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

November 14, 1995

36th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

L022 - Tue 14 Nov 1995 / Mar 14 Nov 1995

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

LEGAL AID

N'SWAKAMOK NATIVE FRIENDSHIP CENTRE

ROTARY INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXCHANGE PROGRAM

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

HIGHWAY SAFETY

CHRIS HADFIELD

FLOYD WHITE

ADOPTION MONTH

FLOYD WHITE

ROYAL ASSENT / SANCTION ROYALE

ANNUAL REPORT, PROVINCIAL AUDITOR

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

HANS DAIGELER

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

KARLA HOMOLKA

ORAL QUESTIONS

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

HIGHWAY SAFETY

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

KARLA HOMOLKA

CHILD CARE

WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD

CHILD CARE

CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETIES

VEHICLE SAFETY

JOBS ONTARIO

ALTERNATIVE FUELS

AGRICULTURAL TRADE

PETITIONS

LABOUR LEGISLATION

PROPERTY ASSESSMENT

HIGHWAY SAFETY

SERVICES À LA JEUNESSE DE HEARST

TIGGER THE CAT

CHILD CARE

SERVICES À LA JEUNESSE DE HEARST

ST STEPHEN'S SECONDARY SCHOOL

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

CHILD CARE

COMMUNITY-BASED JUSTICE OPTIONS

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

CHILD CARE

CHILD ABUSE

HIGHWAY SAFETY

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

REALTY TAX FREEZE STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1995 / LOI DE 1995 MODIFIANT DES LOIS ET VISANT À GELER LES IMPÔTS FONCIERS

CITIZENS ASSEMBLY PROJECT ACT, 1995 / LOI DE 1995 SUR LE PROJET D'ASSEMBLÉEDE CITOYENS

ORDERS OF THE DAY

WORKERS' COMPENSATION AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY AMENDMENT ACT, 1995 / LOI DE 1995 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LES ACCIDENTS DU TRAVAIL ET LA

LOI SUR LA SANTÉ ET LA SÉCURITÉ AU TRAVAIL

The House met at 1331.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

LEGAL AID

Mr Robert Chiarelli (Ottawa West): Because of turmoil in Ontario's legal aid system, last week an Ontario judge stayed cocaine trafficking charges against four accused persons and a second judge stayed a convicted murderer's charge on prison escape.

We also have the sad spectacle of the breakdown of the traditional and cooperative partnership between Ontario's lawyers and the Ministry of the Attorney General. The Law Society of Upper Canada and representative groups of lawyers in separate actions are taking the Attorney General to court on legal aid issues. Ontario lawyers have also taken job action while representing clients in court.

The political and administrative mismanagement of legal aid has caused the loss of public confidence in the reliability and effectiveness of this key cornerstone of our justice system.

It is for these reasons that this afternoon I will be asking the standing committee on administration of justice to immediately convene public hearings and to report to the Legislature before Christmas with recommendations to quell the legal aid crisis in a manner which will maintain the "judicare" model of legal aid within a workable financial framework.

The public, family law lawyers, criminal law lawyers, civil lawyers and legal aid clinics all need a public forum to be heard on this issue, and MPPs need a forum for meaningful contributions to a solution.

N'SWAKAMOK NATIVE FRIENDSHIP CENTRE

Ms Shelley Martel (Sudbury East): I want to make the Premier aware today of yet another organization in the region of Sudbury which is a victim of Conservative funding cuts.

N'Swakamok Native Friendship Centre in Sudbury was established in 1972 to help foster a mutual understanding between native and non-native peoples and to develop native leadership. The centre serves approximately 500 to 600 people per day in the Sudbury and Manitoulin area.

The friendship centre has been hit in three ways. Firstly, since 1973 a community worker has assisted native families moving to Sudbury, to help them access public services and to provide counselling to those feeling the effects of living in an urban setting for the first time. Funding for this position is now gone.

Secondly, since 1976 a daily program for native children involving cultural teachings, urban orientation and tutoring support has been in place. Thousands of children have gone through the Little Beavers program and have benefited from it; now it's been cut.

Thirdly, since 1986, pre-employment and summer employment services for native students have been offered. A counsellor provided support for 100 native students at the native alternative school. Funding for all of this, through the community youth support program, is gone.

If the Premier would visit the native friendship centre he would understand its value and keep its programs. Staff and members are inviting him to do this when he's in Sudbury on November 24. Since they can't afford to pay $125 to buy access to Mike Harris at the Tory fund-raiser, he needs to go to them. I am extending that invitation today.

ROTARY INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXCHANGE PROGRAM

Mr Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): It gives me great pleasure today to welcome to the Legislature Niels Plaumann. Niels is a student from Bremen, Germany, and is visiting Cambridge as part of the Rotary International student exchange program. He is hosted by the Preston-Hespeler Rotary club.

Niels is today accompanied by three club members: President Bob Thiesburger, Erica Tennenbaum, and Bill Barlow, who several members will recognize as one of my predecessors as the MPP for Cambridge.

The Rotary student exchange program has given young people from around the world a chance to visit and learn about other countries and cultures. This type of program is designed to help foster understanding among potential leaders of tomorrow and to expose host families to new ideas from the youth of today.

The four Rotary clubs of Cambridge have hosted many visiting students and sponsored young people from our community as they travelled and learned. We should all be proud of the work that dedicated groups like Rotary do in our community.

I know this is just one way in which Rotarians have enriched Cambridge, the province and Canada. I would like to thank them for their continued good work.

I'm sure all members will welcome Niels, Bob, Erica and Bill.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Ms Annamarie Castrilli (Downsview): The Minister of Education and Training has in general steadfastly refused to meet with the constituent groups of Ontario's colleges and universities. He has to date also not advanced any plans for the sector in this Legislature. But he seems to have no difficulty discussing his views with numerous members of his own party.

The minister's actions are creating uncertainty, and stress and rumours are rampant. Two thousand University of Toronto students have delivered statements to me deploring their strong opposition to the proposed cuts. They wish the minister to know that the cuts for the University of Toronto alone will mean $53 million, or one half of the budget of the faculty of arts and science, its largest faculty. Ontario now ranks ninth out of 10 Canadian provinces in funding on a per-student basis.

HIGHWAY SAFETY

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): I rise to bring to the attention of the members of the Legislature a very serious situation.

Miss Kim Butler of Blind River, in my constituency, died in an automobile accident at 11:30 am on Sunday, 20 miles west of Sudbury near, Whitefish. Her automobile was struck by a westbound vehicle. Her daughter, Amanda, is in hospital, and the driver of the other vehicle and a passenger are also in hospital.

The investigating officer, Sergeant Dan Lee of the Sudbury OPP, indicated that the roads were horrendous, "There was slush and ice over the pavement and there were no salt trucks."

According to the weather report, snow began at 2 pm on Saturday. It snowed until 9 pm. It stopped snowing at 9 pm on Saturday and yet the road, Highway 17 and the Trans-Canada Highway, was not plowed by 11:30 am on Sunday morning when the accident occurred.

I hope the Attorney General, along with his colleague the Minister of Transportation, will consider very seriously whether or not a coroner's inquest should be held into this accident to determine whether road conditions, as such, were the result of cutbacks by this government.

CHRIS HADFIELD

Mr Ted Chudleigh (Halton North): My statement concerns information of a galactic nature for the residents of my riding and all Canadians.

High above the clouds, circling the earth, stands 36-year-old Milton resident Major Chris Hadfield on the space shuttle Atlantis. Educated as a mechanical engineer with a master's degree in aviation, Major Hadfield was recognized as the US Navy Test Pilot of the Year for 1991, the first time that distinction was given to a foreign pilot. He now does his nation proud once again on this historic mission aboard Atlantis.

Atlantis's primary mission is to attach a Russian-built docking port to the Mir station to make future shuttle docking safer and easier to accomplish. This marks the first time a Canadian will operate the shuttle's Canadian designed, 20-metre-long mechanical arm. Hadfield will use the arm to pluck a giant tube out of the cargo bay and place it upright into a

section of the shuttle just below the cockpit.

As part of the traditional offering of gifts, which is customary when visiting Russians in their homes, Major Hadfield and the crew will give the Russian cosmonauts Canadian maple candy shaped like maple leaves.

Please join me in this House today in wishing Major Hadfield and all members of the space shuttle Atlantis a successful and safe mission on this, the latest historic journey into space.

FLOYD WHITE

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): The people of St Catharines bid a final farewell to an individual who had made an outstanding contribution to the field of education and to the community as a whole.

As a former superintendent of education with the Lincoln County Board of Education and as an individual deeply involved with education in the Orangeville, Guelph, North York and North Bay areas, Floyd White brought innovation and a commitment to children and their future to the schools with which he was associated.

In addition to his involvement in education, Floyd was an active participant in the political arena, playing a significant role in the election of the Progressive Conservative government of his close friend Mike Harris and assisting PC candidates and the Progressive Conservative Party at the local level. Floyd also made an important contribution to the election of his friend Alan Unwin to the position of mayor of St Catharines.

The overflow crowd at his funeral was a testimony to the respect and friendship that he earned during his years in St Catharines and the esteem in which he was held by people across the province of Ontario. It was revealing that those in attendance included so many of his political adversaries as well as his many friends.

He'll be missed by all who knew him, but most particularly by his wife and family. We all say a final and sad farewell to our good friend Floyd White.

ADOPTION MONTH

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): It is my great honour and privilege today to rise in recognition of November as Adoption Month in Ontario, to recognize the large number of people in Ontario who are adopted, an adopted family -- mothers, fathers, siblings; brothers and sisters -- and to recognize the extraordinary contribution the adoptive community makes to the fabric of life in our wonderful province.

It was my great privilege to attend recently the annual meeting of the Adoption Council of Ontario and to participate with them as they recognized members from among themselves and the adoptive community and the contribution they've made to making sure that people who are involved in adoption have all the services and information they need to get on with their lives.

There is an issue, however, that concerns them greatly, and that is the disclosure of information that will give some of them who are making tremendous efforts to reclaim their birthright the information they actually need to in fact do that -- something we all take for granted.

I brought forward a bill to this end, which was supported by this House at that time, but we couldn't bring it to a vote. I urge this government to revisit this issue. All the work has been done. Please move quickly to allow adoptees and their families to have ready access to all the relevant information so that they might reclaim their birthright.

FLOYD WHITE

Mr Tom Froese (St Catharines-Brock): I would like to honour, as the member for St Catharines has already done, Mr Floyd White in the House today. He was a friend and constituent who was well known to many members in this House. He died unexpectedly, at the young age of 58, just over a week ago, on Monday, November 6, while hunting.

Floyd White was a dedicated educator, community worker and political organizer. He retired from the Lincoln county public school board five years ago. At the time of his early retirement, he was an area superintendent who had promoted and supported cooperative education and thinking skills across the curriculum. He's remembered fondly and with deep respect for all he has done for the children of our province.

He was also a friend and mentor to people like myself. He was always there when I needed him during, before and after our most recent election. He gave of himself tirelessly for any number of community and political causes.

I acknowledge the life and tremendous contribution of Floyd White in my community, in my party and in my province. Floyd White will be remembered, as well as his family, at this difficult time.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to pay my respects on behalf of all those who knew him.

ROYAL ASSENT / SANCTION ROYALE

The Speaker (Hon Allan K. McLean): I beg to inform the House that in the name of Her Majesty the Queen, His Honour the Lieutenant Governor has been pleased to assent to a certain bill in his office.

Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees (Ms Deborah Deller): The following is the title of the bill to which His Honour assented on November 10, 1995:

Bill 7,

An Act to restore balance and stability to labour relations and to promote economic prosperity and to make consequential changes to statutes concerning labour relations / Projet de loi 7, Loi visant à rétablir l'équilibre et la stabilité dans les relations de travail et à promouvoir la prospérité économique et apportant des modifications corrélatives à des lois en ce qui concerne les relations de travail.

ANNUAL REPORT, PROVINCIAL AUDITOR

The Speaker (Hon Allan K. McLean): I beg to inform the House that I have today laid upon the table the 1995 annual report of the Provincial Auditor.

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

The Speaker (Hon Allan K.

McLean): Please join me in welcoming the second group of pages to serve the 36th Parliament of Ontario: Shannon Bailey, Mississauga South; Seth Baker, Oshawa; David Bakker, Durham Centre; Amanda Billard, Prince Edward-Lennox-South Hastings; Fabian Ciancibello, Mississauga West; Brianna Coughlin, Windsor-Sandwich; Barbara Dickenson, Lambton; Jack Ecker, Lincoln; Jaclyn Goodwillie, Kenora; Tobey Gullick, Peterborough; Megh Gupta, Brampton South; Nathan Haddock, Sault Ste Marie; Jenelle Holtzhauer, Renfrew North; Stephen MacDonald, London North; Lindsay Reimers, Beaches-Woodbine; Mark Reinhart, Chatham-Kent; Jonathan Schinkel, Wentworth North; Melissa Schurter, Perth; Christopher Smeek, York South; Jesse Tinker, Parry Sound; Ailinh Tran, York-Mackenzie; Paul Venditti, Etobicoke-Humber; Katie Waterston, Guelph; Karen Welch, Scarborough West.

Mr Bernard Grandmaître (Ottawa East): Mr Speaker, I would like to ask for unanimous consent to pay respects to our friend Hans Daigeler.

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous consent? Thank you.

HANS DAIGELER

Mr Bernard Grandmaître (Ottawa East): On behalf of my caucus, I wish to convey our sense of loss at the passing of our friend Hans Daigeler. Hans served the people of Nepean in this chamber from 1987 to 1995. He fulfilled his role with dedication and integrity.

Hans was not only a political colleague; he was our friend. He was well known for his convictions and independence of mind. Because of his very special training, he would weigh his decision on his own experiences and his own research.

For many, he was perceived as being stubborn at times, but if you knew Hans Daigeler like I did, you understood why; his thinking was different. We will miss Hans Daigeler because of his uniqueness of approaching problems and resolving them. I think that I am a better man for having known him.

I recall Hans's maiden speech to this chamber on November 10, 1987. It was with regard to Remembrance Day, and in it he stated, "Learning from the past, let us accept the challenge of peace today and renew our commitment to enhance the dignity and rights of all human beings." These words typified the strong humanitarian values which Hans brought to his work and to this chamber.

Hans était un ami de nous tous. Il était une personne dévouée et respectée par ses commettants et notre groupe parlementaire. Hans va nous manquer beaucoup. Il était un homme de grande intégrité. Sa préoccupation du bien-être d'autrui était présente tant dans sa vie personnelle que professionnelle.

Que Dieu bénisse sa famille et lui donne la force devant cette grande tragédie.

To his wife, Beverley, and to his three children, Chris, Elissa and Amanda, I say we share your loss and your grief. The riding of Nepean in the province of Ontario is a better place to live because of Hans Daigeler. May God bless his family.

Mr Bob Rae (York South): We were all shocked on our side to hear the very sad news of the passing of a colleague, Hans Daigeler, who was known to all of us, on all sides of the House, as a man of unusual ability, dedication and integrity.

The tragic circumstances of Hans's passing I think caused all of us to reflect perhaps on how little we really know of one another, but also, in my case, caused me to think of Hans's singularity as a member of the House.

I knew him as a colleague in opposition and I knew him when I was Premier. He was a fair critic. He was always determined to make a point but, having made it in this House, he would often follow up with a phone call or a letter to make clear that there was nothing personal in his comments or criticisms but that they stemmed from a very strongly held belief that he had.

Mon collègue de Vanier a parlé avec beaucoup de sincérité au sujet de son ami. Je crois qu'il sait très bien, comme nous le savons, que Hans Daigeler était d'abord et tout d'abord un grand Canadien, quelqu'un qui a cru beaucoup en le pays, un homme qui est venu à ce pays ; c'est un pays qu'il a choisi. En choisissant le Canada et l'Ontario, je crois peut-être qu'il a donné encore de son âme à notre cher pays et à notre chère province.

Words are hardly adequate to express our sense of shock and our sense of loss. I think it causes all of us to really reflect on some of the challenges and difficulties of public life as well as the difficult transitions that are involved in coming in and coming out of politics.

To Beverley and to the children we simply offer our very best, our prayers and our wishes, that they will find some strong sustenance in the memory of Hans, in the fact that his spirit, and his positive spirit, live on, that in giving to his community and giving to this House he was a man of great goodness, great charity and great foresight.

We shall all miss him. We are all strengthened by having known him and by the treasure of his memory.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean): Today I rise on behalf of my caucus to join with my colleagues on all sides of the House to pay tribute to Hans Daigeler, the former member for Nepean.

Hans Daigeler was, first and foremost, a very community-minded person, someone who fully accepted his responsibilities as a public citizen in our community.

Hans was a theologian by training and immigrated to Canada some 25 years ago. Here in Canada, Hans was very successful, both in his career and, most importantly and particularly, I think, in his family life. He and his wife, Beverley, raised three bright and intelligent children in Nepean and were a great asset to the entire community.

In 1982 Hans was elected to the Carleton Roman Catholic Separate School Board, where he took a special interest, as he usually did, in issues relating to children with developmental disabilities.

Mr Daigeler was a loyal and committed member of the Liberal Party and ran for the provincial Legislature five times, finally meeting with electoral success on his third attempt, in 1987. In fact, Hans is the only Liberal our riding has ever sent to Queen's Park, which I think speaks volumes for the esteem in which he was held in our community.

Throughout his life, and particularly as a member of this House, Hans Daigeler was a man of great principle, of great integrity, who was well respected on all sides of the House. Like every member of this place, Hans ran for election to the Ontario Legislature because he genuinely and very earnestly believed that he had something to offer and something to contribute to our life.

Throughout his time in the Legislature his motives were never in question. Throughout his life Hans wanted to make a very meaningful and real contribution to his community and to his country, and perhaps nothing more than you can point to was that he was part of the caravan of Ottawa-Carleton residents who travelled to Montreal before the referendum campaign to do his small

part in national unity.

Hans always exhibited a genuine interest and concern towards the less advantaged in our society. Of his personal qualities, most notable were his honesty, his integrity and his high idealism.

During the election campaign he proudly put a quote in his campaign literature from my colleague the Conservative member for Mississauga South, which read that she believed he was the most honest and trustworthy of all 130 members of this place. I can say, having been here for just four short months, that there can probably be no better testament to any member of this place than to receive praise like that.

Some people said he was too idealistic. Some said there was no place for idealism in politics and at Queen's Park. I couldn't disagree more. One characteristic that I very much share with Mr Daigeler is his sense of idealism, and I firmly believe, as he did, that idealism is always in fashion.

On election night, Hans Daigeler was very gracious and personally came to see me, I think with one clear motive, simply to wish me well in my new responsibilities, and I greatly appreciated that. I believe that gracious action speaks volumes about the class and character of this legislator.

At this time our thoughts and sympathies go out to his family: his wife, Beverley; his children, Chris, Elissa and Amanda.

Hans Daigeler will be greatly missed by his many friends and colleagues and by our entire community.

The Speaker (Hon Allan K. McLean): I want to thank all honourable members and I will see that Mrs Daigeler and her family get a copy of your remarks today.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

KARLA HOMOLKA

Hon Charles Harnick (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): As members know, I have previously committed to making a statement in this House regarding issues of public concern that have been raised in relation to the case of Regina v Bernardo. I made this commitment because of my strong belief that the public has a right to know the facts of this case.

As I have also stated on several occasions, this statement to the Legislature and the people of Ontario had to be deferred until the conclusion of all criminal trial proceedings involving Paul Bernardo, in particular those in which Karla Homolka could have been a witness.

Therefore, I would like to inform members that I have appointed Mr Justice Patrick Galligan to conduct an independent, external review. Mr Justice Galligan was first appointed to the bench as a High Court Justice in 1970. He was appointed to the Ontario Court of Appeal in 1989. A former criminal lawyer, Mr Justice Galligan has extensive knowledge of the criminal justice system. He enjoys the respect and confidence of all those who work in that system.

I have asked Mr Justice Galligan to begin his work when he retires from the Court of Appeal at the end of this month, and to provide me with his report no later than March 15, 1996. He will be looking into the following matters:

(1) Whether the plea arrangement entered into by crown counsel with Karla Homolka on May 14, 1993, was appropriate in all the circumstances.

(2) Whether the advice given by crown counsel to the Green Ribbon Task Force in connection with possible charges against Karla Homolka arising out of a sexual assault on Jane Doe was appropriate in all the circumstances.

(3) Whether in all the circumstances it is appropriate or feasible to take further proceedings against Karla Homolka for her

part in the deaths of Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy and the sexual assault on Jane Doe.

(4) To inquire into such related matters, if any, which I may from time to time direct.

I would like to add a few words about why I have chosen this course.

Let me begin by saying that in my time as Attorney General I have been most impressed by the professionalism, the diligence and the high ethical standards of the men and women in our prosecutorial service. Therefore, it is not surprising to me that they support the appointment of an external review in this case.

In most cases in which prosecutorial decisions are reviewed, the Attorney General would receive advice from senior ministry officials. In this case, the prosecutorial decisions were reviewed or made by those senior officials themselves, and it would be inappropriate for them to review their own advice and decisions. I have concluded, therefore, that any examination of these matters should be conducted by an external adviser in order to ensure its independence.

I would also like to add that the decision to launch this review was made following consultation with the victims' families.

As the House well knows, the prosecutorial decisions now under review were made before I became the Attorney General. In that sense, I am independent of those decisions and have an open mind on these matters.

I also have an open mind as to the appropriate course to be taken on receipt of Mr Justice Galligan's report. I intend to make Mr Justice Galligan's report public.

As far as I am concerned, all options for further action are open. This would include an examination by the justice committee of this Legislature of any policy issue to which Mr Justice Galligan might draw my attention. Mr Justice Galligan's report itself will give us the information and advice on which to decide whether further steps are needed.

The citizens of this province have a right to a complete explanation of the decisions made and the advice given by prosecutors in this case. I look forward to putting all the facts before the public through Mr Justice Galligan's independent review.

Ms Annamarie Castrilli (Downsview): The gruesome facts in this case demonstrate like no others that the hallmark of a fair society must be an equitable justice system.

The minister's own party published a Conservative Blueprint for Justice and Community Safety in Ontario, and it cites that there is a growing perception in Ontario "that sentencing in our courts is no longer providing a deterrent" or rehabilitation. This in turn "is undermining public confidence in the integrity of the criminal justice system."

Let me remind the minister how long it's taken us to get to this point. It was in the summer that our party wrote a letter asking for a public inquiry. In an effort to be constructive, we pointed out the means whereby the minister could in fact hold the matter to a public inquiry, and indeed, if the inquiry found the process wanting, how the Criminal Code might be of assistance in reopening the case.

We then raised the issue again at the beginning of the Legislature, in both September and October of this year. To both questions, the minister answered that the matter was before the courts and nothing could be done until all proceedings against Mr Bernardo were dispensed with; this despite a growing body of legal opinion which indicated that the Homolka plea-bargaining arrangement was not and could not be evidence in any proceedings against Mr Bernardo.

Nevertheless, here we are. It took those questions, it took some pressure and it took hundreds of thousands of people all across this country who made their voice known to this Legislature. Three hundred and twenty thousand petitions have been received to date. We have been entering them on a daily basis.

People have been shocked, have been outraged, at the way in which this government has stalled on this matter. Now, at long last, we have some action. But let's examine the kind of action that we have.

Firstly, rather than lead, this government has shown a propensity this time to stall, and here we are stalling again. This is an inquiry that will take six months to in fact conclude its findings. Little is known of the terms of reference that this inquiry will have, nor indeed is there any explanation as to why it would take so long.

Let me just conclude by saying that there is indeed a responsibility to the people of Ontario to ensure that the justice system is a fair one. A secret process, which this is -- it is not a public inquiry, although the report itself will be made public at some juncture -- will not help to restore that confidence the public now seems to lack.

The people have a right to know, and we have a right to ask, what is being hidden here? Why cannot this be held up to public scrutiny and why should we go through a charade? I hope this is not going to be a sham. In the end, only the system of justice will lose if that is the case. We urge the minister to reconsider and to open the matter to public inquiry, as the people have demanded.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): Needless to say, in the community of St Catharines there has been an extraordinary degree of interest in this particular subject. The people of our community, and I'm sure the people of Burlington and really the people of the entire province, will take a good deal of interest in the final conclusions which are provided to the public by means of this particular inquiry.

I think the minister is aware, as all members of the House are aware, of the great degree of interest and concern that people have expressed, because of the number of petitions that come forward. All of us who sit in this House know that petitions are almost routinely presented each day, and I think that the Attorney General and others in the House were all extremely impressed by the number of people who took the time to sign petitions and the number of people who volunteered to distribute petitions around the various communities in the province.

I know they, as I and people in my community, will be extremely interested in the final information that is forthcoming. We hope that it will be clear, we hope that it will paint a picture that they will understand and we hope that it's comprehensive enough to do so. That is why I think it's reasonable for the minister to include his fourth condition, and that is that any further matters that might arise should be included in this inquiry.

Mrs Marion Boyd (London Centre): I rise today to say to the Attorney General how pleased our party is that he has made the decision that he has in this matter. The commitment always was, in this very sensitive and difficult case, that once all the matters before the criminal court pertaining to Mr Bernardo were complete, there would indeed be a full disclosure of the issues that went into the decision-making along the way in terms of the prosecution.

Mr Justice Galligan is an excellent choice for this kind of an inquiry. Having practised criminal law, he understands the concerns already being expressed very vociferously by those who practise criminal law in this province around the necessity, first, to build better public confidence in how the justice system works, and, second, to ensure that due process is accorded to every accused in this province and that indeed, whatever kind of public pressure is brought to bear on the Attorney General of the day, the legal process will be full of integrity and will in fact go forward in a way that does not prejudice the possibility of a successful conviction in a case of this magnitude.

Mr Justice Galligan's terms of reference, contrary to what my colleague the member for Downsview says, I think are quite clear, and clearly we can expect his report to go into all the matters that have been raised around the prosecution of this case and the decisions made.

I share the Attorney General's admiration for the professionalism and the very high standards of ethics that our prosecutorial service has. It doesn't surprise me at all that they support him in this decision. It is very important to those who work in our courts as prosecutors that the public understand better than they seem to do how the process works, and this is another step in that direction.

I'm also delighted that the long-standing effort to consult with the victims' families in this case has continued, because they have been very key to the efforts the ministry has made in this case. I'm delighted that they understand why it is necessary to reopen these matters and why it is important for these matters to be made known.

I would say that I have every confidence Mr Justice Galligan will be mindful of our need to ensure that the implications of any finding in this case are clearly laid out for us. The possible consequences of the revisiting of plea bargains that have been made are well known to the Attorney General, and I'm sure he shares my concern that the implications of any finding be limited to this particular case and the very unusual circumstances which surround this case.

In closing, this particular case -- the circumstances that surround it, the public airing of details of a gruesome crime that we seldom see in this province -- has piqued a lot of concern among the population, has raised the interest in the way in which our criminal justice system works.

Although it has been painful, indeed traumatic, for many people to deal with this case, I think it is in the best interests of our population in Ontario that they have a clear understanding of how our legal system works, as opposed to other legal systems, that they have a clarity about the commitment of this government, and frankly all other governments, to ensure that the integrity of the justice system is not questioned.

I assure the Attorney General of my full cooperation as this review goes forward.

ORAL QUESTIONS

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mrs Elinor Caplan (Oriole): My question today is for the Minister of Health. Minister, over the past weeks you have been dropping disturbing hints that your government is planning to break its key election promise, its most important commitment, that there will be no new user fees. My office and those of my colleagues, and I'm assuming yours as well, have been swamped with calls from worried senior citizens. What should I tell these people? Are you planning on making senior citizens pay for their medication?

Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Health): I thank the honourable member for her question and I suggest that she tell her constituents that, consistent with the Common Sense Revolution and our commitments, there will be no new user fees on medically necessary services in this province.

Mrs Caplan: I would remind the minister that his own Premier, when he was Leader of the Opposition, said, "A copayment is a user fee." That is a direct quote. I ask him not to engage in the semantics. A user fee by any other name is a user fee. When you make people pay, as the now Premier said, it is a user fee.

Mr Minister, will you admit that you are breaking and will be breaking your two most important commitments? One, you made to the people of Ontario the commitment that you would not introduce new user fees; two, you made the commitment that you would not hurt seniors and disabled persons. These are the very groups that would have to start paying for their medications that doctors have prescribed for them.

Hon Mr Wilson: I'm familiar with my own words in opposition. I look at the record of October 8, 1992, when I was Health critic for my party and I was trying to explain the difference between a copayment and a user fee to the Honourable Frances Lankin, Minister of Health at the time. Clearly, user fees are fees that are assigned to those services deemed medically necessary under the Canada Health Act. Copayments exist now.

As the honourable member Mrs Caplan said in Hansard on November 22, 1988: "We have in place right now a system of copayment for chronic care. I believe that there may be other appropriate copayment opportunities which are not a deterrent to appropriate services." Then we saw her government and the NDP government bring in $150 million worth of new copayments in our long-term care sector.

All programs are under review in my ministry, including the Ontario drug benefit plan. No decisions have been made at this time, and if a decision to bring a copayment in is made, I can assure the honourable member that low-income seniors and people on social assistance will be well protected under any program.

Mrs Caplan: I'm now quoting Mike Harris when he was your leader in opposition. He said to then-Premier Rae: "The Premier and his cohorts can use all the euphemisms they like when they are talking about fees paid by people who use these services. That's user fees."

Minister, before and during the June election your party stated that it would not introduce new user fees. You said that it was your first and most important commitment, that health care was too important to cut. Your election bible stated, "Under this plan, there will be no new user fees."

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): Do you want me to hold that up?

Mrs Caplan: Would you do that, please. I'll put it here so you can see it very clearly, right out of your own election bible.

This is a serious and critical broken promise. We are talking about sick people; we are talking about charging them for their medication. Minister, what could be more medically necessary than the drugs their doctors prescribe for them? Will you stand today and save your reputation and commit to the people of this province once and for all that when your party and your government says, "No new user fees," it means no new user fees, copayments --

The Speaker (Hon Allan K. McLean): The question has been asked.

Mrs Caplan: Will you make that commitment?

Hon Mr Wilson: It's one of the problems with the Canada Health Act, and it's one of the issues that the Premier has brought up with his colleagues recently across Canada, that I brought forward in Victoria recently with other Health ministers, that drugs outside of the hospital are not covered under the Canada Health Act. We certainly, as a party, committed to no new user fees on medically necessary services. We made that very, very clear.

Unlike the previous government, which actually put user fees on by delisting 20 medically necessary services, as defined under medicare, as defined under the Canada Health Act -- that was the removal of port wine stains for certain age groups, childhood circumcision, in vitro fertilization in many cases -- those were medically necessary services as defined under the Canada Health Act. The NDP government delisted those, and those became 100% new user fees. Our government will not be doing delistings like the NDP did, and we will not be introducing user fees on medically necessary services.

HIGHWAY SAFETY

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): My question today is to the Minister of Transportation. I rise on a very unfortunate matter regarding the death of a northern Ontario woman on an icy stretch of the Trans-Canada Highway this past Sunday morning in Whitefish.

Minister, I recognize that the snowplowing cuts that you authorized had not even taken place on Sunday. I lay no blame towards the ministry and certainly no blame towards the hardworking plow crews of the Sudbury region for the untimely death of Mrs Butler.

Yesterday, though, your cuts did take place in many part of the province. Mr Minister, what guarantees do you give to the families and friends of the people of northern Ontario travelling the winter roads in hazardous conditions that the roads will be safe?

Hon Al Palladini (Minister of Transportation): I'm always saddened to hear of a tragedy on our roads, especially up north. I think everybody is kind of sensitive to the fact that things happen more occasionally up there under the circumstances, supposedly. However, I'm disappointed that the honourable member would link this government with the tragic accident. It is an insult to the families.

The Ministry of Transportation is streamlining its winter operation. It's taking advantage of the opportunities that we have to utilize the dollars. This government is not going to pay people standing around waiting for snow to fall. We have the capabilities to be able to react and perform the services and duties that this government is committed to.

Mr Bartolucci: Mr Minister, either you're incapable of comprehending a question or you weren't listening to the question. Either way, your answer is unacceptable to the residents of northern Ontario. There is a major difference between commuting from Woodbridge with either your chauffeur or by yourself and driving 60 kilometres on an icy road in the dark in the middle of winter to make the morning shift at Levack or Lockerby mine.

Mr Minister, as you should know, there is little public transit in northern Ontario. People use their cars in the north to get to work, to visit families and to bring family members to hospitals. Only God knows what the weather will bring at any given time, but you, Mr Minister, have the ability to guarantee safe roads for the people of northern Ontario. Will you reconsider your cuts to snowplowing, to salt trucks and to manpower?

Hon Mr Palladini: I think the honourable member would like this government to have winter go away. I wish we had that capability. The ministry's reputation is excellent. The people that are on the front lines know their job, and they're doing an excellent job. We have developed a system where we are able to react.

Let me ask this question: Is it working? Yes, it's working. After a recent storm in Thunder Bay last week, I got a letter -- but by the way, I do know the north and I actually have friends up in the north. I would like to tell that to the honourable member. I just would like to share this. This letter states, "We have just had" --

Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora): Those telephones don't work up there, Al.

The Speaker (Hon Allan K. McLean): Order. The member for Kenora is out of order.

Mr Gilles Pouliot (Lake Nipigon): And he bought a pair of moccasins, Mr Speaker, in 1933.

The Speaker: The member for Lake Nipigon, order. Order. I don't know whether the members want to hear the answer or not. I would. Minister.

Hon Mr Palladini: These days we have a way of monitoring when snow is actually going to fall. I just want to make a note.

"We have just had our first major snowstorm of the season. It happened on Thursday and Friday, November 2 and 3. Even though it ended as we went into the weekend, your MTO crews had the major highways plowed, sanded and salted as soon as was possible under the circumstances. My wife and I travelled to Kenora on Saturday, and the roads in that area were just fine."

Here's an

article from a newspaper -- not a letter from a friend -- "Cleanup Crews Handle Snowfall" --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The question has been answered. Final supplementary.

Mr Bartolucci: The minister's answer is probably the worst possible answer any minister has ever given in this House. Let me tell you that the road conditions on the Trans-Canada Highway at 11:30 on Sunday contained three inches of ice with 18 inches of centre-bare pavement. Those are not ideal conditions whether you're in the north or the south. But, Minister, again your answer, which is a non-answer, will be considered a no to reconsidering your cuts.

Let me ask you another question. Recognizing, as I'm sure you do because you have friends in the north, that winter comes earlier in northern Ontario than in southern Ontario, will you commit today to a standard greater than centre-bare conditions at all times during the winter months for the highways of northern Ontario, and will you publicly state what your standard is for the winter months for the roads and highways in northern Ontario?

Hon Mr Palladini: We're still spending $130 million in winter maintenance. This is the Chronicle Journal; I would just like to quote -- I don't want to read the whole article; I think maybe I'll fax one over to my honourable member -- "Despite cutbacks in manpower and equipment, MTO employees were out in full force overnight. The storm threatened to jeopardize travel on highways leading out of the city, but the ministry staff worked and worked and got the roads cleared."

Mr Floyd Laughren (Nickel Belt): I wanted to follow up with the Minister of Transportation the question put by my colleague from Sudbury, because that accident happened about 10 miles from my home.

I'd like to make sure the minister understands the conditions and what led up to the accident. This is according to the Sudbury Airport weather office: Snow began to fall at 2 pm on Saturday. The period of snow falling ended at about 9 pm with very light snow flurries after that until about 5:30 am on Sunday, that included some ice pellets which lasted roughly from 12 to about 2 pm on Saturday, for a total of 25 cm that fell. Sunday was ideal with very little wind and bright sunshine.

The conditions on that road cost a young woman her life and two other people are in serious condition in hospital. The accident happened at 11:30 the next morning when the conditions were horrible on that highway, and it's the Trans-Canada Highway. All of this apparently has happened before the cuts in road maintenance even have taken place, so it's hard to imagine what the conditions of the road will be after the cuts in maintenance occur.

The Speaker: Put your question, please.

Mr Laughren: Could I ask the minister why he's not prepared now to reconsider his ill-advised decision to reduce road maintenance, especially in the north?

Hon Mr Palladini: I could only inform the honourable member once again that we are committed to making sure that our roads are safe. We're spending $130 million. What we have in place is the flexibility to react and perform the duties and the services that it's going to take in order to maintain that safety. I can assure the honourable member we will make sure our roads are safe.

Mr Laughren: Not even your friends up north are going to swallow that hogwash, because it's not happening.

In the words of the OPP sergeant, Dan Lee, "The road conditions were horrendous." Neither car was speeding; it's estimated they were probably travelling at about 50 km an hour, and this is at 11:30 on Sunday morning, 15 hours after the rather intense snowfall took place.

Will you now reconsider your decision to reduce maintenance on Ontario's highways? This is just the beginning; there have been other accidents in other parts of northern Ontario as well which took lives. So I'd ask you again, why will you not reconsider this very, very horrendous decision you've made?

Hon Mr Palladini: I would like to tell the honourable member that we will provide the best service because we have the best people. Unlike the previous NDP government, we are not going to pay people to stand around.

Mr Laughren: The minister can talk about people standing around all he likes. What was needed in that part of the province was for people to be out on the highway clearing the highway, not standing around. Fifteen hours after the snowfall had come down, it still hadn't been done. How do you justify that?

Since obviously the minister and I will never agree on his policies on cutting maintenance, in northern Ontario especially, I would ask him -- I guess this would be referred to the Attorney General -- to consider a coroner's inquest to determine what really did happen on Highway 17 on Sunday morning.

Hon Mr Palladini: It is really sad that I really feel the member would like Ontarians to believe that this government is responsible for that tragedy that occurred. I would like to inform the honourable member that our people were out there before the accident happened, so it's not a question of us not reacting to deliver the services. Our people and plows and sanders were already out, so we did react.

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mr Bob Rae (York South): My question is to the Premier and it concerns the document, the Common Sense Revolution, which was released under his name. That document contains several statements about health care. It says, first of all: "We will not cut health care spending. It's far too important. And frankly, as we all get older, we are going to need it more and more." The statement also says, "Aid for seniors...will not be cut." It then goes on to say, "Under this plan, there will be NO new user fees."

I'd like to ask the Premier directly with respect to this question relating to seniors and the conclusions that seniors would reasonably draw from reading those words, would the Premier not agree with me that any senior hearing these words, "Aid for seniors...will not be cut," and that health care is "far too important...as we get older, we are going to need it more and more," and, "no new user fees," might reasonably conclude from that that the Tory government would not be charging that senior for drugs prescribed by a doctor? Would the Premier not agree with me that that's a reasonable conclusion for a senior citizen to have drawn before June 8?

Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): The senior citizens I've talked to have very reasonably come to this conclusion: $10-billion deficits, $100-billion worth of debt, is a tragedy, is a disgrace to leave to their children, to their grandchildren, to their great grandchildren, and they want something done about it. That's what they have told me. Universally they have told me that.

Now, the former Premier and now leader of the third party for running up those billions of dollars worth of debt and $10-billion deficits asked me this very question in the Legislature a few weeks ago, referred me to the very page that talked about the Canada Health Act and talked about the definition that his Minister of Health, that he as Premier -- the former Minister of Health, now holding up the signs, and the former Premier -- used for user fees for medically necessary services and for those items that were under the Canada Health Act.

Clearly, in reference to the Canada Health Act we said it is our intention to live up to the Canada Health Act. There will be no new user fees that would apply there.

And I would say this: If there is any confusion out there, it has not been created by me, by our Minister of Health, by our caucus, by our campaign; it is being created by you, sir.

Mr Rae: I appreciate being attacked as if I were still Premier. Would that I were, Mr Speaker.

But I want to just say this to the Premier in asking the second question: I can understand the Premier's agitation, because he clearly knows that any senior citizen listening to a door-to-door salesman, and that door-to-door salesman would say to the senior couple, living at home, in their 70s, who would pay out hundreds of dollars for medication medically prescribed by a doctor for blood pressure, for whatever it might happen to be, and they hear, "Don't worry. Aid for seniors will not be cut. Don't worry. There'll be no new user fees. Don't worry.

Health care is too important" -- we are looking at a door-to-door salesman who has told senior citizens not to worry, and now we are clearly told, by the use of weasel words and sucker clauses in the statements made by the Minister of Health, that now seniors are going to be paying through the nose for drugs which are medically necessary.

Let's talk about these medically necessary drugs prescribed by a doctor for conditions that are determined by a doctor. I'd like to ask the Premier how it could possibly be that a senior citizen, having been told that their aid will not be cut and that health care is too important, is now going to be charged hundreds of dollars for medically necessary drugs.

Hon Mr Harris: When we took office and we examined work in progress, we examined things like this --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Allan K. McLean): Order.

Hon Mr Harris: Ruth Grier, June 30, 1993: "In order to expand the number of people eligible for the program ODB, there has to be some sharing of the costs."

I would assume that the former minister, Ruth Grier, was not planning to break the law or go contrary to the Canada Health Act in doing that.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Would the Premier take his seat, please. The member for Windsor and the member for Hamilton East have been continuously out of order, and I won't warn either of one of you again.

Hon Mr Harris: Also on June 30, 1993, former Minister Grier: "The plan isn't fair at this point. It's not based on one's ability to pay. If you're over 65 you get free drugs regardless of income. If you're on social assistance you get free drugs. It's not fair," she said. "It isn't fair."

When we dusted off those proposals and we took a look at them, we agreed: There is something wrong. There is something not fair. The senior citizens I have talked to across the province agree: It's not fair. There is something wrong not only with the $10-billion deficits, not only with the $100 billion worth of debt, but there is something wrong that some poor seniors are paying, some poor people who are working very hard are paying, and others who are millionaires are not paying. So we intend to look at that.

Mr Rae: This is the picture of the door-to-door salesman. This is the picture that was relied upon and the promise that was relied upon, a personal promise made by the Premier to the senior citizens of this province.

Since the Premier has made such a point in his responses about talking about the circumstances facing the province, I want to ask him, how does he justify giving a tax cut worth thousands of dollars to people making over $100,000 or $150,000? If you're making a quarter of a million, it's worth thousands and thousands of dollars. You're giving them that money, you're handing it to them at the same time that a senior citizen couple making $25,000 a year total income is being asked to pay $348, plus a $2 copayment every time they have to take out a prescription. How do you justify that if you're really worried about the deficit?

This is a serious issue of credibility and integrity of the Premier and his government with respect to health care and with respect to the seniors of this province. That's what we're facing right now.

Hon Mr Harris: Let me read a quote from the former Premier and the questioner today, Mr Bob Rae. Mr Rae called free drugs for welfare recipients a disincentive that goes against the government's aim to get people off welfare: "We've got to deal with that when we reform the drug program and the welfare system."

You had it all right, I would say to the former Premier and to the leader of the NDP. You had all the problems identified; you laid it out there. You just didn't have the courage to bring forth commonsense solutions to solve the problem, and that is what we are going to do.

KARLA HOMOLKA

Ms Annamarie Castrilli (Downsview): This question is to the Attorney General. For many months now I have raised in this House the issue of the Homolka plea- bargain inquiry, and you will recall that over 320,000 Ontarians have petitioned the Attorney General to appoint an independent body to conduct a full public inquiry into the Homolka plea-bargain agreement.

The Attorney General has at long last reacted to the overwhelming pressure and has called for an inquiry. I would ask the minister to elaborate on the terms of reference for the inquiry, in particular the rules with respect to fact-finding and why the long deadline -- until March 1996.

Hon Charles Harnick (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): If I might first talk about the deadline, in the member's response to my statement she indicated that it would be six months till the report was completed. In fact, I indicated that Justice Galligan would be starting the report after his retirement at the end of November and that the report would be ready no later than March 15. That is not six months.

For something of this nature, I think we all want the report to be done thoroughly and properly. It will be done thoroughly and properly, and it will be delivered back to this House and made public in a timely way.

In terms of the terms of reference, I very carefully outlined the four terms of reference, and I will review those again. They are quite clear:

(1) Whether the plea arrangement entered into by crown counsel with Karla Homolka on May 14, 1993, was appropriate in all the circumstances.

(2) Whether the advice given by crown counsel to the Green Ribbon Task Force in connection with possible charges against Karla Homolka arising out of a sexual assault on Jane Doe was appropriate in all the circumstances.

(3) Whether in all the circumstances it is appropriate or feasible to take further proceedings against Karla Homolka for her

part in the deaths of Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy and sexual assault on Jane Doe.

(4) To inquire into such related matters, if any, which the Attorney General may, from time to time, direct.

I don't know what can be more clear. Those are the terms of reference. His lordship will deal with these and report back to us, and I will make that report public.

Ms Castrilli: I didn't ask the minister to repeat the terms of reference. I asked him to be very specific on what were the rules with respect to fact-finding and why the deadline. Minister, I should tell you that I did not say that your report was not to be completed for six months.

Hon Mr Harnick: Check Hansard.

Ms Castrilli: Excuse me; I said that it was to be made public. Now you've said that it's going to be made public in a "timely" fashion. God knows what that will mean.

But let me ask you another question since you've not answered the first question, and that is, in the interests of public justice and the fact that so many Ontarians have expressed their views that this be a public inquiry, will you commit yourself to having a public inquiry, and if not, why not?

Hon Mr Harnick: The tragedy of the Bernardo case is something that victims have had to live through, and to make victims live through another inquiry made public is something that I'm shocked about. I'm shocked the member would suggest it and I'm shocked that she would be so unfeeling towards the victims of this terrible situation.

What I have tried to do is to find the very best person to comment on what was done and to make that report public. I will also tell the member that law enforcement officials in the Ministry of the Attorney General will be available. They will be interviewed and they will advise the justice of exactly what happened. He will report and make findings, and I will make them public. Surely, that is the most caring and decent way to deal with this inquiry.

CHILD CARE

Mr Bob Rae (York South): My question is to the Minister of Community and Social Services. It concerns the proposals that are apparently being considered by his ministry to drastically reduce support for child care and, indeed, to change it completely to a voucher system.

Right now there are nearly 70,000 subsidized child care spaces in the province which are vital for those parents as well as for those children. We have begun to build up a good system in the province that needs to be made better.

I'd like to ask the minister to tell us why it is that the ministry is considering such a drastic reduction in the level of service, which will close literally hundreds of centres across the province if carried out, and when it is that we will hear of the plans the minister in fact has?

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Minister of Community and Social Services): Obviously the leader of the third party is referring to this purported report that was, I guess, in the newspapers a couple of weeks ago or so. At the time, I indicated that there was no such report that has been submitted to me, and clearly that's the case.

What we are doing, and I reported it to the Legislature some time ago as well, is that we are looking at a complete review of the day care program, because obviously it's not working right now. I quite agree that we have to make sure there are spaces available to people; that's quite true. We as a party believe this. We want good, quality, affordable day care. We want to make sure there's choice out in the community. That's why we're doing this review of the day care system, ably as well, I might add, as I said before, under the leadership of my parliamentary assistant, Janet Ecker.

Mr Rae: The minister perhaps will forgive us in saying that many things we read about his ministry in the newspaper turn out to be true, and therefore we have no choice but to ask some questions on this subject. He didn't answer my question when I said when this review will be completed and when we will know of the government's new plans.

But by way of supplementary, I wonder if I might ask him for an update on the discussions with the federal government. We know that Metro council, through Chairman Tonks, has approached the federal government. We know that the federal government has indicated an interest in child care spaces. I'd like to ask the minister: What is the position now of the government of Ontario with respect to the federal proposal that would allow for an increase in the number of subsidized child care spaces in the province, considering the length of the waiting lists that are now there?

I'm sure the minister would want to take any opportunity. Can he give us an assurance that he intends to follow through on these negotiations and in fact realize something that will be of benefit to parents and to children?

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: In response to the question, I have already responded back to Mr Axworthy. I've indicated a willingness for ourselves, as a government, to meet with Mr Axworthy, and discuss what he has in mind. Unfortunately, right now, we don't know what he has in mind.

Certainly, his letter to me indicated an idea that he was going to provide us with some idea of what he was proposing, which we haven't received as of yet. Until we do have an opportunity and Mr Axworthy does respond to us, it's very difficult. But I might say right now that the problem we have in Ontario is having good, affordable spaces. That's something that's a priority to us and it's certainly something we're willing to pursue.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD

Mr Trevor Pettit (Hamilton Mountain): My question is for the minister responsible for the Workers' Compensation Board. I've had many calls and concerns from the workers of Hamilton Mountain regarding the state of the WCB. As we all know, the WCB is in serious financial trouble with an unfunded liability of over $11.4 billion.

Will the minister please explain to me and the workers of Hamilton Mountain what was wrong with the strategy that was followed by the previous government's bipartite board of directors in order to address this financial crisis?

Hon Cameron Jackson (Minister without Portfolio [Workers' Compensation Board]): I wish to thank the member for Hamilton Mountain for his question. It's always a pleasure to get a question in the House.

Mr David S. Cooke (Windsor-Riverside): Oh, that's right, this is your issue.

Hon Mr Jackson: Yes, I'm kind of looking forward to this.

It's very clear that the unfunded liability is a very major crisis facing the Workers' Compensation Board, in fact facing all workers, injured or not injured, in this province.

The unfunded liability has increased over 300% over the last 10 years, in just a decade. The previous government's bipartite board of directors was given a package of financial improvements for their consideration, in which they could help manage and bring on side some of these important changes to get their operating budget under control.

This balanced package, as I said, was balanced with concerns from both management and from injured workers, but it represented over $400 million worth of savings to the Workers' Compensation Board with this kind of unfunded liability. This was never approved. It was never approved by the handpicked bipartite board of the previous NDP government. That government sold this province on bipartism on a board that was adversarial and in a gridlock situation, and it's truly unfortunate that the previous government lacked the leadership to get the financial house in order for the Workers' Compensation Board.

Mr Pettit: The Workers' Compensation Board spent over $2.7 billion in workers' pensions and other obligations in 1994 and had revenues from assessments of $2.3 billion, yet the board reported a $130-million surplus for 1994. Can the minister possibly explain to me and the workers of Hamilton Mountain how the board could possibly manage an operating surplus when its assessment revenues do not cover its expenditures?

Hon Mr Jackson: The member is quite clear in sharing with the House the very large amounts of money that are held in trust for injured workers and paid out on an annual basis. I want to remind the members of the House, the original vision for the Workers' Compensation Board, as defined in this province, was an accident fund and it was created to ensure wage replacement for injured workers. This was a trust to be held for future injured workers.

In the last several years the WCB board of directors has approved consecutive annual transfers of $200 million and $400 million from its investment fund to its operating budget in order to cover its current expenses. This is known as drawing down from your investment and your cash flow in order to make your books look good. The fact is that this was done not in the best interests of both injured workers and the employers who create the jobs in this province.

I just want to share with the House that $130 million of the operating surplus recorded by the WCB in 1994 is a sham. It was a sham because of this drawing down of money. I simply want to say that under the leadership of this government we are prepared to make the necessary changes, under the leadership of my colleague the Minister of Labour, starting with Bill 15 and a subsequent review, that we will restore financial accountability to the Workers' Compensation Board in this province.

CHILD CARE

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor-Sandwich): My question is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. I'd like to ask him if he would verify what he was quoted in the Ottawa press some time last week, indicating that he intends to abolish the Day Nurseries Act.

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Minister of Community and Social Services): I haven't seen it and definitely no. I've never seen that quote. I've never said that.

Mrs Pupatello: In fact not only that, but we understand that he too is investigating the Wisconsin model of providing child care and bringing it over to Ontario. In speaking to officials from Wisconsin, we called them and we said: "Could it be true? Could our minister indeed be searching Wisconsin for the model?" The officials from the office of child care in Wisconsin told me: "You've got to be kidding. Why on earth would you be looking at Wisconsin when Ontario offers one of the best and most progressive quality child care in North America?"

Since the minister is so interested in the Wisconsin model, he probably already knows that they've had 1,200 infractions that have required investigation in the child care industry in Wisconsin, and that compares to Ontario's last year of 25 infractions that required some action. In fact the state of Wisconsin doesn't even require criminal checks when issuing certificates for child care.

The Speaker (Hon Allan K. McLean): Put your question, please.

Mrs Pupatello: I'd like the minister to respond to the parents of Ontario and to the 70% of children who are currently on a roulette wheel; all of those children, 70% of whom are currently in some form of child care: Are you agreeable to putting these children at risk?

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: No, we're not willing to put children at risk. Number two, I don't know where the honourable member is getting some of these outlandish ideas that she's coming up with, but certainly I've never looked at the Wisconsin model, whatever that is, and certainly, if it doesn't work, why would we put it into place in Ontario? It doesn't make any sense. So I think there's got to be a little more pith, so to say, to some of the things the honourable member is saying these days.

CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETIES

Mr David S. Cooke (Windsor-Riverside): My question is also to the Minister of Community and Social Services. Could he confirm that there are a number of children's aid societies in the province that are in very difficult financial shape? In particular, can he confirm that the Halton CAS ran out of money at the end of October?

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Minister of Community and Social Services): Since it's a specific question about the Halton CAS, what the Halton CAS has agreed to do with the ministry is a review of both its financial and procedural administration at the Halton CAS.

Secondly, the ministry has also agreed to ensure that the services can be provided to the end of the year certainly, until we can see what their new budget is, and we've agreed to guarantee that.

Mr Cooke: The Halton CAS can provide services to the end of the year because your government has had to provide for emergency funding for November and December because their regular budget ran out at the end of October. So can the minister also confirm that the Peel children's aid society is in similar difficulty, that York is in similar difficulty, that the Rainy River CAS is also in difficulty, that Thunder Bay is also in difficulty?

And can the minister tell us and tell the public how he can guarantee the safety of children in this province when he knows that the primary role of the children's aid societies is protection of children who are potential victims of physical and sexual abuse and that children's aid societies across this province are in deep financial trouble because of your cuts, are laying off social workers, and that those services can no longer be guaranteed and that children are in deep trouble?

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: The reason why a lot of organizations around the province are in trouble is not because of our attempts to try to make things better. It's because of this mess we've inherited from the previous government, and clearly, they don't want to face up to this reality. When we formed the government, we opened up Fibber McGee's closet and we got rolled under by all the stuff that was in there. It's absolutely crazy.

But the honourable member is pointing out a very important point and what I will say to you is -- and I've said this before in the House -- but several of the organizations dealing with protection of children, including the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies, have --

Mr Cooke: You haven't met with them yet, and they've been asking for a meeting for three months. You have not met with them.

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: Actually, I have met with them already and I would suggest that the honourable member is saying to me across the House that we haven't met with the Ontario children's aid society and in fact, we have. In fact, they've also agreed to be on my advisory committee to deal with the structure and to deal with the core services and how we're going to deal with this terrible situation that we've inherited. They've agreed to be on the advisory committee to work for the protection of the children with the government.

VEHICLE SAFETY

Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): My question is to the Minister of Transportation. Last April, one of my constituents, James Tyrrell Jr, was tragically killed when a flying truck tire struck his car on the Queen Elizabeth Way. The coroner's inquest into Mr Tyrrell's death is over and the jury has made several recommendations to improve truck safety. These recommendations are enthusiastically supported by the Ontario Trucking Association and the Ontario Provincial Police. Shortly after the conclusion of the inquest, the Minister of Transportation promised swift action to increase existing fines and to crack down on unsafe truck drivers and owners.

Can the minister tell this House how and when he will act on the recommendations of that inquest?

Hon Al Palladini (Minister of Transportation): I would like to assure my esteemed colleague and all Ontarians that truck safety and road safety are a priority of this government. Since the change in government, we have stepped up enforcement and we are certainly going to continue to do just that.

We have also announced a comprehensive road safety plan that does address truck safety and we have had much OPP input and consultation and input from the Ontario Trucking Association. Many of the inquest recommendations are already in place and certainly, there are other things in there that we will consider. We are studying pretty well the jury's recommendations on what can be added to our present plan.

Mrs Marland: I thank you for your response, Minister. I'm certainly happy to hear that you will also be meeting with Paula Tyrrell to discuss the recommendations of the inquest. While improving truck safety will not ease Mrs Tyrrell's loss, it will help her to know that we are doing everything possible to prevent injury and loss of life from unsafe trucks on our highways.

I'm also pleased that the government is already acting, as you have just said, on several of the inquest's recommendations. Can you expand further on the actual contents of the road safety plan and how it will improve not only truck safety but also road safety in general?

Hon Mr Palladini: I met with the Worona family last week and I assured them that this government is very serious and we are going to get tough with bad operators.

Our road safety plan includes rating carriers. We're going to share that information with the people whom they do business with and we're going to encourage these people not to do business with the bad operators.

In our plan, there is also going to be brake training and axle weight enforcement, something, I might add, as far as axle weight enforcement, that the last two governments just failed to act upon.

We are also looking at raising fines and we are also going to be looking at implementing a demerit point system for safety violations. We are also looking at implementing a graduated truck driver's licence, and bus driver's. This government is going to do more for truck safety than the last two governments did in 10 years.

JOBS ONTARIO

Mr Gerry Phillips (Scarborough-Agincourt): My question is around the Provincial Auditor's report today. The question would be, I guess, to the Minister of Economic Development, Trade and Tourism.

The document outlines, I think, a series of horror stories around a program in your ministry called the Jobs Ontario Community Action fund, where about $135 million has been spent. Among other things in the report, it says there was one project where $516,000 was spent, $248,000 provided by your ministry.

The auditor said the project had only one tangible output, that was, "a total of seven days of training for a class of 30 individuals." In other words, the province spent about a quarter of a million dollars for seven days of training for 30 people, including $120,000 for organizational seed money.

It then goes on to say that your ministry was supposed to conduct follow-up reviews of those, and the auditor says, "We found no evidence that any such inspections have been completed to date." In other words, your ministry has spent about $135 million, and the auditor says that no inspections have been completed to date.

Can the minister assure the House that you have reviewed this project and that no one who has received this money has done so without a legal basis?

Hon William Saunderson (Minister of Economic Development, Trade and Tourism): To the member for Scarborough-Agincourt, I'd like to say that I have read the auditor's report concerning my own ministry. Quite frankly, I am appalled with the lack of controls and the systems that were in place to monitor how all projects were to be surveyed as they progressed.

I'm very happy to report that, as this report really was for business concluded as of March 31 of this year, and that was in the previous government's time, from now on -- and I agree with everything the auditor has said -- we will be certainly scrutinizing and accepting all of his suggestions so that nothing like this will ever happen again. It's a travesty. I'm just assuring you, Mr Speaker, and the member that I'm sure this will not happen again.

Mr Phillips: I think the minister could not have been listening to the question. I said that your ministry has the responsibility, for three years after the grant is made, to do follow-up inspections.

The question is your responsibility. Have those inspections taken place? Have you assured yourself that these grants are fair and these grants are legally done? If not, is it your intention to recover any funds that have been granted for which there is not legal justification? It is now your responsibility to do the follow-up inspections as per the agreement. Have they been done? Is it your intention to follow up and recover funds that should not have been granted, that haven't been used for the appropriately approved facilities?

Minister, you can't wipe your hands of this. You have responsibility for three years to follow up. Is it your intention to do that and will you be recovering the moneys that should not have been allocated?

Hon Mr Saunderson: In response to the honourable member's supplementary question, as he knows and as the House knows, projects that were not legally committed to were terminated -- or frozen, I should say -- by the July 21 statement by the Minister of Finance. The ones that are proceeding of course will receive our closest scrutiny to make sure that they are properly completed. At any time that member wishes to ask on progress, we will be able to report on that.

But as a chartered accountant I can assure him that the controls that are suggested are realistic. It's just a very pathetic situation that we are left with such a mess to clean up after the previous government.

ALTERNATIVE FUELS

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Two weeks ago, your government withdrew partnership investment funding from two ethanol fuel manufacturing plants, one in Chatham and one in Cornwall. The two plants would have created over 120 new, permanent, full-time jobs and would have been a great stimulus to the agricultural sector, particularly corn producers in the province.

The president of one of the plants, Commercial Alcohols, the Chatham project, has said that your government's withdrawal of partnership investment funding is a major threat to the project and creates serious doubt about the viability of the project in Chatham. Can the Minister of Agriculture justify killing jobs and new economic opportunities in the agricultural sector, and especially in rural Ontario?

Hon Noble Villeneuve (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, minister responsible for francophone affairs): To my esteemed colleague opposite, I am pleased to have that question. This minister and this government believe in the ethanol industry, an environmentally friendly fuel that is presently produced in Ontario and will continue to be produced in Ontario, and I and this government still very much support the ethanol industry.

Mr Hampton: We are well aware of the minister's rhetoric when he was in opposition, and he's trying to repeat that now. But this is the head of one of the companies, who was planning on making that investment, and he says -- and he says it publicly -- that your withdrawal of funding is a major threat to the project and it's a major threat to the spinoff industries that could have occurred around this.

Now, your government has found money, $12 million announced by your colleague the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations, for some corporations a couple of weeks ago. You're going to give that to them, and you've indicated that you've got great tax cuts that you want to give to wealthy Ontarians, yet you're abandoning something that would have major job-producing prospects and major economic stimulus for corn producers in the province and the agricultural sector. How do you justify that? How do you justify tax cuts for some but an abandonment of the agricultural sector?

Hon Mr Villeneuve: Again to my colleague opposite, the word "abandon" is not correct. This minister and this government support the ethanol industry, support the use of ethanol and support the production of ethanol here in the province of Ontario.

AGRICULTURAL TRADE

Mr Leo Jordan (Lanark-Renfrew): My question is for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. In my riding, and I'm sure across the province, the producers of poultry and the dairy industry are very concerned about the negotiations going on with NAFTA. As you know, and anyone in the rural ridings understands, the dairy industry especially is very dependent on the supply management program.

Minister, could you advise this House and the people of Lanark-Renfrew to relax, that the negotiations are still going on and that supply management will be saved?

Hon Noble Villeneuve (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, minister responsible for francophone affairs): To my colleague from Lanark-Renfrew: I want to assure him and indeed the dairy and feather industry that this government and this minister support the federal government.

I have spoken recently with the Honourable Ralph Goodale. We now have a panel that will be renegotiating and indeed fighting to maintain what was signed in the North American free trade agreement. We support the federal government. The Americans want to rewrite the rules that they agreed to some years ago when they signed the deal. They don't only want to rewrite the rules, they want to be the referees of the rules, and we are going to protect the dairy and feather industry.

Mr Jordan: The people would like to know how soon this decision will be made.

Hon Mr Villeneuve: It is presently being heard with the NAFTA panel. We have two Canadians, two Americans and an independent chair, and it is presently being arbitrated as we speak.

PETITIONS

LABOUR LEGISLATION

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Parkdale): I have a petition to the Legislature of Ontario:

"Whereas the Minister of Labour has introduced legislation, Bill 7, to drastically amend the Labour Relations Act, the Employment Standards Act and other labour legislation which had been brought forward by successive Progressive Conservative, Liberal and New Democratic governments in the recognition of the legitimate rights of employees in Ontario;

"Whereas the implementation of Bill 7 will undermine the fundamental democratic rights of employees to organize and to have access to collective bargaining;

"Whereas employers have raised concerns about how Bill 7 will result in an increased number of strikes; and

"Whereas the Minister of Labour is proceeding with Bill 7 without consultation with employee groups and without conducting public hearings;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to urge the Minister of Labour to withdraw Bill 7."

I've attached my signature to this document.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Riverdale): To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Minister of Labour has introduced legislation, Bill 7, to drastically amend the Labour Relations Act, the Employment Standards Act and other labour legislation which had been brought forward by successive Progressive Conservative, Liberal and New Democratic governments in the recognition of the legitimate rights of employees in Ontario;

"Whereas the implementation of Bill 7 will undermine the fundamental democratic rights of employees to organize and to have access to collective bargaining;

"Whereas employers have raised concerns about how Bill 7 will result in an increased number of strikes; and

"Whereas the Minister of Labour is proceeding with Bill 7 without consultation with employee groups and without conducting public hearings;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to urge the Minister of Labour to withdraw Bill 7."

I will affix my signature to this petition.

PROPERTY ASSESSMENT

Mr Gary Carr (Oakville South): I've been asked by constituents of my riding to table a petition which reads as follows:

"Whereas the Oakville Citizens' Committee on Property Tax Reform and the town of Oakville council have requested the province of Ontario to review and consider the issue of property tax reform; and

"Whereas the town of Oakville council has called on the provincial government to impose an immediate moratorium on region-wide market value assessment;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to impose an immediate moratorium on region-wide market value assessment pending the province's review and consideration of the issue of property tax reform."

That is signed by approximately 2,000 people from my riding of Oakville South.

HIGHWAY SAFETY

Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it reads:

"Whereas the Minister of Transportation is intent on reducing northern winter road maintenance services; and

"Whereas such downgrading places the lives of northern residents at undue and unnecessary risk;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to disallow these reductions in service and to guarantee that winter roads across northern regions of the province receive the necessary maintenance to ensure the safe passage of vehicles."

That's signed by many constituents from places like Vermilion Bay, Dryden, Eagle River, Waldhof and Kenora in my riding.

SERVICES À LA JEUNESSE DE HEARST

Mr Len Wood (Cochrane North): I have a petition here signed by hundreds of people from the town of Hearst. I was at a reception with about 350 people last Wednesday night, and this petition expresses our disagreement with the decision taken by the Harris government to cut funding for the services out of Jeunesse de Hearst youth services.

We feel that services at Jeunesse de Hearst, including the youth centre, the Camp Source de Vie and the Coopérative Jeunesse au Travail respond to the essential needs of youth in our community. The elimination of services of the Jeunesse de Hearst Inc will have serious repercussions on the quality of life of the local youth.

The petition is signed by hundreds of people from the town of Hearst who are opposed to the cuts of the Mike Harris government.

TIGGER THE CAT

Mr Derwyn Shea (High Park-Swansea): I'd like to present a petition signed by supporters of Tigger the cat in his fight with those health officials who want to keep this friendly feline out of a local tea shop. We believe this issue pits community spirit and common sense against public health legislation that may be out of date and at the very least requires immediate review by the appropriate authorities in the Ministry of Health.

This petition is signed by thousands of constituents who beg a quick review and a speedy return of Tigger to his station at Say Tea in the heart of Bloor West village, and I'm proud to add my name to this petition.

The Speaker (Hon Allan K. McLean): The member for Hamilton East.

Interjection: He hasn't behaved himself today.

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): I promise I'll behave tomorrow.

CHILD CARE

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): The Hamilton area child care resource centres have been providing an important service to families in the community for over 10 years. The service includes community information, guest speakers for parent and caregivers with knowledge regarding parenting and child care skills, daily play groups for children, adult resource library, toy and book lending library and discussion groups. Approximately 200 parents and children use these services on a weekly basis. It's a good indication that the centre is a vital service to the community.

The individuals who signed the petition urge "the province of Ontario and the Ministry of Community and Social Services not to further reduce dollars flowed to the Hamilton Child Care Resource Centre. These centres are funded by the Ministry of Community and Social Services and the programs are preventive and educational by nature and play a vital role in supporting the informal child care sector, thus providing service to many community families. Please continue the funding."

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

SERVICES À LA JEUNESSE DE HEARST

M. Gilles Bisson (Cochrane-Sud) : J'ai ici une pétition soussignée par des milliers de personnes des environs de Cochrane-Nord faisant affaire avec les Services à la Jeunesse de Hearst. La pétition se lit comme suit :

«La présente pétition affirme notre désaccord avec la décision du gouvernement Harris de couper les subventions des Services à la Jeunesse de Hearst Inc. Nous considérons que les Services à la Jeunesse de Hearst, incluant la Maison des jeunes (La Limite), le Camp Source de Vie, et la Coopérative Jeunesse au Travail, répondent à des besoins essentiels des jeunes de la communauté. La disparition des Services à la Jeunesse de Hearst Inc entraînera des répercussions sérieuses sur la qualité de vie de la jeunesse locale.»

J'y affixe ma signature.

ST STEPHEN'S SECONDARY SCHOOL

Mr John O'Toole (Durham East): I rise today to present a petition to the Premier and the Minister of Education. This petition is from the students and parents of the St Stephen's Secondary School in the municipality of Clarington. Their petition outlines and petitions the government to complete the funding of St Stephen's Secondary School, which is currently a rented facility at the cost of $600,000 per year. They are looking for a new school.

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Monte Kwinter (Wilson Heights): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the report of the Metropolitan Toronto District Health Council hospital restructuring committee has recommended that North York Branson Hospital merge with York-Finch General Hospital;

"Whereas this recommendation will remove emergency and inpatient services currently provided by North York Branson Hospital, which will seriously jeopardize medical care and the quality of health for the growing population which the hospital serves, many being elderly people who in numerous cases require treatment for life-threatening medical conditions;

"We petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to reject the recommendations contained within the report of the Metropolitan Toronto District Health Council hospital restructuring committee as it pertains to North York Branson Hospital so that it retains, at minimum, emergency and inpatient services."

It's signed by many of my constituents, and I have added my name as well.

CHILD CARE

Mr Tom Froese (St Catharines-Brock): I have a petition by the Niagara Child-Adult Resource Exchange Cooperative with 65 signatures stating:

"We, the undersigned, are firmly opposed to the erosion of the child care system. We are most particularly concerned about the unregulated child care sector, which represents the choice of most Ontario families, many living in rural areas. We urge this government to make its budget reductions in areas where children and families will not once again be the target of cuts. Family resource programs support the informal sector of child care, which includes parents caring for their own children and care provided by grandparents, home child care providers and nannies."

I affix my name to this petition.

COMMUNITY-BASED JUSTICE OPTIONS

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): I rise today to present a petition that has been organized by the Ontario Community Justice Association of Ottawa-Carleton. The members are concerned that these programs will be seriously affected by upcoming funding cuts and petition to the Legislative Assembly as follows:

"Whereas during the 1970s the government of the day developed measures that curbed the growth of government by involving local communities in the provision of legal services; the criminal justice field began to recognize the benefits of community-based justice options; privatization was considered more cost-effective while strengthening government ministries through community participation in the justice system;

"Since this time, non-profit agencies across Ontario have developed effective programs and present a strong local face to the justice system while supporting partnerships with an ever-widening community base. Community programs have proven to be effective in comparison to directly operated government services. Community-based options reduce the cost of incarceration while promoting public safety.

"Whereas community-based justice programs such as community service orders, diversion, alternative measures, bail supervision etc have proven value; the screening and supervision of accused and offenders within well-defined programs contribute to public safety; for over 20 years community-based options have made a positive contribution to the welfare of community in Ontario;

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

"We believe these programs must not be viewed as dispensable. As with many recent cuts, short-term fiscal expediency holds no long-term value. Credible links with the community and quality programs for the citizens of Ontario must be maintained."

The petition is signed by over 700 individuals, and as a former Minister of Correctional Services I'm pleased to support it and have signed the petition as well.

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Mike Colle (Oakwood): It's my pleasure to bring forth a petition of 9,000 names. These are people who are very concerned about the Metropolitan Toronto District Health Council, which has put forth a proposition of closing one of Ontario's best hospitals, Northwestern General Hospital.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Metropolitan Toronto District Health Council hospital restructuring committee has recommended to close Northwestern General Hospital and merge all programs and services with Humber Memorial Hospital on Humber's site;

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

"That the recommendation of the Metropolitan Toronto District Health Council to close Northwestern General Hospital be rejected by the government of Ontario and that it keep Northwestern hospital open."

I present this petition to the Minister of Health, the Honourable Jim Wilson, and to Premier Mike Harris.

CHILD CARE

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the region of Sudbury's child care system provides high-quality early childhood programming; provides intervention services which identify and assist those families at high risk, thereby creating a healthier society; provides integration programs for children with special needs, thereby creating an inclusive society; works with the private and non-profit sectors, including group care, private home day care and family resource centres, all of which support the choices of working and stay-at-home parents; strives to provide parents with the child care choices that the Ontario government has identified as their mandate; ultimately saves future tax dollars by increasing high school completion rates and making our youth more employable, decreasing teenage pregnancies and drug use and lowering the incidence of juvenile crime;

"We, the undersigned, believe that further government cutbacks will jeopardize the child care system in the region of Sudbury.

"We therefore urge the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to refrain from any further reductions to child care funding in the region of Sudbury."

It is signed by 2,061 people.

CHILD ABUSE

Mr John O'Toole (Durham East): I rise again today to present a petition to this House. It is from the residents of my riding, Durham East, in the province of Ontario.

"We ask that our Parliament act on our plea for an enlightened and merciful law for the unborn. Such a law would require a prisoner convicted of sadistic cruelty or convicted of repeated child molesting to submit to sterilization as part of the condition for his/her release after serving the requisite prison term."

HIGHWAY SAFETY

Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur): I have a petition that's attracting a great deal of interest and concern across northern Ontario and in fact across the entire province.

"Whereas the Ministry of Transportation is intent on reducing northern winter road maintenance services; and

"Whereas such downgrading places the lives of northern residents at undue and unnecessary risk;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to disallow these reductions in service and to guarantee that winter roads across the northern regions of the province receive the necessary maintenance to ensure the safe passage of drivers."

I'm proud to sign my name to this.

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): I too have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Ministry of Transportation is intent on reducing northern winter road maintenance services; and

"Whereas such downgrading places the lives of northern residents at undue and unnecessary risk;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to disallow these reductions in service and to guarantee that winter roads across the northern regions of the province receive the necessary maintenance to ensure the safe passage of drivers."

This is signed by numerous of my constituents in places like Spanish, Cutler, Sagamok and some in Sudbury and Elliot Lake.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

REALTY TAX FREEZE STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1995 / LOI DE 1995 MODIFIANT DES LOIS ET VISANT À GELER LES IMPÔTS FONCIERS

Mr Carr moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 17,

An Act to amend various Statutes to freeze Realty Taxes / Projet de loi 17, Loi modifiant diverses lois et visant à geler les impôts fonciers.

The Speaker (Hon Allan K. McLean): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Does the member have a short statement?

Mr Gary Carr (Oakville South): Yes. This bill amends various statutes to freeze the amount of all realty taxes levied in 1996 at their 1995 levels, both in municipalities and territories without municipal organizations. That will be my private member's resolution on November 30.

CITIZENS ASSEMBLY PROJECT ACT, 1995 / LOI DE 1995 SUR LE PROJET D'ASSEMBLÉEDE CITOYENS

Mr Chiarelli moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 18,

An Act to provide for the establishment of Citizens Assemblies and the expedited consideration by the Legislative Assembly of Legislation prepared by Citizens Assemblies / Projet de loi 18, Loi prévoyant la mise sur pied d'assemblées de citoyens et une procédure accélérée pour l'étude, par l'Assemblée législative, des projets de loi rédigés par ces assemblées.

The Speaker (Hon Allan K. McLean): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Does the member have a short statement?

Mr Robert Chiarelli (Ottawa West): This is reintroduction of a bill which had been introduced in the last Parliament dealing with parliamentary reform, and the bill at that time received much favourable comment.

The bill establishes a pilot project whereby certain public policy issues defined by the Lieutenant Governor in Council would be examined by citizens' assemblies established under the bill with the view to preparing legislation for consideration by the Legislative Assembly in accordance with the expedited procedures set out in the bill.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

WORKERS' COMPENSATION AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY AMENDMENT ACT, 1995 / LOI DE 1995 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LES ACCIDENTS DU TRAVAIL ET LA

LOI SUR LA SANTÉ ET LA SÉCURITÉ AU TRAVAIL

Mrs Witmer moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 15,

An Act to amend the Workers' Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Act / Projet de loi 15, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les accidents du travail et la

Loi sur la santé et la sécurité au travail.

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Labour): I am pleased today to move second reading of this important piece of legislation which represents a very crucial first step in the government's two-stage initiative to completely overhaul the financially troubled Workers' Compensation Board.

The legislative package before us today launches the process of restoring the long-term financial viability of the Workers' Compensation Board and making the system serve the interest of workers and employers in a more efficient, caring and cost-effective manner. At the same time, the changes will improve Ontario's ability to attract new investment and create jobs.

It will establish the Workers' Compensation Board as part of the economic environment to create more prosperity for all of the people of our province.

Bill 15 has two fundamental objectives. The first is to change the governance structure. The present one has paralysed decision-making. The second objective is to put the system on a sound financial footing. At the same time, we must focus on service quality and regain the confidence and the support of all stakeholders.

The changes in Bill 15 will bring stronger management accountability and leadership to the board, and it will provide the service that is so necessary to the workers and the employers. It will also give the board the tools it needs to aggressively attack fraud in all its forms, fraud which is potentially costing the board many millions of dollars each year.

These measures will set the stage for future comprehensive reform of the WCB. Future reform will be done by my colleague Cam Jackson, the Minister without Portfolio responsible for worker's compensation reform.

His report, based on a major review of the system, will provide a comprehensive financial package that will stabilize the system over the long term and eliminate the board's unfunded liability by the year 2014.

It is clear that the government must act decisively in order to ensure that the board can meet its future financial obligations to injured workers and also provide the necessary relief to employers who are struggling under the burden of the second-highest WCB premiums in Canada.

As other provinces in Canada have done and are doing, we must gain control of our workers' compensation system. The government will fulfil its election promises to eliminate the board's huge unfunded liability by the year 2014 and to return the WCB to its original concept, as envisioned by Meredith, as a workplace accident insurance plan.

The government is moving ahead carefully and deliberately to fix the problems facing the board. We do not want to repeat the mistakes that were made by past governments. Our reforms will be sustainable and will lead to long-term stability. We owe it to the people of this province to finally fix the massive problems facing the board. A quick review of the facts shows clearly that the workers' compensation system is now on the brink of a financial crisis. The board's staggering unfunded liability is presently at $11.4 billion. In 1984, it was at $2.7 billion.

To understand the full magnitude of the problem that we have, let us examine the funding ratios of workers' compensation systems across Canada. Funding ratios are the ratios of total assets to total liabilities. In other words, they are the total assets that you have today versus what you would have to pay if all your liabilities became due today. In the WCB's case, these liabilities include pensions and future economic loss payments for injured workers. In Ontario, in 1994 the funding ratio was 37.4%.

That means that if the board had to pay out all of its obligations today, it would only be able to provide 37.4 cents for each dollar it owed injured workers. Compare that to the province of Saskatchewan where the funding ratio is 113.7%, and to British Columbia where the ratio is 95.8%. Clearly, things are out of line in Ontario.

If action is not taken on the unfunded liability, the results will mean even greater increases in WCB rates for Ontario employers. And as I said before, the rates are already the second highest in Canada. In 1995, the average employer's assessment rate in Ontario was $3 per $100 assessable payroll. Compare this to the $2.60 --

Interjection.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): The member for Lake Nipigon, please.

Hon Mrs Witmer: -- per $100 in the neighbouring province of Quebec. If we take a look at British Columbia, the rate there is $2.26, and New Brunswick's rate is $1.70. Because prospective investors recognize the high cost of workers' compensation in Ontario and the prospect of even higher costs in the future, this is having a very serious impact on our ability to encourage new job creation and encourage investment in this province. That has a very negative impact on all people in this province, because we want to encourage investment and we want to encourage employers to expand and create new jobs.

So despite the huge cost of our system, which I've indicated to you is the second highest for employers in Canada, things are not working well even though the costs are high. For example, the WCB has had to dip into its long-term reserves for the past few years to meet its yearly operating expenses. Again, that has put the needs of injured workers at further risk. If we continue to dip into our long-term reserves and into our asset base, we're not going to make any progress towards dealing with the unfunded liability. You put on top of that a system that does not serve injured workers or employers and you have very serious problems.

I know that every member of this House has numerous examples of constituents who are dissatisfied with how long it takes the board to process and resolve their concerns. Workers face excessive delays when they file their claims. The problem seems to be particularly severe when it comes to complex claims for workers. Employers are also having difficulties around the length of time it takes to resolve the conflicts involving the amount of their premiums. So both workers and employers have said to us that the overall appeals process is too slow, it is too cumbersome, it's too drawn out. Action needs to be taken and taken now.

I also want to address the problems that the WCB has with fraud. Just like private insurers, this board faces fraud and other abuses of the system by employers, by suppliers, by workers and by others. The board faces three major kinds of external fraud: the claimant-worker fraud, the employer fraud and the fraud of non-compliance, and service provider fraud.

Based on the private insurers' experience, fraud at the WCB could cost up to 5% of the overall cost of the system each year. With yearly expenditures of close to $3 billion at the WCB, this experience suggests that fraud may be costing us as much as $150 million annually.

I think that members will agree that after reviewing the multitude of problems facing the WCB, one might begin to ask --

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker: Order. There is a period which is called questions and comments. Please take advantage of that.

Mr Len Wood (Cochrane North): I want her to stick to the truth.

The Acting Speaker: Order. Otherwise I'll ask you to leave the House.

Mr Wayne Wettlaufer (Kitchener): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: The honourable member alleged that the minister told other than the truth.

The Acting Speaker: If you've said that word, which I didn't hear because I was preoccupied with this group, I would ask you to withdraw it.

Mr Len Wood: I did not say exactly what the member accused me of saying.

The Acting Speaker: I ask you to withdraw.

Mr Len Wood: I said I want the truth. I will withdraw it, but I want to hear the facts, what's going on.

The Acting Speaker: Take your seat. Minister.

Hon Mrs Witmer: Many people ask: How did we ever get into such a mess in the first place? Why were steps not taken to deal with these problems before they reached the crisis proportions that we have today? Unfortunately, a large part of the blame for the lack of progress in tackling the WCB's many problems can be laid at the feet of the board's present governance structure. To put it simply, the governance system is broke.

Unfortunately, the bipartite, labour-versus-management approach has paralysed constructive decision-making on very crucial administrative, policy and financial issues facing the board, such as -- and this was referred to by my colleague this afternoon -- the financial improvement package that would have and could have resulted in $400 million in savings.

Unfortunately, the bipartite board was also ineffective in dealing with very crucial policy issues, such as those concerning work-related stress and entitlement, even when legislative requirements demanded action.

This government recognizes that the structure of governance is not working, just as bipartism did not work at the Workplace Health and Safety Agency. In fact, it's interesting to note that in response to the failure of the bipartite system, the NDP government in British Columbia recently also found it necessary to remove its bipartite board of governors and replace it with a panel of administrators. I can tell you that fixing the governance structure is a key component of the proposed reforms in Bill 15 and it is an important step towards all future reforms.

I now want to provide the members with some detail on the specific legislation before the House today.

The bill amends the Workers' Compensation Act to clear the way for a new governance model, a multi-stakeholder board of governors. These boards have achieved tremendous success recently in both Alberta and Manitoba. They have improved in those provinces not only the financial position but also service delivery to their clients. They have also avoided the very divisive and confrontational aspects of bipartism which often have led to deadlock within our own system.

This board must be prepared to govern the WCB as it evolves from a bureaucracy to a modern business entity. This new multi-stakeholder board will include representatives of workers, employers and others, such as the members of the medical community, the insurance community and the rehabilitation community, others who will bring a different perspective to the Workers' Compensation Board, thereby resulting in better, more responsive management and decision-making.

Until the new board is established, the WCB will be run by its interim president, Kenneth Copeland. I would also like to tell the House that recruitment for a new president is well under way, and the new president will have the mandate to completely overhaul the operations of the WCB, which of course are desperately needed.

The legislation will also strengthen financial accountability at the WCB and ensure that the board employs sound financial management practices as it begins the process of overhauling the system. We will be demanding that there be five-year strategic plans provided in order to ensure financial accountability.

Bill 15 defines the WCB relationship to government. It makes it more financially accountable to government, and therefore to the stakeholders and all Ontarians. Specifically, accountability will be strengthened through the provisions that will require the board to provide the Minister of Labour with the five-year strategic plans that I referred to, as well as a statement of priorities, as well as their investment policies. The

section of the act dealing with the duties of the board of directors will place an additional duty on board members to act in a financially responsible manner. Finally, the legislation strengthens the purpose clause of the act to ensure that financial accountability is a key consideration in all aspects of the system.

The legislation also establishes value-for-money audits that will ensure the board's programs and operations are efficient, effective and financially sound. Value-for-money audits are a business practice used by well-run organizations to ensure that efficiency, economy and effectiveness are achieved in the delivery of all programs.

The amendments also include measures to stem the loss of revenue owed to the WCB, strengthen anti-fraud measures and eliminate abuses of the system. For the first time, the board will have the necessary tools to aggressively attack fraud, all forms of fraud, whether perpetrated by employers, suppliers or workers. The amendments will make it an offence under the act to obtain benefits or to receive compensation by deliberately providing false or misleading information. Persons found guilty will be subject to penalties under the act.

The bill also imposes an explicit requirement that employers who are required to register with the WCB do so. Failure to register will be an offence under the act, subject to penalties.

In addition, the amendments will give the WCB the authority to recover any overpayment it has made to both employers and workers, and the WCB will be given the right to deduct any money it is owed by a person from money it pays out to that person.

Taken together, these anti-fraud measures will help the WCB wage a much more effective campaign against fraud and other revenue losses that cost the board so much money every year. More importantly, they will ensure that the board has sufficient funds to cover the very legitimate claims of so many injured workers and that all employers who are required to fund the system pay their fair share.

The changes in this bill begin the difficult process of overhauling the WCB. As I mentioned at the outset, this sets the stage for the further reforms now under study by Mr Jackson. His report, which is expected next spring, will provide the integrated financial savings package that will eliminate the unfunded liability, and it will fulfil the government's commitment to deal with the issue of benefit levels, entitlement and assessment rates. These actions will enable us to turn the WCB around.

The changes in Bill 15 are an important first step in restoring the long-term financial viability of the Workers' Compensation Board and making the system serve the interests of the employers and the workers in a much more efficient, caring and cost-effective manner. That is the goal I urge all members of this House to support by approving this most important piece of legislation.

The Acting Speaker: Are there any questions or comments? Further debate?

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-Walkerville): I'd like to begin today by talking a little bit about Sir William Meredith and what it is he originally established. Sir William wasn't from Windsor, of course, but what he did between 1912 and 1914 was unique, shrouded in deep study, and he incorporated four basic principles.

He was charged by the government of the day to study the issue of laws relating to the liability of employers to make compensation to their employees for injuries in the course of their employment.

Meredith studied systems all over the world. He did a comparative analysis. He held hearings. He met with the experts of his time. He studied the failings of the system, as they knew it in those days, the tort system, which would require employees to sue their employer in the event of an accident.

Sir William reported back initially to the Legislature in 1912, and his final report was established and finished in 1914. That report formed the basis of the system we have in this province today. Indeed, it formed the basis of systems that have come into place in many, many other jurisdictions since that time.

Sir William established four principles of compensation. The first was the no-fault principle, the principle that eliminated the question of negligence. It provided, in effect, protection for employers.

Sir William established also the principle of statutory benefits, a principle that emphasizes that following an accident, the need of the injured worker was the most important consideration -- far-sighted in his day. I repeat, the need of the injured worker was the most important consideration.

The third principle he established was the principle of collective liability. Compensation costs must rest solely on employers who are collectively liable. Employers insure themselves and insure one another.

The final principle he established was the notion of independent administration. At the time, he recommended and designated a three-member commission which was to be appointed by the Legislature, the Lieutenant Governor in Council, to administer the Workmen's Compensation Act and all of its provisions.

As we look at those principles today, we can indeed relate back to them. The no-fault principle: Employers enjoy relief, they enjoy protection from being sued by those workers who are injured or become sick in their workplace.

Statutory benefits: The need of the injured worker is the most important consideration the board must undertake. That's important, because I think given this government's record on Bill 7 and other areas, they really don't put the workers first and they certainly will not put injured workers first.

Collective liability: Employers pay for a form of insurance. Their assessments are an important cost of doing business and the minister is quite correct that those costs are higher in this province than in every other jurisdiction in the country but Newfoundland, I believe. But we also have the most sophisticated employment base or industrial base ranging from mines, the auto industry, the steel industry, the forestry industry, the agricultural industry, gambling -- a very important industry in this great province. It employs more than 2,600 people in my community.

The Northern Belle is floating today down Lake Erie soon to dock at the foot of McDougall Street in the great riding of Windsor-Walkerville, the riding which I have the honour to represent in this House. That initiative will employ an additional 600 people in good-paying jobs, some making as high as $40,000 to $50,000 a year, the lowest making pr