then subsequently immediately tossed his campaign

promises right out the window. But unfortunately for Ontario working families and seniors, it's been a long three years of broken promises and weak leadership.

In fact, Dalton McGuinty did his tour yesterday as part of his "Sorry I broke my promises" tour across the province of Ontario, but every time he tried to break with his reputation of broken promises, he was

haunted by ghosts of those very same broken promises stop after stop: first at CFRA Radio, where, as my colleague indicated, a poll said that some 74.5% of listeners described the three years of the McGuinty Liberal government as unsatisfactory or

terrible.

Second stop: Dunlop Public School, where Dalton was trying to boast about his cap on class sizes. But he has neglected to talk about the hard cap he had promised during the campaign or the important side effect

that class sizes for grade 4 and up are heading upwards and not downwards.

Down the 401, school boards are protesting the government's lack of funding for key programs and taking on the new Minister of Education.

Then, importantly, the Ajax hospital: When Dalton was trying to boast about his fictitious new nurses, a real, live flesh-and-blood nurse called the Premier on his broken promise and said that she certainly has

not seen any front-line nurses. She said in fact that they're all working in upper management, if anywhere. She basically said his pants were on fire.

Three years of broken promises and weak leadership.

DAVID BREECH

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): I rise to salute the Beach Citizen of the Year. Every year, the citizens of our community get together and decide who is the best recipient of the Beach

Citizen of the Year award for his or her contribution to the people of the Beach.

This year, the recipient of our own very prestigious award is David Breech. He is best known in the community for the 20 years he has devoted to the East Toronto Baseball Association, but he is also a leader at

the local Scout troop. He's active in St. John's Roman Catholic church and the Beach Interfaith Outreach Committee. He does work for St. John's Catholic parents' council. He's on the Kimberly school council. He does the yearly Spring Sprint, the

race along the Beach and the boardwalk. He is active in Centre 55's Share A Christmas and helps with the jazz festival. That's what one guy does in the Beach.

The devotion to the people of the Beach -- the devotion to the children especially and the future citizens -- is unparalleled. I ask all citizens to join with us at the Millennium Gardens at Coxwell and Eastern

Avenues on Saturday, October 14, at 1 p.m. We salute the newest recipient of the Beach Citizen of the Year award and we induct our newest citizen at the same time. Congratulations to David Breech.

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mr. Brad Duguid (Scarborough Centre): I rise in the House today to speak about the progress this government has achieved in just three short years in health care.

That progress is even more impressive if you remember where we started. The previous government cut $557 million from hospitals, closed 28 public hospitals and eliminated 5,000 hospital beds in their first two

years alone. That was after the government before them cut $268 million from hospitals and closed 8,000 hospital beds.

On the other hand, the McGuinty government has demonstrated its commitment to the health care of Ontarians by increasing funding for hospitals by over $2.2 billion. We've also funded over 5,000 full-time nursing

positions, increased the number of first-year medical school spaces by 23% and more than doubled the number of training spots for international medical graduates. We're also on track to open over 150 family health teams and we have doubled the

number of community health centres so that Ontarians can receive the health care they need closer to home.

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): How's it working?

Mr. Duguid: A member asks, "How's it working?" Let me tell you, in my own riding, the Minister of Health has been there two times in the last two weeks: once to break ground on a $57-million new

emergency and critical care wing, another to create a brand new community health centre. On top of that, we're also funding a community health team in my own riding, as we're doing right across the province.

I'm proud to remind all members of this House of this great record that our --

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

KOREAN NATIONAL

FOUNDATION DAY

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): Today, Korean nationals and Korean Canadians are celebrating a special day: Korea's National Foundation Day. As we raised this very special flag today, we were

reminded by the Consul General of Korea of the very deep religious significance of their flag -- the yin and the yang, fire, Earth, heaven and water. The very positive and negative influences of humanity are all reflected in this flag. We were

delighted to raise it today.

I want to remind members that, unlike Canadians who experienced a fairly easy progression towards independence, Koreans had a tremendous experience in terms of their own pain, and the destructive ability of the

North Korean forces. I want to remind all members today that there were 20,000 Canadian soldiers who stood arm-in-arm next to Koreans to fight for democracy and independence. What did these Koreans really want? They wanted to ensure that they had

their own independence, they wanted to structure their own future, and they wanted to determine their own destiny.

That's why today, while we are reminded of this flag, we want to ensure we are with Koreans as they pass on the torch of freedom from one generation to the next. We are also reminded of the great and very

important contributions Koreans made in this country. That's why we are proud today to maintain independence and freedom. Thank you.

CLASS SIZE

Mr. John Wilkinson (Perth-Middlesex): "Smaller Class Sizes Will Eventually Pay Off: Provincial initiative makes sense." That is the editorial in the Mitchell Advocate, a daily paper in my

riding, and I quote --

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): It's your column.

Mr. Wilkinson: I'll tell that to Andy Bader.

This is the editorial: "It makes perfect sense that smaller class sizes for elementary school students, in the primary age group at least, will be a benefit to their future learning.

"The lesser the number of pupils for a teacher to look after, the greater the chance of pinpointing students' strengths and weaknesses at an age where specialized help, or before problems linger, can be

found.

"Seems reasonable, doesn't it?

"And this is what the Dalton McGuinty provincial government is trying to do."

I go on further. "Locally, the Avon Maitland District School Board reported that 19 schools have directly benefited and 20.8 teachers have been added to reduce class size, while the Huron-Perth Catholic District

School Board reported that five schools have directly benefited....

"Educators are noticing the improvement.

"`It is working very well for our young students,' said Janet Jamison, principal of St. Marys Central Public School, where Wilkinson" -- I think they're referring to me -- "paid a visit last week. `We know they

will benefit from smaller class sizes and additional teaching staff and we're confident that we will see improved student achievement.'

"Time will tell, of course," says the editorial, "but it looks as if things are on the right path."

The choices you make as a government send a quick and important message. We are not the NDP who ripped up contracts, and we are not the --

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

RESIGNATION OF MEMBER

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that a vacancy has occurred in the membership of the House by reason of the resignation of Cam Jackson as member of the electoral

district of Burlington, effective September 29, 2006.

ANNUAL REPORT, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER OF ONTARIO

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I beg to inform the House that I have laid upon the table the 2005-06 annual report of the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

LONG-TERM CARE HOMES ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LES FOYERS DE SOINS DE LONGUE DURÉE

Mr. Smitherman moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 140,

An Act respecting long-term care homes / Projet de loi 140, Loi concernant les foyers de soins de longue durée.

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

Does the minister wish to make a brief statement?

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I will defer to ministerial statements.

PATIENT-TO-DOCTOR RATIO ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LE RAPPORT ENTRE PATIENTS ET MÉDECINS

Mr. Martiniuk moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 141,

An Act to establish a yearly target for the patient-to-doctor ratio / Projet de loi 141, Loi établissant un rapport cible annuel entre patients et médecins.

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

Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr. Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): Today, there are 1.2 million men, women and children in Ontario without a family doctor, and unfortunately, it's going to get worse. As the most famous catcher

in baseball, Yogi Berra, once said, "You've got to be very careful if you don't know where you're going, because you might not get there." Well, that aptly describes the McGuinty government's lack of plan and vision to solve the doctor shortage.

They truly don't know where they're going.

This bill forces the government to address this crisis by establishing an absolute minimum number of doctors required to service Ontario patients. The patient-to-doctor ratio bill forces governments to meet

the target, for if they do not, all cabinet ministers would take a reduction in pay for that year.

Every person in Ontario is entitled to the services of a family doctor.

TRANSPARENCY IN

PUBLIC MATTERS ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR LA TRANSPARENCE

DES QUESTIONS D'INTÉRÊT PUBLIC

Mr. Craitor moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 142,

An Act to require that meetings of provincial and municipal boards, commissions and other public bodies be open to the public / Projet de loi 142, Loi exigeant que les réunions des

commissions et conseils provinciaux et municipaux et d'autres organismes publics soient ouvertes au public.

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

The member may wish to make a brief statement.

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): Today, I'm pleased to introduce a bill entitled Transparency in Public Matters Act, 2006. My bill designates and requires these designated public bodies to

give reasonable notice of their meetings and ensure that the meetings are open to the public, and public distribution of the minutes in a timely fashion. In addition, my bill establishes a procedure to make a complaint to the Information and

Privacy Commissioner and authorizes the commissioner to make certain orders of review, including an order that voids a decision made at a meeting that did not conform with the requirements of the bill. My bill will include, as well, the parks

commission, municipally owned hydro utility companies, CCACs and other bodies designated under the act.

Finally, this proposed bill will make public bodies more transparent and reinforces the concept that the public have a right to know how and why their money is being spent.

MOTIONS

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding the membership

of a certain committee.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Mr. Bradley is asking for unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding the membership of a certain committee. Agreed? Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Bradley: I move that the following substitution be made to the membership of a committee: on the standing committee on government agencies, Ms. DiNovo replaces Mr. Bisson.

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

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding private

members' public business.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Mr. Bradley seeks unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding private members' public business. Agreed? Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Bradley: I move that, notwithstanding standing order 96(d), the following change be made to the ballot list of private members' public business: Ms. DiNovo and Mr. Bisson exchange

places in order of precedence in order that Ms. DiNovo assumes ballot item 57 and Mr. Bisson assumes ballot item 77.

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

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): Now the motion that the House leader of the third party is waiting for: I move that,

pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 3, 2006, for the purpose of considering government business.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Mr. Bradley has moved government notice of motion number 186. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour will say "aye."

All those opposed will say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1358 to 1403.

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

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Balkissoon, Bas

Bartolucci, Rick

Bradley, James J.

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Chudleigh, Ted

Colle, Mike

Craitor, Kim

Delaney, Bob

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Dunlop, Garfield

Elliott, Christine

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jeffrey, Linda

Kwinter, Monte

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McNeely, Phil

Miller, Norm

Mitchell, Carol

Mossop, Jennifer F.

O'Toole, John

Orazietti, David

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Racco, Mario G.

Ramal, Khalil

Rinaldi, Lou

Runciman, Robert W.

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Scott, Laurie

Sergio, Mario

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Gregory S.

Takhar, Harinder S.

Tory, John

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

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

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

DiNovo, Cheri

Horwath, Andrea

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Murdoch, Bill

Prue, Michael

Tabuns, Peter

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 62; the nays are 9.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

LONG-TERM CARE

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): Today I would like to start by welcoming a lot of people in the various galleries who have worked hard on the

issue of long-term care: staff from the ministry and, in our other galleries, Maureen Hutchinson, who is the new president of the Ontario Association of Residents' Councils; Pat Prentice from the residents' councils; Lois Dent of Concerned Friends

of Ontario Citizens in Care Facilities; Judith Wahl of the Advocacy Centre for the Elderly; Barbara Leja from Family Councils; Kathy Dingwell and JoAnn Stephan of the Activity Professionals of Ontario; Donna Rubin from OANHSS; Karen Sullivan from

OLTCA; Sandra Pitters from the city of Toronto Homes for the Aged. They all share a dedication to providing care for our loved ones in long-term care, and we welcome them all. Thank you for being here.

It is with very great pride that I rise in my place to tell my colleagues about the latest step our government is taking to ensure that the residents of long-term-care homes in Ontario are treated with the

dignity and compassion they deserve.

The Long-Term Care Homes Act, 2006, will, if passed, replace the three different statutes that currently govern the system, but it will do oh so much more than that. The act is the cornerstone of our strategy

to ensure the best possible level of care for residents of this province's 618 long-term-care homes, and if passed, it will make Ontario a leader in protecting the rights of long-term-care residents. Our proposed resident bill of rights would be

the most extensive and comprehensive, providing greater protection than any other jurisdiction in Canada.

It will ensure, once and for all -- and the name of the legislation was chosen very deliberately to reflect this -- that our parents and grandparents can enter long-term care knowing they are going into homes,

not facilities. That distinction was born in my mind three years ago, very soon after we came to office, and there was a flurry of media reports chronicling the absolutely unacceptable conditions at certain long-term-care facilities. And make no

mistake, these were facilities, not homes.

We determined at that time that we had a mission: that there was going to have to be a revolution in long-term care to ensure that the word "facilities" in association with our grandparents', our parents' and

other loved ones' living was going to be history. The word was going to be history, the mindset was going to be history and the conditions associated with the word and the mindset would be history as well.

My colleagues might wonder, are we there yet? Have we replaced facilities with homes? No, not completely. The revolution we began in long-term care isn't done yet, but together with our partners in long-term

care, we have accomplished a great deal and today we take another step forward.

We launched our long-term-care consultation/action plan back in January 2004. Monique Smith, my parliamentary assistant, travelled far and wide in this province to learn more about long-term care: what was

working and what wasn't, what was urgent and what needed to be done but could wait, perhaps, a little while longer.

I want to take this opportunity to bring to my colleagues' attention the extraordinary work that Monique has done on this province's behalf. She has been unfailing in her commitment and unwavering in her

determination to make things better for long-term-care residents. The bill I am talking about today is very much a tribute to her great work, and we thank her for it

During the course of her consultations, Monique heard from administrators and residents, from countless different members of Ontario's long-term-care community about their views on how to improve the system.

Out of all that came her May 2004 report, Commitment to Care: A Plan for Long-Term Care in Ontario. That plan was to be a blueprint for our long-term-care revolution. In response:

-- We hired 3,140 new staff in our long-term-care homes, including 682 new nurses.

-- We launched a public website to allow Ontario seniors, their families and anyone else with an interest in long-term care to access information about homes and their record of care. Every day this website

gets 160 visitors who are looking for information about our initiatives on long-term care and, more to the point, about the quality of care in various homes.

-- We introduced a toll-free action line for people to get information or register a concern or a complaint. That line has received 9,476 calls and, of those, almost 2,500 have been sent to the regions for

follow-up or investigation.

-- Ministry inspectors have begun surprise annual inspections because you know that if people know you're coming, they tend to sweep whatever they can under the rug.

-- We mandated residents' councils and strongly encourage family councils so folks who live in these homes and their families can have a say in how they're operated. Speaker, you and I have a say in how

things are done where we live; we have for almost our whole lives. Is there some reason that we should stop when we reach a certain age and move into a long-term-care home?

-- Finally, we introduced a regulation to allow couples to live together in the same home even if they require different levels of care. I've always thought that one a bit of a no-brainer, but apparently we

were the first to think of it.

All of which brings us to today, Speaker, and the introduction of this extremely important bill. Let me give you, and through you my colleagues, a few highlights.

If the Long-Term Care Homes Act is passed, there will be zero tolerance -- and I do mean zero tolerance -- of abuse and neglect of residents. Any -- and I do mean any -- abuse or neglect that occurs must be

reported, and there will be whistle-blower protection in place to ensure that the people doing the reporting don't have to worry about any retaliation.

It will be entrenched in law that a registered nurse must be on duty in the home 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

There will be detailed and comprehensive provisions to minimize the use of restraints on residents, so they are only used when absolutely necessary and only with proper safeguards in place.

There will be tighter and more consistent reporting requirements for long-term-care home operators. Clear requirements for the proper training and orientation of long-term-care staff and volunteers will be put

into place.

We will introduce a system of licensing that gives us better control of where beds are located and ensures that the issuing of a licence would be dependent upon the competency of the proposed operator.

Licences could be revoked at any time for non-compliance, because quality of care is what this is all about.

In drafting the legislation, we took into account the opinions expressed by more than 700 Ontarians in response to Future Directions for Legislation Governing Long-Term Care Homes, which was a discussion paper

we released in November 2004. Those opinions and suggestions were as varied as they were helpful, but they absolutely had one thing in common: They reflected a deep and abiding commitment to see the residents of long-term-care homes in Ontario

live with dignity, in the comfort and safety that all of us would want for our parents, for our friends, for our children and for ourselves. That only makes sense because that stage of life comes to all of us.

Surely we have an obligation to ensure that we all, regardless of our wealth, our situation or our station in life, are able to live our declining years without feeling that society no longer cares or has

passed us by, without feeling that somehow at a certain age the notion of society no longer applies to us. That's the culture of long-term care that we are determined to build in this province.

The Long-Term Care Homes Act, 2006, is a critical part of our plan for doing that. I'm sure that when all members of this House study the act and think about what it accomplishes, they will pass this into law.

It's the right thing to do for our seniors and other residents of our long-term-care homes. I thank everyone for the work they've done to date, and for the opportunity to bring this forward for debate.

SMALL BUSINESS

Hon. Harinder S. Takhar (Minister of Small Business and Entrepreneurship): I am pleased to inform the Legislature about the important steps our government is taking to support small businesses

in Ontario.

The McGuinty government places a high value on the outstanding contributions made by small business and its hard-working entrepreneurs. Ninety-nine per cent of businesses in Ontario are small and medium-sized.

We define SMEs as having less than 500 employees in their organization. Half of Ontarians work for these firms, and many of these firms succeed bolstered by a highly skilled workforce. So it's easy to understand why innovation, investment and job

creation are thriving across the province.

This government champions the entrepreneurial spirit that drives economic prosperity. We have taken key steps to ensure this continues. The McGuinty government established for the first time a ministry devoted

solely to the needs of small business. I am proud to lead the Ontario Ministry of Small Business and Entrepreneurship and set a direction on how we can accelerate small business growth and success.

One of the first things I announced as minister was an additional investment of $10 million over three years to support the long-term growth of Ontario's VQA wine industry. This should help make wine producers

and grape growers become more competitive.

We have also provided $673,000 through youth entrepreneurship partnerships to create a culture of entrepreneurship among Ontario youth.

In July, we launched our ministry's new website for small business owners and entrepreneurs. I encourage everyone to visit www.sbe.gov.on.ca to learn about the many exciting opportunities that lie ahead for

entrepreneurs to grow their business and succeed. It provides a wealth of information and connections to people and resources that can help them be successful, such as Service Ontario, which provides small businesses with one-stop access to

government information and services online, in person and by phone; 44 small business enterprise centres in 53 locations across the province which assist small entrepreneurs to start and grow businesses; and the Small Business Agency of Ontario,

which works hard to reduce the paperwork burden faced by small business entrepreneurs. The goal of our government is to save entrepreneurs time and money so they can concentrate on being successful, productive and innovative. That means more jobs

and prosperity for Ontario.

This summer I toured the province and met with small and medium-sized business owners, executives and organizations. I also met many of our students participating in our summer company program, where they get

their first crack at establishing and running their own businesses. In fact, we accepted 370 students into this year's summer company program, and that is a record in itself. I can assure the people of this province that youth entrepreneurship is

alive and well here in Ontario. Our young people have the talent, energy and ideas to make the province grow and prosper. They are our future, and the future is now.

Our government plans to build on our efforts with new initiatives that are being planned as I speak. We are developing a comprehensive one-stop-shop website to give small business owners and entrepreneurs

valuable information to help them start and grow successful businesses. Our paper burden reduction initiative will move ahead. The goal is to eliminate obsolete government paper forms and convert streamlined and relevant forms for easy access

online. We want to extend value-added experience for student entrepreneurs through a pilot program known as future global entrepreneurs. We want to send post-secondary students to experience how international business operates through

international placements and to understand why Ontario's role in the global marketplace is critical to our prosperity.

We also want to give and improve opportunities for small businesses to sell their products to government, and start a women's entrepreneurship conference and mentoring program, given the increasingly important

role women are taking in contributing to Ontario's economy.

We have lots to celebrate in Ontario, and during October we are celebrating Salute to Small Business Month. We want to recognize the outstanding contributions small business owners and entrepreneurs make every

day. It is also an opportunity to inform entrepreneurs about the programs our government has designed to help them succeed.

Our government is celebrating the spirit of Ontario's 340,000 small and medium entrepreneurs and their success. We want all small business owners and operators to feel proud of what they do. I urge everyone to

support small businesses in Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Statements by the ministry? Responses?

LONG-TERM CARE

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): Today we have the introduction of this new Long-Term Care Homes Act, and it's certainly a disappointment. It's indicative of yet another Liberal

broken promise, and it also demonstrates once again that the Liberals are prepared to say anything to get elected, and then of course break their promise afterwards.

Regrettably, we have here today a bill which the minister says will allow residents to live with the dignity, comfort and safety that obviously he intends to say they deserve. I would say to you that this bill

does anything but. This bill simply consolidates three acts. It makes different statements about mechanisms that are already in place. There's very little new in the legislation.

For example, it makes reference to the fact that patients are going to have two baths a week -- nothing new here. It also makes reference to the fact that there's going to be 24/7 nursing care. Well, there's

nothing new here; that was already put in place in January 2005. The reality is that there aren't enough nurses to be hired for the long-term-care facilities. They are only in compliance to the tune of about 92%. So that's something the minister

is going to have to fix, and he's also going to have to provide appropriate funding in order that the nurses can provide the care they need.

This does not, however, address a problem that was brought to our attention this past summer. There is no limit on how hot it can be in patients' bedrooms, and this summer, when the heat was up over 30

degrees, we all heard from families whose mothers, fathers and other family members were uncomfortable. There was no responsibility that there be air conditioning. These people were cooking in their beds, and there's nothing that's going to change

that fact.

Also, currently, nursing homes spend only $5.46 on food, while the people in our prisons are allotted about $11. However --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order. There is way too much, as I call it, ambient noise. I need to be able to hear the member from Kitchener-Waterloo.

Mrs. Witmer: However, the broken promise is that the resident councils and family councils that have been set up have been approaching MPPs because this government broke its promise to

seniors. They promised in the election that they were going to provide $6,000 in care for every resident, and they were going to provide an additional 20 minutes. This government has not done so.

This government also is not following through on its commitment to provide new facilities for the residents. They're not continuing with our plan of making sure that residents are accommodated in new

facilities. There's no plan here for capital renewal whatsoever. There's not going to be any construction of new homes. There are 36,000 people in this province who are going to continue to live in beds in wards with four people, without a

washroom, without hallways that are wide enough to accommodate them. This is not going to give them dignity. It's not going to do at all what the minister says. There is no plan for the renewal of older homes. Half of them in this province need to

be done. We undertook that plan in 1998. We had 20,000 new long-term-care beds, and we renovated all the D beds, which was 16,000. You are not continuing with the plan.

The other thing is the new issue of limited licensing. This will not lead to the construction of new homes. This is untenable for the sector, the lending institutions. It's going to create uncertainty and

instability, and it certainly could compromise the financing and the operation of these homes. So for you to say this is going to provide safety and dignity for these residents, definitely it will not.

SMALL BUSINESS

Mr. Ted Chudleigh (Halton): Ontario's small business sector is an important engine in driving Ontario's economy, but the government of Dalton McGuinty doesn't seem to want to walk the walk.

It's too bad. How does the Premier demonstrate his appreciation for small business in Ontario? He breaks his promises. He promised not to raise taxes -- broken. He promised to fix the property tax assessment system -- broken. He promised to cap

electricity prices -- broken. He promised to roll back tolls on the 407 -- broken. He promised to abide by the Taxpayer Protection Act -- broken. He promised to govern with honesty and integrity -- broken. He promised to close all coal-fired

electricity plants by 2007 -- broken. He promised to hire 8,000 nurses -- broken. Broken, broken --

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

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The government House leader will come to order.

Responses?

LONG-TERM CARE

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): The Minister of Health promised to bring in new long-term-care legislation two years ago. I don't know why the government delayed doing so, but I can tell you

that New Democrats expect full province-wide public hearings on this bill. And why? Because this bill does not deliver on the single most important promise the Liberals made in the last election to the frail and elderly in our long-term-care

homes, and that promise was to guarantee a certain level of hands-on care per resident per day for those who live in our long-term-care homes.

Right now in Ontario there's no standard. There's no law regarding how much hands-on care a resident is entitled to receive. There hasn't been a standard in place since it was cancelled by the Conservatives 10

years ago. Under the New Democrats there was a standard of 2.25 hours of hands-on care per resident per day, and when the Conservatives cancelled that standard, it had a very negative impact on the frail and elderly.

In 2001, PricewaterhouseCoopers compared the levels of care received by residents in Ontario long-term-care homes to residents living in seven other jurisdictions in every category of care: nursing, specific

nursing intervention, occupational therapy, behavioural therapy. Residents of Ontario long-term-care homes ranked last every time. That's probably why, in the last election, Dalton McGuinty promised, and I quote: "Ontario Liberals are committed to

reinstating the standards of care for nursing homes that were removed by the Harris-Eves government, including minimum 2.25 hours of nursing care daily and three baths per week."

Are there minimum standards of care in this bill? No. Are the Liberals keeping the promise they made to reinstate minimum standards? No. Are the Liberals responding to the coroner's jury recommendation in

April 2005 that the minister set and fund a standard of care of no less than 3.06 hours of hands-on care per day? No. The Liberals' standard on hands-on nursing care is the same as the Conservatives': There is no standard. This broken McGuinty

Liberal promise will continue to negatively affect the frail and elderly who live in our long-term-care homes, and the government's got to deal with that.

Secondly, where has the government been on the critical issue of zero tolerance of abuse of the frail and elderly in our long-term-care homes? In April 2004 and again in March 2006, New Democrats introduced

the Safeguard Our Seniors Act to protect residents in long-term-care homes from abuse. Our bill placed a duty on operators and persons aware of abuse to report it to the Minister of Health. The minister could have an investigation. The minister

could refer criminal wrongdoing to the police. The minister could also report that individual to their individual college. Whistle-blowers were also specifically protected. And anyone contravening the act would face an individual fine of $50,000,

and for corporations a $1-million fine.

On numerous occasions we urged this government to implement the Safeguard our Seniors Act, and the Liberals refused. If you were so concerned about protecting seniors in care, why didn't you bring our bill

forward?

Thirdly, what happened to the promise made by the Minister of Health to establish an independent ombudsman to advocate for long-term care and deal with complaints? At a February 2004 meeting with Gord Moore,

provincial president of Ontario Provincial Command, the Royal Canadian Legion, the minister promised to create this position. We confirmed that with Gord Moore again this morning. Is the position of ombudsman created in the bill? No. Is the

government giving the current Ombudsman oversight power of long-term-care facilities, as proposed by my colleague Andrea Horwath? No. These are important proposals. They should have made their way into this bill, and they didn't.

Long-term-care homes also need specialized staff, specialized units and funding necessary to care for residents who are violent and aggressive and likely to hurt other residents. This was recommended by a

coroner's jury in 2005. Did that commitment make its way into this bill? No. This bill lacks maximum indoor standards regarding temperatures for long-term-care homes. It lacks a requirement, also proposed by the same coroner's jury, that a study

be done every three years to determine how our frail and elderly are ranking in terms of the direct care they are receiving in comparison to others living in other jurisdictions. It fails to guarantee that the Liberals will invest in nursing home

care, providing an additional $6,000 in care for every resident -- another promise from the last election. We know from the Ontario Association of Non-Profit Homes and Services for Seniors that this government has only raised that amount by

$2,000, a far cry and a big shortfall from the promise that you made.

Residents need hands-on care. They need a standard. It's not in this bill. The bill would be better named the No Minimum Standards for Seniors Act.

We demand public hearings on this bill.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): We have with us today in the Speaker's gallery a parliamentary delegation from Gauteng Provincial Legislature in the Republic of South Africa. The

delegation is the oversight committee on the Premier's office and the Legislature and is led by Samuel Johannes De Beer, chairperson of the committee.

Please join me in welcoming our guests.

ORAL QUESTIONS

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier. Yesterday, while you were out on your orgy of self-satisfaction tour, you were asked about the --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order. I need to be able to hear the Leader of the Opposition place his question.

The Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: When you were out on this tour, you were asked about the current emergency room crisis at the Grand River Hospital in Kitchener-Waterloo. You said you were caught off guard.

According to the Toronto Star, you said you were surprised at how quickly the problem arose at Grand River.

Premier, the problems at Grand River and nearly 20 other hospitals across the province have not been a secret. In fact, as you well know, last week alone the Grand River problem was specifically raised in this

House on September 25 and again on September 28.

Here's the headline of the Kitchener-Waterloo Record of September 20: "Situation Critical: Two Emergency Rooms, but Only Enough Doctors to Fully Staff One." That refers specifically, and you know it, to the

problems at Grand River and St. Mary's.

As Premier, how could you possibly have been unaware of the seriousness of this situation? Why would you say that? How could you possibly have been unaware?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): Let me take the opportunity to thank all involved who have worked so hard to ensure that we can keep this emergency room

open. I want to thank the Minister of Health and the member John Milloy. I want to thank local doctors. I want to thank folks at St. Joe's who have worked very hard to free up their talents and bring their expertise to bear on Grand River.

I want to say as well that we've taken the step of putting the hospital in question on notice that we may very well send in a supervisor. We believe that, working together, we have the situation in hand. Now

we look forward to working not just with the folks at Grand River but in other emergency rooms throughout the province, our doctors and hospital administrators, to ensure that we have long-term stability for all of our emergency rooms.

Mr. Tory: The people of that region and other regions across the province will thank you for your inattention to this for months on end on October 4, 2007.

The fact is, you didn't hear the cries for help from Grand River and other communities across this province, from the doctors and nurses, and from the patients who are sitting in those emergency rooms not

getting care.

Here's another cry for help from Dr. John Carter of the Kitchener-Waterloo Emergency Medicine Associates quoted in today's Kitchener-Waterloo Record saying, "The reality is without more full-time physicians,

we are postponing the inevitable." Yesterday you said, and I quote, "We will need to do more." That is the understatement of the century.

The temporary solution for Grand River, by your own admission, is only going to be in place until Friday. Yesterday, we asked what the plan was beyond Friday. What is the plan beyond Friday specifically? What

are you going to do about it, and when are we going to hear about it here?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I know there would be one interesting fact, as unaccustomed as my friend is to dealing with facts, but there is an important fact here. The Tories cut funding to the Grand

River Hospital Corp. by $11.5 million. So far, our government has increased funding to the same hospital by $20 million. If there is any indication of which party is most committed to working together with Ontario hospitals, and our emergency room

physicians in particular, that says one heck of a lot -- $11.5 million out; $20 million in. I think that says a lot.

Mr. Tory: Perhaps we should deal with the fact that the member sitting beside me produced a new emergency room for Grand River, and you have allowed it to deteriorate into a state of chaos,

with no staff and no resources to run it. Not only that, but there are 19 other hospitals in the province facing issues with their emergency rooms over the past couple of months.

The Ontario Medical Association has a list: Quinte Health Centre in Belleville; Guelph General Hospital; Kirkland and District Hospital; Leamington District Memorial Hospital, which already had a temporary

shutdown of its ER this year; Hanover and District Hospital; St. Marys Memorial. These are all emergency rooms the OMA says are in your trouble on your watch. You have been the government of Ontario for three years. We don't need you being caught

by surprise again. Now that you've been made aware of these additional hospitals, in addition to Grand River, suffering these crises, when are we going to have a plan from your government to deal with this issue and deal with it properly?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: There is no doubt about it: We inherited quite a bit of a mess when it came to our emergency rooms. Let me just speak to two challenges in particular.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I need to be able to hear the Premier. Premier?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Two specific challenges I'll address: While the NDP cut medical school spaces by 13%, and then the Tories sat on their hands, we've increased medical school spaces by 22%.

We've doubled our international medical graduate spaces. We've opened our first new medical school with four more satellites coming online.

The second challenge: We don't have enough rooms in our hospitals. The NDP and the Tories, together, closed over 21 emergency rooms. The Tories, on their own, closed 28 hospitals, eliminating thousands of

beds.

We have begun rebuilding our hospitals. We have over 1,600 new hospital beds in the works. That is something that the Tories and the NDP don't support, but we are moving ahead to ensure we have sufficient

rooms in our hospitals.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Interjection.

The Speaker: The Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal will come to order. I won't warn him again.

BOTTLE RECYCLING

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question again is to the Premier. With all the stuff you guys have got in the works, you'd better get going on it. You're running out of time.

Today the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario released his report, called Neglecting our Obligations. With respect to your promise in 2003 to achieve a 60% waste diversion within five years, the

Environmental Commissioner wrote that your failure to take timely action likely rendered the 60% goal "a pipe dream." Instead of taking concrete action to divert waste, you've instead expended your energy saying anything you can that you think

will help you get elected.

Let's talk for a minute about the LCBO bottle return program that you rushed out the door on September 10. As you know, I've been in favour of a bottle return program for the LCBO throughout the time I've been

in public life.

Interjections.

Mr. Tory: Throughout the time -- it's on the record since 2003.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): And it's just Tuesday. I need you to remember that the Speaker needs to be able to hear the question and that we need to have respect for those who are

asking and placing questions and those who are responding to them. It's very difficult for us to operate in the fashion we're moving along in today.

I would ask the leader, then, to place his question.

Mr. Tory: It's on the record. I am concerned, in the case of your plan that you rushed out on September 10, that there's a lack of detail and a lack of proper planning. So let's start with one

simple question: How much is this initiative of yours going to cost? What will the cost be?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I'm really pleased to have the opportunity to compare and contrast the former Tory government record on the environment

with ours. When it came to funding the ministry, they ripped $102 million out; that's a 30% cut. We've increased funding by $40 million; that's a 15% increase. The Conservative government fired one third of the staff within the ministry; we have

hired, so far, 25% more drinking water inspectors. They allowed polluters to walk away; we have passed our "You spill, you pay" legislation. They wanted to dump garbage in a lake in northern Ontario. We said, "No, you can't do that."

They presided over the Walkerton disaster. I can recall when the chief medical officer of health of Ontario said, "You turned your back on public health." That is the record of that government when it comes to

the environment. I'll gladly put their record up against ours any day.

The Speaker: Supplementary?

Mr. Tory: Actually, last I checked, the Environmental Commissioner, an objective officer of this Legislature, passed judgment on your record --

The Speaker: Order. I would remind members, especially the member for Renfrew, that you shouldn't be using props.

The Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: He passed judgment on this record of yours today. He called it "Neglecting our Obligations." Now there's an A plus if ever I saw one.

There was no answer, of course, nothing even approaching an answer on the cost of the LCBO problem. Let's take the $5 million -- another detail you should know -- that the LCBO presently pays to the blue box

program. The Minister of the Environment says this program means that all the glass will be going off to your new program, so we won't need to put the $5 million into the blue boxes.

Now, 48% of customers don't shop at the Beer Store. A lot of them tell me, and I'm sure they've told you, that they're going to just put their bottles into the blue boxes, and yet the $5 million won't be there

anymore. So can you tell me what contingencies you have in the plan to make up for the $5 million that the blue box program won't have anymore?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: It's really hard to figure out where the leader of the official opposition is on this LCBO bottle return policy. Is he telling us that he doesn't want us to take action to

ensure that 80 million bottles are no longer placed in our landfill sites?

We have in place a new policy; we are confident it's going to be effective. It is going to ensure that people pay a reasonable premium, a reasonable return, on the bottle they acquire through the LCBO, or any

other container. It's returnable at the Beer Store. We think it's going to be effective.

I can tell you, Speaker, that if the leader of the official opposition is saying he thinks it's okay for 80 million bottles to go into our landfill sites, then why doesn't he just stand up and say so?

Mr. Tory: What I will stand up and say is that when you're making important public policy, you don't rush it out the door for a photo op; you think through the details. That's what you do.

Now, you've told us that the details don't matter; they're unimportant. The program is scheduled to begin on February 1, 2007. That's 144 days during which the LCBO will sell 237 million bottles of wine and

spirits, not even counting extra Christmas sales. You've said the deposits will be in line with other provinces -- let's take a number of 40 cents in other provinces. That means that come February 1, we could have $95 million worth of bottles out

there in the public's hands which they haven't paid a deposit on that they can bring back to the Beer Store after February 1. Who's going to pick up the $95 million for bottles on which people have not paid a deposit? Have you thought that one

through?

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I need to be able to hear the Premier.

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: My advice to the leader of the official opposition is that no, he should not begin to save up his bottles.

What I can say is that bottles that will be covered by this new return policy will be specially marked. They will be specially identified.

Yes, we did think that through and we thought through many other aspects of this as well. There are all kinds of reasons put forward as to why we should not do this and why we should continue to send 80

million bottles into our landfill sites. Many of those were put up today by the leader of the official opposition.

We are determined to move this policy ahead. We will do so in the interests of our environment and of the greater public in the province of Ontario.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): Premier, your no-minimum-standards-of-care-for-seniors act that you introduced today is a huge disappointment for seniors living in long-term-care

homes, for caregivers and for their families.

For three years, New Democrats have been asking you, "When are you going to establish your promised minimum standard of hands-on care for seniors living in long-term-care homes so that they will have the

support and care that they need to live in dignity?"

In case you forgot, Premier, this is what you promised: to "ensure long-term-care residents get more personal care, including a minimum 2.25 hours of daily nursing care."

My question is, why have you broken your promise to seniors? Where's the minimum standard of daily nursing care that Dalton McGuinty promised?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): The Minister of Health.

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'm so pleased that we had the privilege today of bringing in a piece of legislation that builds on the work my

colleague Monique Smith has done, not on behalf of our government but to the benefit of the patients in the province of Ontario.

The one having the yak attack over there would know that already we've invested an additional $750 million in long-term care that has afforded us the opportunity to employ 3,140 additional people on the front

line.

The honourable member asked questions about care, and he looks inside a piece of legislation. But the reality is that those are resource allocations that we have already worked to bring to the front lines of

the long-term-care sector. In addition, building a very strong compliance system ensures that, in the circumstance where care is challenging, where there's any evidence of neglect, people are obligated to inform about it so the compliance regime

can take effect. This bill asks us all to work together to create a sense of community in these homes, and we're very, very proud to bring it forward to the people of Ontario.

Mr. Hampton: Premier, the promise was specific, and it was in the Premier's own words. Today, when you look at this much ballyhooed piece of legislation, it's not there. But the Premier also

promised an additional $6,000 in care for every resident. In three years, you've provided seniors with less than a third of that amount, and today your no-minimum-standards-of-care-for-seniors act does nothing to make up the difference.

Gordon Holnbeck lives in Peterborough. He's 90 years old. His copayment fees are going up $400 a year under the McGuinty government. But because of the McGuinty government's broken promises, he's still only

getting $5.46 a day for food -- half of what an inmate in a provincial jail receives. Mr. Holnbeck says, "Fruit is pretty well out of it. The odd time we get half of a banana."

Premier, Ontario's seniors deserve better. Why are you breaking your funding promises while seniors go without healthy food in our long-term-care homes?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: Let me take this opportunity to correct at least one part of the record for the honourable member. We do know that in the NDP days, when they increased rates related to

food, at one time they moved forward and increased the rates for inmates but not for long-term-care residents. But this has been misstated for a long time. The cost related to inmates is an all-in cost, which includes labour. The cost related to

our long-term-care residents has been about raw food alone.

I'm pleased to tell the honourable member that $11.43 a day for an inmate compares not so favourably to the $18.10 a day that we're contributing to food in long-term care. The reality is that the honourable

member likes to do apples-to-oranges comparisons, but when we look at the apples, we know that our long-term-care residents deserve and are getting the higher-quality apples for sure.

Mr. Hampton: Long-term-care homes receive a food allowance of $5.46 a day, and no matter how the McGuinty government tries to explain it away, that's the reality.

But here's another promise by the Premier, one that the Premier made to Ontario's veterans. Premier, you promised the Royal Canadian Legion veterans, who fought for our country, that you would bring in an

ombudsman for long-term care: an independent, third-party advocate to stand up for seniors living in long-term-care homes. We look at your no-minimum-standards-of-care-for-seniors act today, and what do we find? No ombudsman for long-term care, no

independent place where seniors and their families can appeal to when there's a problem in terms of a long-term-care home.

Premier, you said our seniors deserve better. When are you going to keep the promise that you made to our veterans, to our grandparents and our parents to bring in an ombudsman for long-term --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The question's been asked. The Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: I note that the honourable member didn't like the answer to the earlier question, so let me give him a bit more information about that. Based on the financial returns of

long-term care --

Interjection.

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: Oh, I'll get to that too.

Based on the overall food spending, which takes into consideration the combination of raw food costs, dietary services, meal preparation, menu planning to meet specific medical requirements and the delivery of

food to residents, the total cost is $18.10 per day, per resident. This compares quite favourably to $11.43 per day for each inmate. We've worked hard to enhance the quality of meals. We've made sure that as we go forward, each year there will be

built-in increases to the raw food contribution, and as I made the point, there are of course other costs associated with that.

I'll look forward to more debate with the honourable member as we move forward on other points.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is to the Premier. You have broken your election promise to overhaul a flawed school funding formula that was forcing classroom cuts, and

you've broken your promise to create a standing committee on education to fix the school funding formula. As a result, there is a classroom funding crisis in schools across Dufferin-Peel, where local trustees, parents and students are united in

their opposition to classroom cuts.

Premier, today, as you're about to strip power from elected school trustees in order to force your classroom cuts, parents want to know: What happened to Dalton McGuinty's school funding promises?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): I'm pleased to say that we've been working very closely with the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board to help

balance their budget.

At the province-wide level, as you will know, we've invested $2.7 billion more into public education. Under the previous Conservative government, they took $200 million out during their first three years; in

our first three years, we've put $2.7 billion in.

At this particular board, per pupil funding has gone up by 18%. When it comes to class sizes, half of the early years classes are now capped at 20. We put in place funding for 137 new teachers for smaller

classes, 64 additional elementary teachers and 74 new secondary school teachers. Test scores have gone up by over 10% across the board, and we've put in place almost $60 million for investment in projects to make repairs to schools.

So, yes, we've been putting a lot more money into public education, and we've brought a lot of goodwill to the table, and we'll continue to work with that particular board.

Mr. Hampton: The reality, Premier, is that school trustees and federation leaders all say that what your government has done, more than anything else, is move money out of one funding envelope

and into another funding envelope, but at the end of the day, there still isn't the funding that you promised.

The reality is that in 2003, you promised anything and everything to win votes. Now you're breaking those promises to our kids and talking about taking over school boards and forcing cuts in the classroom. You

know what, Premier? It's like listening to Mike Harris and Ernie Eves all over again.

Premier, parents, students and trustees in the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board refuse to cut $2 million from the reading recovery program -- something which helps struggling grade 1 students learn

how to read. These parents and trustees ask you this question: How is Dalton McGuinty's order to cut $2 million from reading recovery going to help their children learn to read?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: The leader of the NDP remains mistaken in a number of areas, but just to correct his record once again, under the first three years of the previous government, they took

$200 million out of public education. On our watch, during our first three years, we put $2.7 billion more into public education.

Again, we've increased per pupil funding by 18% in this board, while, on the other hand, the student population there has only gone up by some 3%. It's gone up 18% in terms of funding, but student population

only by 3%.

On behalf of the good people of Ontario, we have been very privileged, in a most demonstrable, concrete and real way, to invest in public education with a tremendous amount of money. We place a corresponding

responsibility on the shoulders of our trustees and school board administrators as well, to make sure they're spending that money in the best possible way.

Mr. Hampton: We know you're famous for wanting to have it both ways, but you can't. You admit that the school funding formula is flawed and inadequate, but then you order underfunded schools

to live with it. You promise to respect democratically elected trustees, but then you order them to make your damaging cuts to our children's education.

Premier, parents, students and trustees won't slash reading recovery as you ordered. They want to help struggling grade 1 students learn to read. So the question is this, Premier: Are you going to override

that democratically elected school board to make your cuts, or are you finally going to keep your promise and fix the school funding formula, which you admit is flawed and inadequate?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: Only the NDP could possibly argue that a net increase of $2.7 billion into public education was grossly inadequate. Only the NDP could possibly argue that although student

population has gone up by 3% and we've funded an increase of 18%, that funding increase was grossly inadequate.

We think that we are doing our share on behalf of the people of Ontario, not only making additional investments in education, but in health care and in infrastructure as well, to ensure we can grow this

economy. We will continue to work with all of our boards, not just the 68 out of the 72 who have already balanced their budgets but those who are finding some challenges. We will continue to work with them.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier. I want to go back to the emergency room issue. Premier, yesterday, we finally got a chance to see this report which

we've been asking to see for a week on emergency rooms and which the minister has been sitting on for weeks. It makes a series of recommendations for a system-wide fix for the emergency room crisis we have across the province of Ontario.

The first recommendation in the report is that ER wait times be measured and benchmarks set for the maximum length of stay in an ER. This is the same recommendation that was made in the Schwartz report, which

has been gathering dust with your Minister of Health since last September 16. The Schwartz report said that this should become something on your list of priorities. That's the message echoed by the emergency room doctors when they came here to

visit you to tell you about this crisis last November.

My question is this: Will you demonstrate a real, genuine commitment, for once, to resolving this issue by announcing that ER wait times are going to become, in fact, a priority for your government? Will you

do it?

Hon. Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Research and Innovation): It's good to know that the leader of the official opposition is now, for the very first time, embracing the concept of wait

times, something we introduced to the people of Ontario. It's good to know he's finally bought into our agenda.

That report confirms something we've known for a long, long time: that we, the people of Ontario, have had foisted upon us a terrible shortage of hospital beds because of serious cuts made by that government.

They shut down 28 hospitals, eliminating thousands of beds. We've begun rebuilding our hospitals. Those are, on average, some 43 years old. We have over 1,600 new hospital beds in the works. I would ask the leader of the official opposition to

support us in that work as we do everything we can to repair the damage that was left to us by that government.

Mr. Tory: I'd support you if you actually did anything; everything's in the works. Anyway, whether --

Interjections.

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

The Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: You could act on this today and it could almost immediately help to alleviate it.

Here's another idea: The Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons currently has a pilot project in place that is set to come to an end on December 31, 2006. It allows residents to apply for restricted

certificates but requires the sign-off of medical school deans. As of May 15, 2006, no dean has agreed to participate.

Here's a request that might help -- and it was told to me at Grand River that it would help -- in the supply of personnel. Will you commit today to bringing together the college council, the medical school

deans and the hospitals to at least permit some of these residents to be deployed in helping with the emergency room crisis that has been created on your watch while you have been governing for the past three years? Would you bring them together

and try and use that as partly an answer to this?

Hon. Mr. McGuinty: I can tell you that we're giving that matter very careful consideration, but more than that, we're bringing real leadership to this.

There are also a few other things in that same report that are worthy of our public consideration. The report also said that there has been, until now, a lack of community integration. I can note that the NDP

and the Tories did nothing to make sure we had a true system with local health care providers working together. As you know, we have brought into place our local health integration networks, which Mr. Tory and his party of course voted

against.

As well, the report noted the importance of making investments in community health care. The Tories never added money to community health care. In fact, they cut people off of home care. On our watch, we

brought home care to 71,000 more people, we have 49 new community health centres and 150 new family health teams, we are rebuilding public health, and we've made the first investments in community mental health in a decade. Together we are undoing

the damage of the last 13 years that happened on this watch and on that watch. We are investing in medicare.

WASTE DIVERSION

Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto-Danforth): My question is for the Premier. Premier, the Environmental Commissioner's report, Neglecting Our Obligations -- I'm sure you've seen it -- confirms what

we've known for many months, and that's that your government has no plan to meet the promise you made of 60% waste diversion from landfill.

The Environmental Commissioner emphasized that a waste diversion strategy for all waste is urgently required and, with every passing day, more undiverted waste, more organic waste is going to landfill. When

will you keep your promise? When will you introduce a fully funded plan for waste diversion?

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

Hon. Laurel C. Broten (Minister of the Environment): I'm pleased to have a chance to comment on the Environmental Commissioner's report today and speak specifically about the steps that our

government is taking with respect to waste diversion.

A 60% target is, no doubt, a difficult stretch target. We are giving municipalities the tools that they need each and every day to meet that target, and many of them will meet that target. We're three years

into that program, and we remain committed to working with those sectors to meet their obligations. By providing funding for the blue box program, by the LCBO return program, by the household hazardous waste and electronics programs -- all of

those initiatives will help municipalities get there. We're cracking down on the ICI sector, which is dragging those diversion rates down. It's a work in progress, and we will do more because we are committed to seeing increased diversion.

Mr. Tabuns: The Environmental Commissioner's report not only confirms that the McGuinty Liberals have no plans to meet their waste diversion promises -- and you've just confirmed that -- but

they also have no plan or strategy for dealing with adaptation to climate change. We already know that the McGuinty Liberals do not have a climate change plan.

Minister, you will recall, last month in estimates, I asked if you thought climate change was one of the most important environmental crises facing the world. Your response was an unqualified "Absolutely."

Will you immediately introduce and fund a climate change plan for Ontario to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and a plan to deal with adaptation to climate change, as outlined by the Environmental Commissioner?

Hon. Ms. Broten: My friends across the House are caught in an old way of thinking, where we only tackle environmental issues in the Ministry of the Environment. I'm part of a government where

every ministry is working on those files. The Minister of Natural Resources, the Minister of Energy, the Minister of Transportation: All of us collectively are making significant investments that are reducing greenhouse gases in this province.

Getting ethanol, getting cleaner sources of electricity, energy conservation, creating a greenbelt: All of those initiatives are part and parcel of the steps that we need to collectively take, as a society, to

tackle a critical environmental issue. No doubt about it: There's more to do. We continue to build our efforts in that regard and work for the next generation, to deliver them what we've promised them -- a clean, healthy, sustainable future.

LAVAL BRIDGE COLLAPSE /

EFFONDREMENT DU VIADUC À LAVAL

Mr. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): My question is to the Minister of Transportation. I want to raise the issue of the tragedy this past weekend in Laval. I know that each

member in this House would join with me to express our sorrow and sympathy to our neighbours in Laval.

Oui, c'est au nom de tous les membres de cette assemblée que je veux offrir mes sincères sympathies aux familles éprouvées.

In times like this, with the collapse of an overpass on Highway 19 in Laval, Quebec, and other tragedies in other countries, Canadians come together to assist. Minister, can you tell us just what our

government is doing to assist our neighbours in dealing with this crisis?

Hon. Donna H. Cansfield (Minister of Transportation): I'd like to thank the member for the question. I would also like to extend my thoughts and prayers to the families for this tragedy.

The first thing that occurred was that we were in touch with the ministry. The Premier called the Premier of Quebec, Premier Charest. We were in touch with both the minister and ministry staff and we have

offered our assistance. What we will be doing is sending a GO train to Quebec to help them. It's one locomotive and a number of cars. It will move about 1,400 people every day, and they will have this until they no longer have need of it.

What we will also do is continue to assist in any way we can with expertise from our ministry. We will also be sending some folks from both GO and the ministry on the train, and CN will be participating in

terms of the movement of that train through to Quebec. So we are working with Quebec in any way we can to ensure that we can help them during this very difficult time.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Supplementary? The member for Mississauga East.

Mr. Peter Fonseca (Mississauga East): Let me join my colleague and offer my personal condolences to our neighbours in Laval.

I am pleased to hear that we have taken these steps to assist those who have been affected. However, this incident has caused all of us here who travel on our highway system to wonder just how safe the

highways are here in Ontario, with our wide system and the many bridges that we have. Minister, can you tell us just what we are doing here to ensure the safety of Ontarians and to reassure my constituents as we travel on these highways to get to

work, to get home, that this type of incident won't happen here in our great province of Ontario?

Hon. Mrs. Cansfield: It is important to reassure. I can tell you that we have about 28,000 bridges provincially and 13,000 bridges and large culverts municipally. Our bridges are visually

inspected annually; they are then reinspected every other year by professional engineers. So the professional engineers out of the Ministry of Transportation inspect visually and then also do an additional inspection every two years, which is also

required municipally.

In addition to that, we do inspection that would core into the bridges. It's called destructive looking at the bridge in terms of actually coring into the concrete. They then also will do magnetic, for

example, or they'll do ultrasound, to ensure that the bridges are safe.

In the case of steel bridges, they do actual fatigue stress. This is done on a regular basis.

One of the most important things to note is that we have, without a doubt, one of the finest sets of bridges in this province. But more importantly, we are reinvesting over $400 million from Move Ontario alone

municipally --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

BOTTLE RECYCLING

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): My question is to the Minister of the Environment. Minister, today the Environmental Commissioner released a rather scathing report on your

government's record on the environment. It's entitled Neglecting our Obligations. It sounds a lot like "breaking your promises" to me.

Interestingly enough, there was no information in this report regarding the LCBO. The Environmental Commissioner himself is on record as saying that, "Prescribing the LCBO under the EBR would increase

transparency and accountability of their decision-making." This would allow the public to respond with a request for review of your policy decisions, such as the proposed LCBO recycling program with the Beer Store.

Minister, are you willing to stand today and say you will encourage the Premier and the rest of your cabinet colleagues to ensure that the LCBO will be included under the Environmental Bill of Rights?

Hon. Laurel C. Broten (Minister of the Environment): I'm pleased to have a chance to talk about what we are doing with respect to the environment, and what we are doing to increase diversion

across the province.

We talk about the blue box program and the diversion of bottles. I can tell you, at the Ministry of the Environment, we're working hard to turn the corner from the sad state of affairs that existed in this

province under your former government. As the Environmental Commissioner himself also said today, the law was not in force. Regulations 102 and 103 have been in place since 1994. The ICI sector has dismal rates of diversion, and that is because

there was an understanding under your government that those rules would not be enforced.

Our government does not pick and choose what rules we enforce. We're enforcing the rules. We've commenced an inspection blitz and we will see increased rates of diversion in the province because that, along

with the blue box program and the bottle return, are all steps and initiatives to make sure that we --

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

Ms. Scott: Minister, I was asking for results. You refused to answer questions on the cost and implications of the proposed LCBO recycling plan when we were in estimates last month, saying

that it was a government decision, not a decision of your ministry, and that it falls under various ministries other than your own.

Minister, after today's scathing review of your ministry, your failed promise of diverting 60% of Ontario's waste, which just adds to the three years of broken promises, and your own member's lack of

representation on the Green Lane landfill situation, don't you think that at the very least you should tell the hardworking people of Ontario what your LCBO-to-the-Beer-Store proposal is going to cost them? It's only the right thing to do.

Hon. Ms. Broten: We've said to Ontarians that we are investing in the Ministry of the Environment, unlike your government, which decimated the ministry, which indicated that the Ministry of

the Environment was not an important ministry. Our government has turned the page.

I guess you're against the bottle return plan. Our goal is to provide municipalities with the tools they have asked for, such as a bottle return program, to assist them in diverting waste from landfills. We

will always need landfills, there's no doubt about it, but let's collectively provide municipalities and the ICI sector with the tools they need. Ontarians are calling for increased diversion. Your party needs to get with the program, and get with

the rest of Ontarians who want to divert waste from landfills.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a question for the Premier. This past weekend, in a last-minute scramble, your government narrowly avoided the closure of an ER in Kitchener. This past

summer, in a similar scramble at the last minute, at the start of a long weekend, staff in the Ministry of Health's office had to phone doctors to get them to staff the ER in St. Marys.

Throughout the summer, the OMA identified 19 hospitals across the province where ERs were at risk of closing or where there were not enough staff to guarantee emergency care. These crises in ERs are not going

away.

Where is your government's comprehensive plan to deal with these crises, instead of having to resort to last-minute scrambles to keep ERs open?

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

Hon. George Smitherman (Deputy Premier, Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I would like to say, on behalf of the patients of the province, that if it requires a last-minute scramble to

lend assistance, then we will.

The circumstances, as the honourable member will know, are made very complex by the overall shortages that we have related to doctors. And we have well established in previous debate that her DNA is well

associated with that problem. The comprehensive strategy that she speaks about can be found in enhanced compensation for emergency room physicians, dramatic increases to the range of community resources that are available, and the efforts that are

under way to enhance physician supply in Ontario: to date, 750 additional foreign-trained doctors deployed in communities across Ontario, and a 23% increase in the size of our medical schools. We will continue to work on behalf of Ontario's

patients to address these long-standing challenges, and we'll do so in a fashion that helps to make them a thing of the past.

Ms. Martel: A supplementary to the Premier: Whatever strategy you claim to have in place, it's clear that it's not working. That was clear with the last-minute scramble in Kitchener this

weekend.

Premier, the Manitoba government was proactive in developing a strategy to ensure that ERs would not close this summer. At the beginning of June, the government announced a four-point plan to prevent the

closure of its ERs and to address staffing problems in ERs, both in the medium term and the long term. Manitoba's strategies worked. The ERs were kept open. In fact, the government has now decided to extend its program until March 2007. And its

working group, which includes ER physicians, is due to report in November with respect to recommendations to change the work environment in their ERs.

We've urged you to look at the Manitoba model. You have refused. If you don't want to look at Manitoba's strategy, where is your comprehensive plan to ensure that ERs in the 19 hospitals that are at risk are

going to stay open?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: Obviously, the honourable member's only plan can be found on the palms of her hands, and they were awfully warm, because she spent her whole time in government sitting on

them. The reality is that she sat there, she sat idly by, while they made a decision to shrink the size of medical schools. At least one of them had the good conscience to go screaming out of the parking lot, squealing their tires as they went,

when the public policy debate didn't go their way. And it's enough of the honourable member's pretending her way through these things. She wants the Manitoba solution. She wants to top up the compensation of doctors while her partner there, her

seatmate, when we brought forward a resolution with doctors through a negotiated agreement, said that we were bribing them. So the policy incoherence offered by that party continues.

The Manitoba solution was Hamilton's solution, which was to move forward with top-ups. We are working on a comprehensive plan that at the heart of it builds community capacity, replaces beds that they closed,

and works hard to make up for the doctor shortages that these two parties --

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

ARTS AND CULTURAL FUNDING

Ms. Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): My question is for the Minister of Culture. Last week we learned that the Conservative government in Ottawa is cutting funding to its museums assistance

program by 50%. Hamilton hosts several museums, and I am concerned about the impact of this change at a time when Hamilton can least manage it. Hamilton boasts several wonderful points of interest -- the Canadian Football Hall of Fame and Dundurn

Castle, just to name two.

Minister, can you please tell me how these federal cuts will impact museums in Hamilton and, by extension, in the province of Ontario?

Hon. Caroline Di Cocco (Minister of Culture): I thank the member from Hamilton West for the question. Last week, I hosted the culture ministers from across Canada at the

federal-provincial-territorial meeting, and all the provincial ministers conveyed their concern about these cuts. In my conversation with the federal minister, Bev Oda, I conveyed in no uncertain terms my disappointment and grave concerns over

these cuts. I also asked the minister to convey to the federal Minister of Finance that, of their $13.2-billion surplus, approximately $5.3 billion comes from the people of Ontario. I was disturbed to hear the news, and it means that about $1.4

million less will come to the province of Ontario -- to the museums.

On the other hand, this government, under the leadership of Premier Dalton McGuinty, continues to fund 180 museums through our community museums operating grant and through Ontario Trillium grants. I continue

to impress upon the federal government that they must meet their --

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

Supplementary?

Ms. Marsales: I'm familiar with this grant program, and in fact I believe that Dundurn National Historic Site in my riding received almost $60,000 this year in provincial funding. But I'm

still concerned about other federal cuts. Can you tell me what they involve and assure the people of Hamilton West that the Ontario government has a different view of culture and the value of heritage and culture?

Hon. Ms. Di Cocco: Again, thank you for that supplementary question. Not only did Stephen Harper cut museum grants by half, but other cuts have been made: the termination of a commercial

heritage properties incentive fund, which protected heritage buildings; elimination of the goods and services tax rebate for tourists; and elimination of support to the Canadian Volunteerism Initiative, considering that thousands of volunteers are

those who support our museums.

We are bringing Ontarians into museums and building pride in our heritage through Doors Open Ontario, a program designed to open historical sites to the public for free, organized by Ontario Heritage Trust.

Unlike the actions of the federal government, we have spent more than 38% more in the Ministry of Culture in 2005-06, for a total of $475 million to culture.

GREATER TORONTO

TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): My question is to the Minister of Transportation. Last April, with great fanfare, you introduced the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority. Even at that time,

that announcement was three years overdue. It had been announced and reannounced in three successive budgets. Your government promised, but again, they didn't deliver.

Bill 104 established the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority, and the John Tory government supported that initiative. Recently, Glen Grunwald, president and CEO of the Toronto Board of Trade, was quoted

in the Toronto Star as saying, "Our hopes rest with the new Greater Toronto Transportation Authority...." He went on to say, "With no board of directors named, no CEO appointed and no money in sight, that road ahead" looks "pretty ... rocky"

indeed.

Minister, what has taken so long to get this agency up and running, or is this simply another McGuinty election promise that's been broken?

Hon. Donna H. Cansfield (Minister of Transportation): I thank the member for the question. The Greater Toronto Transportation Authority is something we're very proud of. As a matter of fact,

both the chair and the vice-chair will be announced shortly. As the member knows, everyone in the region from Hamilton to Durham will have an opportunity to participate in the board, but they can either be elected or non-elected, and they come

from those municipalities or regions. Given the fact that there is the November election, it makes a great deal of sense for those folks to be appointed after the election, and so we have asked them to do that. They then will be available for

January, and that board will be up and going, sir.

Mr. O'Toole: Another strategic delay, I would say.

A further announcement during the election was dealing with gridlock. All Ontarians know that your government would say anything to get elected; we know that. The reality is that in the GTA -- there was a

study a couple of weeks ago -- the average commuter from my region spends about two hours a day commuting to Toronto. That's 400 hours a year, about 16 days out of their lives. The problem is not just gridlock; it's gridlock in your government,

because you simply have no plan.

Last April, your government's own news release claimed that the GTTA would be operating in September. It's October. Now you've delayed it till after the November elections, and then it'll be Christmas. These

are simply delays for political purposes. Why don't you tell the people the truth for a change, that you simply have no plan for the GTTA or for gridlock for the people of Ontario?

Hon. Mrs. Cansfield: I welcome and acknowledge the fact that we did make a very strategic decision to delay who would participate on that board until after the election. You're correct: It

makes a great deal of sense to do that, and I thank you for that support. As a matter of fact, that board will be up and going, and it will have to deal with the gridlock that is here.

It was interesting, when I travelled across the province this summer. There is no question in my mind that if I thought there was neglect in the energy field when I was there, neglect and total underinvestment

in our infrastructure by the previous government is virtually abhorrent. That's why we've put in $5.6 billion over the next five years -- all you have to do is go on the website, and you'll see exactly where that investment will occur -- in

addition to a one-time $1.4-billion investment, $400 million of which goes to roads and bridges municipally. So although you may not choose to look at that as a plan, I can assure you that it is a plan. All you have to do is go on

www.mto.gov.on.ca, and you can look --

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

WINDSOR RACEWAY

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Minister of Economic Development and Trade. Working families in Windsor are furious that they are losing their racetrack, their

slots, and possibly a proposed new rink for the Spitfires, an OHL franchise. This is a devastating blow that will cost your community an important industry and hundreds of good jobs. Slots run by the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. can't just

pick up and move without government's knowledge. My question is simple: When did you and your McGuinty government colleagues first learn of the OLG move?

Hon. Sandra Pupatello (Minister of Economic Development and Trade, minister responsible for women's issues): I appreciate, once again, the opportunity to clarify the position that the

provincial government has when a private company is dealing with a municipality, as is the case with the Windsor Raceway, the town of Tecumseh or the city of Windsor. It is a private relationship between those two parties.

Let me say this: When the last government introduced slots to raceways, they did so to support the horsemen and the horseracing industry. The horsemen who are participating, wherever that Windsor Raceway may

be, whether it's 20 kilometres at one end of Essex county or the other, are the same: They're at that same raceway, and the slots are there to support those horsemen. The lion's share of that funding for slots, in fact, goes to the purse that is

used in those raceways. But this member opposite must understand that this is a private deal between a private company and a municipality.

Mr. Prue: My question was a simple one: When did you and your government first learn of this? You're not going to tell us.

The residents are stunned by your government's plans to pull the racetrack and the slots out of Windsor. This backroom deal will cost your city $3 million in lost revenues.

I can only quote what the Windsor Star had to say about you today. A Windsor Star columnist said today, and I quote verbatim, "Where the hell are Dwight Duncan and Sandra Pupatello on this file? Why are they

running for cover instead of fighting tooth and nail to preserve this city's slots revenue? Are they knuckling under because the Premier, who's being feted at a $1,000-a-plate fundraiser here next month, has more pressing priorities?"

Minister, what are you going to do to keep Windsor from losing $3 million --

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

Hon. Ms. Pupatello: I appreciate the opportunity once again to tell the people of Windsor and the people of Essex county that 90% of all of that slot revenue benefits the people of Essex

county. That additional perhaps 10% is actually $2.4 million that did sit with the municipality to host the raceway. The lion's share of that money is staying in the same county. All of the horsemen are still there, the people riding the horses

and those horses are the same, and they are very happy with the recent happenings with Windsor Raceway.

Let me say this to the people of Windsor: If they think for one moment that there has been an historic government in this province that has done more for Windsor, there simply has not. Since we have become a

government, in these short three years alone we have seen the advent of a medical school for Essex county; we saw the expansion of Valiant Machine just last week; we are looking at saving the Nemak plant -- that was last year; we've looked at the

DaimlerChrysler expansion, which holds our paint shop for Windsor. These are very important initiatives.

As I mentioned to you yesterday, since we have become --

The Speaker: Thank you, Minister. New question.

AMATEUR SPORT

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): My question is for the Minister of Health Promotion.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order. I cannot hear the member for Ottawa-Orléans. Perhaps his colleagues would stop heckling. The member for Ottawa-Orléans.

Mr. McNeely: Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Health Promotion. Last winter our government launched the Quest for Gold lottery, which offered Ontarians a voluntary way to

help out young high-performance athletes.

In my riding of Ottawa-Orléans, athletes have benefited from the funds, which enable them to cover the many costs associated with performing at a very high level. Quest for Gold funding helps athletes

attend national and international competitions by encouraging them to stay in Ontario to live and train.

Minister, this summer you launched a new round of this innovative lottery. Can you please provide me with the details of round two so I can communicate them to the athletes in my riding?

Hon. Jim Watson (Minister of Health Promotion): I want to thank the honourable member from Ottawa-Orléans, who's a great supporter of amateur sport.

I was pleased to be in Ottawa at the commencement of the Ontario Summer Games to launch phase two of the Quest for Gold program. I'm also very pleased to recognize that in the first round, $2.9 million in

funding went directly to amateur athletes in sports in this province and, in fact, 892 athletes received cheques prior to March 31 to support them in their quest for gold.

I'm proud to be a part of this government under the leadership of Premier McGuinty, who has not turned his back, and we have not turned our backs, on amateur athletes. The previous government, to set the

record straight, cut 42% of the funding to provincial sport organizations, for a grand total of $3.3 million.

Mr. McNeely: Minister, odds like that make supporting our athletes a winning choice. We've gone over how this will benefit athletes directly, but how will this lottery increase their access to

training and competitive opportunities, both of which are vital to high levels of performance?

Having adequate training facilities is also essential to growing the next generation of Olympic and Paralympic gold medalists. Velodromes, Olympic-sized swimming pools and speed skating tracks are desperately

needed. Even standard arenas in my riding are in desperate need of repair and renovations. Minister, I know you met last week with the provincial and territorial sports ministers. Was any progress made on sports infrastructure?

Hon. Mr. Watson: I just wanted to point out the sad record of the previous government. Our government has increased by 134% the funding to amateur athletes in Ontario.

We had a federal-provincial -- FPT -- meeting, but the "F" didn't show up; the federal minister failed to show up. Prime Minister Harper has such a tight leash on his ministers from Ontario that they're not

standing up for Ontario. They're not doing their job; they're not coming to meet with provincial counterparts.

We set out a very realistic plan to talk about sport and recreation infrastructure. Eighty per cent of the single-pad arenas in the province of Ontario are 25 years or older; 13% of them are 50 years or

older.

We recognize that this government has put money into infrastructure for sport and recreation and community activities in Ontario. We're very proud of the track record --

The Speaker: Thank you.

PROCLAMATION OF BILL 86

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): I have a question for the Attorney General. Minister, I'm sure you're familiar with Bill 86, a powerful tool to protect children from sexual

exploitation. That bill was passed in 2002, brought in by former Attorney General David Young.

In the run-up to the election of 2003, your seatmate, the member from Sudbury, was quoted as saying, "The failure to proclaim the act after 10 months since passage was shameful, cynical politicking, and it's

vulnerable kids who are paying the price." That member has been sitting beside you for three years. You've been in government for three years. Would you suggest, Minister, that your seatmate was engaged in shameful, cynical politicking? If not,

why have you not proclaimed this legislation?

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General): I know that my seatmate would like to answer this question, but you've directed it to me. I will say more on this to come, other than saying that the

member was right then and he's certainly right now to say that it was absolutely shameful that the previous government would have brought forward this bill, had the bill passed and not have it proclaimed. It's really as simple as that.

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Pursuant to standing order 37(a), on Thursday the member for Timmins-James Bay gave notice of his dissatisfaction with the answer to his question given by

the Minister of Education concerning French-language schools. This matter will be debated at 6 o'clock today.

ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: On Thursday of last week, we asked about two outstanding questions on the order paper whose answers are overdue. We

thus far have received the answer to only one question, 183, standing in the name of the member for Simcoe-Grey. That remains -- pardon me -- outstanding.

As you know, standing order 97(

d) requires the minister to respond within 24 sitting days, and that deadline has long come and gone.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I'd like to remind the minister responsible that you are required, under standing order 97(d), to provide answers to written questions within 24 sitting

days, that the response is now overdue, and I would ask that the minister give some indication as to when the answer is forthcoming.

Perhaps the government House leader could respond on behalf of the Premier.

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): We will endeavour to get the question answered as quickly as possible. I used to sit in

the opposition and ask the same questions of the government, so I'm sympathetic to the opposition asking that question.

PETITIONS

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

Mr. Bill Murdoch (Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound): I have a petition here that many people across Ontario are concerned about, but this one is with over 1,000 signatures from around the area in

Hanover. It's to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas there has been a lack of action on the acute doctor shortage for rural Ontario, particularly in Grey-Bruce, and many do not have a family doctor, and specialists are leaving the area;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows: asking for initiatives and timelines to deal with this current problem, financial incentives and support for family health

networks."

I've also signed this.

CAFETERIA FOOD GUIDELINES

Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): I have a petition today in support of healthy food education.

"Whereas childhood obesity rates have tripled over the past two decades in Canada, causing many other serious health problems, including diabetes, heart diseases, cancer and hypertension; and

"Whereas the increase in childhood obesity rates has been greatly affected by the increased amount of commercialized funding to the Ontario school boards; and

"Whereas some corporations who give funds to schools have no interest in the health of today's youth and cannot be held accountable for the increased obesity rates and other health problems; and

"Whereas students between the ages of 14 and 18 are responsible for making their own food choices; and

"Whereas the Ontario food premises regulation only provides safety policies that must be followed by the cafeterias of Ontario school boards but does not define regulations regarding the nutritional standards

of the food being served;

"Be it therefore resolved that the government of Ontario, through the Ministry of Education, support Ontario school boards to educate students more thoroughly and systematically about making healthy food

choices according to Canada's Food Guide to Healthy Eating."

I'll affix my signature to this petition.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): It's the proper day to introduce a petition on long-term care, as the minister introduced this legislation today. The petition reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

that they deserve; and

"Whereas, even with recent funding increases and a dedicated staff who do more than their best, there is still not enough time available to provide the care residents need. For example, 10 minutes, and

sometimes less, is simply not enough time to assist a resident to get up, dressed, to the bathroom and then to the dining room for breakfast; and

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

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

Dalton McGuinty government -- "to increase operating funding to long-term-care homes by $306.6 million, which will allow the hiring of more staff to provide an additional 20 minutes of care per resident per day over the next two years (2006 and

2007)."

I'm pleased to support this on behalf of constituents of the riding of Durham and present it to Breanna.

CHILD PROTECTION

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I'm pleased to present this petition from a number of people in my community and, in fact, from all over the province. It's to the Legislative Assembly of

Ontario:

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

"Whereas Ontario is one of the few provinces that does not have independent oversight of child welfare administration; and

"Whereas eight provinces now have independent oversight of child welfare issues, including child protection; and

"Whereas all provincial Ombudsmen first identified child protection as a priority issue in 1986 and still Ontario does not allow the Ombudsman to investigate people's complaints about children's aid societies'

decisions; and

"Whereas people wronged by CAS decisions concerning placement, access, custody or care are not allowed to appeal those decisions to the Ontario Ombudsman's office;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we support the Ombudsman having the power to probe decisions and investigate complaints concerning the province's children's aid societies (CAS)."

I support this petition. I've signed it and will send it down to the table by way of Dominic, the page.

CAFETERIA FOOD GUIDELINES

Mr. David Zimmer (Willowdale): I have a petition entitled Support Healthy Food Education.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas childhood obesity rates have tripled over the past two decades in Canada, causing many other serious health problems, including diabetes, heart diseasea, cancer and hypertension; and

"Whereas the increase in childhood obesity rates has been greatly affected by the increased amount of commercialized funding to the Ontario school boards; and

"Whereas some corporations who give funds to schools have no interest in the health of today's youth and cannot be held accountable for the increased obesity rates and other health problems; and

"Whereas students between the ages of 14 and 18 are responsible for making their own food choices; and

"Whereas the Ontario food premises regulation only provides safety policies that must be followed by cafeterias of Ontario school boards but does not define regulations regarding the nutritional standards of

the food being served;

"Be it therefore resolved that the government of Ontario, through the Ministry of Education, support Ontario school boards to educate students more thoroughly and systematically about making healthy food

choices according to Canada's Food Guide to Healthy Eating."

I support this and am pleased to attach my signature.

HEALTH PROTECTION LEGISLATION

Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean-Carleton): I'm bringing this petition on behalf of residents in rural Ottawa and Nepean-Carleton.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"It is a long-standing tradition in rural Ontario for churches and other organizations to raise funds by holding suppers and feature home-cooked food and home baking. These suppers provide a venue for people

in the community to gather to share a nutritious meal at a reasonable cost. The funds raised enable the host groups to continue to provide a wide range of other services to their communities;

"Whereas provincial legislation requiring food served at public events to be prepared on site in approved kitchen facilities places an impossible burden on small groups of volunteers who cannot afford to

rebuild or upgrade facilities to commercial standards, or to undertake to prepare all the food on site; and

"Whereas regulation 562 of the Health Protection and Promotion Act already recognizes this by providing an exemption, allowing churches, service groups and fraternal organizations to prepare and serve meals

for members and personally invited guests at special events;

"We, the undersigned residents of Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to amend

section 2 of the Health Protection and Promotion Act, RSO 1990, to permit churches, service clubs and fraternal

organizations to serve home-cooked food at public events for fundraising purposes."

Since I not only support this petition but have also undertaken to go to many of these church suppers in my community and will continue to do so, I affix my signature and present it to page Chad.

CHILD CUSTODY

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): I'm pleased to introduce this petition on behalf of grandparents across Ontario. The petition reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

grandparents; and

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

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

of maintaining emotional ties between children and grandparents; and

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

consistent with the best interests of the child.

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

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

Whereas we support the introduction of Bill 8, introduced by the member from Niagara Falls;

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

grandparents."

I'm proud to sign my signature in support of this petition.

WATER QUALITY

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas every Ontarian wants the best water quality possible; and

"Whereas the goal of clean water can be achieved effectively through amendments to existing legislation; and

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals are determined to hammer through the flawed legislation known as the Clean Water Act; and

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals have failed to put in place adequate, stable, long-term funding into the bill; and

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals have failed to effectively address the numerous problems in the bill; and

"Whereas rural Ontario stands to suffer significantly under this poorly-thought-out policy;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows: To not pass Bill 43 (the Clean Water Act) until proper funding and amendments are in place."

This was signed by many people at the International Plowing Match in Peterborough.

AGGREGATE EXTRACTION

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): I've got a petition to rescind the joint board decision of June 8, 2005, approving the applications of Dufferin Aggregates to expand its mining licence in

the Niagara Escarpment World Biosphere Reserve:

"To the Legislature of Ontario:

"There are numerous reasons for rescinding the joint board decision, including the following:

"Whereas the decision contravenes the purpose of the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act;

"Whereas the decision sets precedent for quarry expansion licences on the Niagara Escarpment;

"Whereas this decision could lead to habitat destruction for species of concern;

"Whereas escarpment rural lands are equivalent to buffer designation under the United Nations' framework for biosphere reserve (buffer designation is expected to protect the sensitive nature of the core

protected areas);

"Whereas to attempt to maintain the significant wetlands and the streams' course, water will have to be pumped in perpetuity;

"Whereas this decision allows for pumping 50 feet ... below the water table;

"Whereas the 50-foot dams to be constructed have a potential for failure;

"Whereas aggregate can be readily accessed close to market off the Niagara Escarpment in land that is not protected or at risk;

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

"We call on the government of Ontario to:

"Issue an order by the Lieutenant Governor in Council ... rescinding the decision made by the joint board dated June 8, 2005, approving the applications of Dufferin Aggregates in regards to this matter;"

and

"Issue an order by the cabinet substituting for the decision of the board on this matter, a decision rejecting the applications of Dufferin."

PROPERTY RIGHTS

Mrs. Christine Elliott (Whitby-Ajax): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is silent on property rights; and

"Whereas the Alberta Bill of Rights specifically protects the right to the enjoyment of property; and

"Whereas the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms provides that `Every person has a right to the peaceful enjoyment and free disposition of his property, except to the extent provided by law'; and

"Whereas ownership rights should not be abridged or usurped without due process of law; and

"Whereas owners of all lands affected by expropriation should have the right to be included as parties to a required inquiry to consider the merits of the objectives of the expropriating authority; and

"Whereas the decision of an expropriating authority should be subject to judicial review; and

"Whereas, subject to specific limitations of law, the right to peaceful enjoyment of one's land must be recognized by Ontario law;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legi