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

June 16, 2003

37th Parliament, 4th Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2003-Jun-16 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 16 June 2003 Lundi 16 juin 2003

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SUDBURY REGIONAL HOSPITAL

METIS CANOE TRIP

MACULAR DEGENERATION

LEWIS PEARSALL

ITER FUSION PROJECT

KINGSTON GENERAL HOSPITAL

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES

TOURISM IN NIAGARA

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

COMPENSATION FOR VICTIMS

OF CRIME AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR L'INDEMNISATION

DES VICTIMES D'ACTES CRIMINELS

DAY NURSERIES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003

MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES GARDERIES

VISITORS

CONSIDERATION OF BILL 20

ORAL QUESTIONS

FORMER MINISTER'S EXPENSES

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE POLICY

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

TOURISM

AUTISM TREATMENT

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

FOREST INDUSTRY

IMMIGRATION POLICY

SCHOOL SAFETY

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

KIDS' FISHING DAY

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

AUTISM TREATMENT

HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY

PETITIONS

EDUCATION

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

HIGHWAY 69

HYDRO RATES

SCHOOL BUS SAFETY

HOME CARE

SCHOOL BUS SAFETY

LONG-TERM CARE

EDUCATION TAX CREDIT

HOME CARE

EDUCATION TAX CREDIT

ORDERS OF THE DAY

ONTARIO ENERGY BOARD

CONSUMER PROTECTION AND GOVERNANCE ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA PROTECTION

DES CONSOMMATEURS

ET LA RÉGIE DE LA COMMISSION

DE L'ENÉRGIE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 16 June 2003 Lundi 16 juin 2003

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SUDBURY REGIONAL HOSPITAL

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): I rise to inform the House and the people of Ontario that our Sudbury Regional Hospital still has not received

capital construction money from the Harris-Eves government. So today I inform the Harris-Eves government, Minister of Health Tony Clement, and all the members on the other side that we have

launched a northeastern initiative.

I have mailed out a notice of motion today that I would ask 85 groups across northeastern Ontario to pass. This is an approach that I took several years ago with

regard to the four-laning of Highway 69. At that time, it forced the government to make a commitment, or at least an announcement.

Today we are employing the same strategy. We want this government to announce funding for the capital construction of the Sudbury Regional Hospital, a

construction project that has been stalled for two years because this government chooses to ignore the funding dilemma within the Sudbury Regional Hospital Corp.

I thank Austin Davey, councillor for the city of Greater Sudbury, who will be bringing it to the council table to ask for support. The 85 other groups -- be they

business, labour, health care or educational sectors -- are going to clearly tell this government, "It's time that you people pay up. It's time that the Sudbury Regional Hospital gets back on

track. It's time that this hospital is built."

METIS CANOE TRIP

Mr AL McDonald (Nipissing): On June 5 I had the opportunity, along with other dignitaries including Lisa Pigeau-Crawford of the Metis Council

and a group of northern Ontarians who were on hand, to meet the Metis Nation canoe expedition's arrival in North Bay.

This canoe trip retraces the 2,000-kilometre historical canoe route employed by the voyageurs from the northwest some 200 years ago and shows the contribution of

the Metis people to the early development of Ontario as they paddle through the communities along the way.

The journey began for the 10 voyageurs -- including Travis Tessier, who was born in North Bay -- on May 19 from the fur trade museum in Lachine national park in

Quebec, paddling a 26-foot replica birchbark canoe 10 to 12 hours a day.

During their two-month trek, they will stop along the way at Ottawa, Pembroke, Deep River, Mattawa and North Bay. The North Bay stop has historic significance,

as it has long-lasting ties with the fur trade and was part of the route taken by the voyageurs travelling west into the interior at the head of Lake Superior.

North Bay has also serviced trappers who brought furs from the rivers flowing south into Lake Nipissing. Today, North Bay is one of the few remaining hubs of the

North American fur trade, which allows aboriginal people to preserve their traditional way of live and the history associated with it.

My congratulations to all the participants and voyageurs for making this voyage unforgettable.

MACULAR DEGENERATION

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): We are always advised by consumer advocates and legal advisers to read the fine print before purchasing a

product or service. That is sound advice not to be ignored. It is advice that should apply to Eves government announcements.

With the usual fanfare and blue backdrop, the Eves Conservatives in May 2002, under relentless pressure from the Ontario Liberal caucus and advocates for people

with vision problems, finally, two full years after approval from Health Canada, approved funding for Visudyne for the treatment of macular degeneration, the leading cause of blindness after the

age of 50.

Just as we are advised to read the fine print for commercial products, however, we should also read the regulations put in place subsequent to any big

Conservative announcement. It turns out that very restrictive rules on who is eligible for OHIP-paid macular degeneration treatment mean that in reality only a fraction of those individuals

suffering from this debilitating condition are assisted in covering this expense.

After two years of foot-dragging and excuse-making, over half of all patients must reach into their own pockets for very expensive treatment or risk losing their

eyesight and their independence.

The lesson is clear: when the Eves Conservatives make a promise or long-term announcement, read the fine print. Unfortunately, those afflicted with macular

degeneration may be unable to do so unless they have the money to pay for a medically necessary treatment. Welcome to Ernie Eves's Ontario.

LEWIS PEARSALL

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): This weekend, I went to a celebration of the life of Lewis Pearsall, who died on Wednesday, April 30,

2003. Lewis Pearsall was a very dear friend of mine, but more importantly, he was a dear friend to the Riverdale community. We've all lost an activist and friend.

We were shocked when he died, even though he was 82 years old. He showed us all that getting older means getting better and better. I can't tell you in such a

short time all the activities Lewis participated in, in the community. He was particularly fond of the Ralph Thornton Centre and put many of his efforts in there.

Just let me tell a few others: his involvement ranged from his participation in the original Toronto Community Ventures, which I started back in the early 1990s

-- that evolved into the Greater Riverdale Economic Action Together -- the alternative curriculum for excluded students; he also helped create the Riverdale Community Development Corp and the

Riverdale Community Business Centre, a process that took him over eight years. But Lewis never gave up.

Lewis was a handsome man with a wife whom he dearly loved, and five children. I want to take this opportunity to wish all of them well and extend my sympathies

to my dear friend Cecile and their five children, Philip, Marc, Russell, LeeBari and Arlene.

Lewis, we miss you, but we know you're with us somewhere looking down.

ITER FUSION PROJECT

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I'm pleased to rise in the House to support Durham riding constituents regarding the bid for the ITER fusion research

facility. ITER is the international thermonuclear experimental reactor.

ITER is an $18-billion international research project that will examine the next generation of clean, safe, sustainable energy. If Canada were successful in the

ITER bid, we would have the opportunity to play a leadership role in the world's largest new international research project.

Consider some of the ITER advantages: thousands of person-years of employment, $9.4 billion in direct foreign investment, a brain gain of some 250 international

scientists, and expansion in key areas of technology and education.

I'm proud to say that the OPG Darlington site in Durham has proven itself to be an ideal location for this research centre. ITER has the full support of business

and labour leaders, educators, elected officials and the general public. Just a few of the members' names would be Mayor John Mutton of the municipality of Clarington, regional chair Roger

Anderson, Gary Polonsky, president of Durham College, as well as Bill Harford, president of the Durham Region Labour Council. All Durham MPPs are on record as being in support of ITER. However,

ITER is a project with benefits spanning beyond Durham region to Ontario and Canada. It's the next generation of energy technology.

The province of Ontario has had the foresight to agree to a $300-million investment. However, we need the federal government to show the same level of

commitment. Canada has an excellent chance of winning this bid if the federal government shows more support for ITER. On behalf of the citizens of Durham riding, I am asking the federal government

to make an important investment in our future and the future of our children. I am calling on the province of Ontario and our fellow colleagues federally to work together in developing the winning

bid to bring ITER to Canada.

KINGSTON GENERAL HOSPITAL

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): It was aggravating this weekend when I read this headline in the Kingston Whig

Standard: "We are Being Ignored Says [Kingston General Hospital] Director Who Quit."

The

article states that the board chair, Ian Wilson, has grown cynical about the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and its seeming indifference to the

phenomenal local effort that has been made to get restructuring off the ground. In a letter written to the Minister of Health two months ago, Wilson described the board's grave concern about the

complete absence of movement on hospital restructuring and the damage to patient care, hospital finances and morale the delay has caused.

Peter Leslie, professor emeritus at Queen's and member of the board of Kingston General Hospital, has also resigned. He cites that the board is more and more

frustrated with the province's "ad hoc" system of hospital financing. He states that his resignation and his decision to explain himself publicly are intended to "rouse the ministry from its

torpor." In his letter, Leslie also notes that Kingston General Hospital has been forced to consider cutting essential services to ensure its solvency, but refuses to imperil the status of KGH as a

teaching hospital or risk closing the medical school.

It is absolutely unacceptable that this Tory government continues to ignore its responsibility to work with the local board to ensure quality services remain

intact. Minister, stop ignoring KGH. Answer their letters. Pay what you promised. Their patients and their community deserve your support, not your neglect.

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mr Wayne Wettlaufer (Kitchener Centre): One of the biggest accomplishments for the residents of Kitchener Centre has been the improvement in our

health care community. Over the last eight years, our government has taken the necessary steps to ensure that my constituents have access to the highest-quality health care in Ontario. St Mary's

General Hospital is one of the best medical centres in the region. The successful campaign to save St Mary's General Hospital has given Kitchener the ability to deal with the needs of our

community, including a growing and aging population.

Record investments in health care have given our hospitals the necessary tools to care for their patients. On June 6, our government announced $420,112 in new

funding for St Mary's hospital. This money will be used for a new cardiac technology called drug-eluting stents for cardiac patients. These drugs have been reported to improve outcomes in coronary

angioplasty. Our government is funding the use of this new technology for cardiac patients who are at a high risk of suffering narrowing of the arteries after an angioplasty procedure. This

technology could improve the quality of life for these patients, as the chances of a repeat procedure may be reduced.

care by enabling hospitals to deliver services closer to home. The residents of Kitchener Centre will benefit greatly from this new funding.

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): Last week, the member for Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound said that Liberals don't care about families. Excuse

me; he hasn't been paying attention.

Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberals care about the growing number of families who have to rely on food banks.

Liberals care about children who suffer medical problems because of your weakening of environmental protection.

Liberals care about families with autistic children who are ignored after they turn six.

Liberals care about children who have to rely on school breakfast clubs for their first meal of the day.

Liberals care about families who despair about the lack of special education services for their children.

Liberals care about families on ODSP who must live $8,000 below the poverty level.

Liberals cry for the lack of affordable housing, with 55,000 on the waiting list in Toronto alone.

Liberals share the worry of families who can no longer afford post-secondary education for their child.

Liberals are appalled by your government's support for school user fees, which means that children can no longer afford to play on the playground after

school.

Liberals are deeply concerned for the families who cannot afford their electricity or gas bills. Liberals worry about families whose jobs are at risk because

their employers can't afford your electricity bills.

Liberals wonder why you continue to block Rick Bartolucci's bill to allow the transfer of information between children's aid societies.

Liberals believe it is wrong that families have to worry that their water is safe.

Liberals care deeply about the many families whose total annual income is less than your House leader spent in Europe in one week.

To the member from Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound, your government's words say one thing, but your actions speak loudly of your neglect of families.

TOURISM IN NIAGARA

Mr Bart Maves (Niagara Falls): Unlike the member opposite, who just got up and said how much he cares about all these problems, the people on

this side of the floor actually have solutions to these problems and actually address a lot of these problems.

Interjections.

Mr Maves: It's unusual for statements to be heckled when they haven't even let me say what I'm speaking about.

On Friday, Tim Hudak, the Minister of Consumer and Business Services, and the member from Erie-Lincoln and myself convened a tourism summit in Niagara to deal

with the difficult year we're having in tourism throughout Canada and Ontario. Everyone who would be constructive was invited to this tourism summit.

There's a perfect storm happening right now. There are the difficulties with 9/11, there are difficulties with SARS, there are difficulties with the Iraq war

and, of course, the very unfortunate statements made by the federal Liberals about our good American cousins, which have teamed together to cause difficult problems in tourism this year.

We got together with about 45 different people in the tourism industry, leaders from Niagara Falls, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Port Colborne, Fort Erie and St

Catharines, throughout the entire region.

Kudos go to all of those people who want to come together to take advantage of the province's $128-million tourism recovery program and come up with a unified

Niagara strategy to help tourism rebound in Niagara and get Niagara citizens back to work.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

COMPENSATION FOR VICTIMS

OF CRIME AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR L'INDEMNISATION

DES VICTIMES D'ACTES CRIMINELS

Mr Duncan moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 98,

An Act to amend the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act / Projet de loi 98, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'indemnisation des victimes d'actes

criminels.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): The bill amends the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act to permit the Lieutenant Governor in Council to

make regulations requiring annual cost-of-living adjustments to awards made under this act.

There has not been a change in real compensation to victims of crime since 1986. This bill would provide, first of all, for regulatory power. Later today I

will be tabling a resolution to increase the amount for victims on a one-time basis, because I can't do that through private bills.

It's time the government takes victims of crime seriously on these issues.

DAY NURSERIES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003

MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES GARDERIES

Mr Lalonde moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 99,

An Act to amend the Day Nurseries Act to allow up to seven children to be cared for in rural areas without requiring a licence under the Act / Projet

de loi 99, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les garderies afin d'autoriser, dans les régions rurales, la garde de sept enfants au plus sans devoir obtenir un permis prévu par la Loi.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): The purpose of the bill is to exempt day nurseries and private home daycare agencies that

receive or provide care for no more than seven children from the licence requirements of the act, if the nurseries or agencies are located in rural areas or in a town or village with a population

of fewer than 3,500.

VISITORS

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I know that you and all members in the House would like to welcome, in the

members' gallery visiting here today, Maryann Nargi of Chatham and Marnie Sutherland-Stein of Leamington.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): I too have a point of order, Mr Speaker, although you may rule it out of order. I want to introduce Joe

Witalis and his partner Sheila Foster. Joe lives in my riding and is here every single day for question period. I also want to introduce his mother, Anna Witalis, who is 84 years old. She took a

train up from New York. She's a good example to all of us. Look at her. Welcome. Thank you for coming today.

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

Hon Frank Klees (Minister of Transportation): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I too have two very special guests with me here today: Danielle

and Cameron Healy from King township. Cameron is a student at St Andrew's College and Danielle is a student at Country Day School. They're here spending the day with an MPP to see what it's like.

No doubt one of these days they'll be here themselves. Please welcome my guests today.

The Speaker: We welcome our people. The member for Durham was up first.

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): It is also my pleasure and privilege to introduce Richard Pentney, who is a member of the Smart Systems for Health

Agency's board of directors. He's seated in the members' gallery. Richard is from Sudbury. It was my opportunity as PA to meet with him earlier today to discuss with him the great job of the

delivery of health. I thank Richard for his work on the Smart Systems board.

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I wanted to take the opportunity to introduce Timothy Lewis, who is beside me here; the page's parents,

who are in the west gallery, Jamie and Jane Lewis; his grandparents, Beth and Orm McGirr from Sundridge from my riding; and friend Kyle Wood, who are here today visiting.

The Speaker: We welcome the parents. You have a fine son. He's doing a wonderful job with us here today.

CONSIDERATION OF BILL 20

Hon Frank Klees (Minister of Transportation): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: In light of a very serious incident over the weekend -- four

teenagers seriously injured as a result of road racing -- we have before the House Bill 20, the Road Safety Act, 2003. In light of these circumstances, I would ask unanimous consent for second and

third reading of this bill immediately, so that we can get on and have this important legislation in place in the province of Ontario.

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: We ask that it be referred to House leaders, which is the normal

process. We weren't given any notice of this. There are a couple of items that I think would merit discussion at that point as well.

Hon Mr Klees: I'm pleased to refer this matter to the House leaders for discussion. It's such an important issue. I would ask, in that case,

that the House leaders convene to discuss this possibility.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I appreciate that. Do you still want --

Interjection.

The Speaker: That's fine. OK. We hope the House leaders will be able to negotiate that, and we wish them luck in that endeavour.

ORAL QUESTIONS

FORMER MINISTER'S EXPENSES

Ms Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): My question is for the Deputy Premier. Last October, Cam Jackson was fired as minister because of his

expenses. The Premier promised at that time a review of those expenses. In November, the Premier's office stated that the review was still not complete. Can you tell me, Minister, if the Premier's

review of Cam Jackson's expense is complete? If so, what were the results of that review?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): I don't have any information about the question that's just been asked by the

deputy leader, but I will certainly Inquire and I will inform the House.

Ms Pupatello: Deputy Premier, I would like to add items for your perusal and perhaps you can get back to the House.

As you know, Cam Jackson was fired after it was discovered that he billed taxpayers more than $100,000. Months before Jackson was fired, he attempted to repay

$7,600 of those expenses and say the matter was closed.

I have in my hands Cam Jackson's riding association filing. They show that Jackson didn't pay back those expenses himself; he got his riding association to

pick up the tab instead. His riding association paid for expenses that had clearly been marked `Personal,' as such, when he repaid them to the Legislature. They had so little to do with his work,

in fact, that he lost his job for expensing them. Did the Premier's review cover the fact that Cam Jackson billed expenses to his riding association that were clearly personal?

Hon Mrs Witmer: As I said to the member opposite after the first question, I will take the question under advisement and we will prepare a

response.

Ms Pupatello: Deputy Premier, I think you can see where we're getting here. If you do work on government business, then the ministry should

cover those expenses. If you do work for your party, then your party covers those expenses. But if you go out to entertain yourself, you should be paying for it yourself. Cam Jackson clearly didn't

do that. While sitting as a cabinet minister in Ernie Eves's government from August to October last year, Cam Jackson was sending his donors the bills for his personal expenses. Political

donations, some from the groups and industries that he oversaw as Minister of Tourism, were being used to fluff up his personal lifestyle.

Minister, is this why we give tax credits for political donations, so that cabinet ministers can live this type of lifestyle? That's a serious question. We're

looking forward to your opinion.

Hon Mrs Witmer: I would just like to share with the member opposite that I've been informed that the Premier's office has done a review, and

my understanding is that they are presently in discussion with Mr Jackson on this particular subject.

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): My question is to the government House leader with respect to this review by the Premier's office. Is the

Premier's office aware of your European trip of last summer? Are they aware of the various sources that paid for the participants' expenses on that trip? Did they provide approvals for this

practice?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): The question is before the Integrity Commissioner. I would wait

for the report from the Integrity Commissioner.

Mr Bryant : The Integrity Commissioner is not looking at what the Premier's office knew or did not know. My question is about what you did, and

I'm asking for an answer in this House. I don't think it's appropriate to use the Integrity Commissioner's deliberations as a shield to providing the answers. The question is, either you provided

and disclosed to the Premier's office all the facts as to who paid for what on this trip and received approval, or you did not disclose all these facts to the Premier's office and withheld them for

approval. Which one is it?

Hon Mr Stockwell: I think I'll wait for the Integrity Commissioner's report to comment any further on this issue.

Mr Bryant: I say to the minister, you offered last Tuesday to release to the public the letter that you sent to the Integrity Commissioner

that triggered his current deliberations. That was six days ago. I would have thought it would take about 60 minutes, not six days, to get your hands on that letter and disclose it to the

public.

Why have you still not released a letter that you promised six days ago, and will you release the letter that you wrote to the Integrity Commissioner by the

end of question period today?

Hon Mr Stockwell: I think, before I get into any undertakings, I'd like to see the report from the Integrity Commissioner.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): New question.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of the Environment. Reports in the Globe and Mail indicate that your

special assistant, one John Koutoulakis, and his wife accompanied you on your now infamous, taxpayer-funded, five-star tour of Rome, Paris, London and Glasgow. I'm wondering what services Mr

Koutoulakis provided that were so vital that you felt compelled to take him and his wife with you at considerable public expense?

Hon Mr Stockwell: I referred that issue to the Integrity Commissioner. I'll wait for his response.

Mr Hampton: I'm not sure that that particular issue was referred to the Integrity Commissioner.

I'll try again. I understand that Mr Koutoulakis has had quite a career trajectory. A few short years ago, I understand, he was selling cars. When you became

Minister of Labour, you appointed your friend Mr Koutoulakis to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal. That's an important job. It hears the appeals of injured workers whose lives are

on hold.

Of the 23 appeal cases that Mr Koutoulakis heard, he didn't give a decision on 18. He heard the case and then never, ever bothered to give a decision. On five,

he gave a decision that was four months late. One injured worker was forced to go on social assistance because Mr Koutoulakis didn't think it was important to give a decision in his case. So I ask

you, Minister, why is the public paying for this man's visit to the Champs Élysées?

Hon Mr Stockwell: I'm pleased with Mr Koutoulakis's work. I've referred all the appropriate documents to the Integrity Commissioner and I

await his response.

Mr Hampton: Minister, this is an ankle bracelet; your government advocates that it be used. I'm advocating that maybe we should put one on you

so the public can keep track of your junkets and how much public money you're spending. We took a second look at your expense problems of last December. You remember: two of your staffers racked up

$3,300 in other expenses at a very trendy $600-a-night, ultra-luxury Manhattan hotel. And what name turns up there? Koutoulakis.

This is all public money. It's not a travel slush fund for you and your friends. How do you justify these repeated junkets by you and your friends at public

expense?

Hon Mr Stockwell: The Integrity Commissioner reviewed those expenses and he approved them all.

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is to the Deputy Premier. All across the province of Ontario, you are hearing from drivers

who are concerned about skyrocketing auto insurance premiums. Just today, a young man who requires a car to go to work wrote to me saying that private insurance companies in Ontario are telling him

they need to charge $7,000 a year to give him basic coverage on an eight-year-old vehicle. He says he doesn't understand how he's supposed to come up with that money when he barely makes that

amount.

It's common knowledge that auto insurance premiums are exploding because of the dramatic decline in income that insurance companies have experienced because of

their losses on the stock market. Deputy Premier, do you think it's all right that this young man and millions of other Ontarians like him are paying through the nose because insurance companies

lost money on the stock market?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): I will refer that to the Minister of Finance.

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Finance): I certainly share the honourable member's concern for this particular auto insurance consumer.

Obviously, I'm not privy to the personal circumstances of this consumer, so I can't comment on what may or may not have occurred in this circumstance.

I know the honourable member's government was certainly concerned about this. They had proposed public auto insurance; they did not do that. What we're looking

at -- and we've been working with stakeholders -- is to put in place some plans and some regulation changes that will help the companies and consumers to make sure we have auto insurance in this

province.

Mr Hampton: It turns out that this young man is a recent arrival from Montreal. Before he left Montreal, he received a quote of $2,500 from

the public auto insurance company in Quebec -- so $7,000 in Ontario and $2,500 in Quebec.

Minister, you will know that while insurance rates in Ontario have risen almost 40% since 2001, they've risen by less than 10% in provinces like British

Columbia, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, which have public auto insurance systems.

The changes you're proposing are not going to make up for the amount of money that private insurance companies lost on the stock market. They're still going to

insist that that money come from drivers across Ontario.

I think we need a public insurance system in Ontario. Are you prepared to bring one in?

Hon Mrs Ecker: First of all, the problem we're finding with auto insurance, not only in Canada but in many other countries around the world,

is not because of the stock market. I think we need to be clear here. There are a number of issues that are pressuring auto insurance -- the increased cost of repairs, for example. There are a

number of pressures that are causing this problem. As I said, we are working with the stakeholders to put in place strategies which will help protect consumers; provide better rights for consumers

to make sure there is better access to treatment for consumers; take administrative processes that may be adding to costs, may be running consumers through endless assessments and dispute

mechanisms.

The honourable member says, "Bring in public auto insurance." Well, where was he? His government decided not to do it. I would assume they made that decision

based on rational policy reasons. For example, one of the reasons those public systems are having lower rates is because they have lower benefits for consumers --

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

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): My question is for the government House leader.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Stop the clock for a quick moment, please. Here he comes.

The member for St Paul's.

Mr Bryant: My question is to the government House leader. You said last Tuesday, when asked in a media scrum, that you would release a copy of

the letter you wrote to the Integrity Commissioner. Do you deny that you said that?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): No.

Mr Bryant: Then why have you not released the letter for the last six days? Why do you continue to pretend that the Integrity Commissioner is

looking into facts that speak to the various calls for your resignation that have been made by various sources, when in fact you know what the scope of the inquiry of the Integrity Commissioner is;

it is contained in that letter, and you can clarify to everybody what the Integrity Commissioner is looking at by your release of that letter. You promised you would release it six days ago. I

understand that the Stockwellian approach to this involves the release of contradictory facts in a selective fashion, But you're on camera and you're on tape saying that you'd release this letter.

Why on earth will you not release it?

Hon Mr Stockwell: I'm sure all the relevant information will be released when the Integrity Commissioner finishes his investigation.

IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE POLICY

Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): My question is for the Minister of Citizenship. There have been a lot of media reports

about problems with the federal refugee claimant system. For example, the recent federal auditor's report states that Citizenship and Immigration Canada has lost track of 36,000 failed refugee

claimants illegally in Canada. Federal mismanagement of the refugee claimant system not only costs provincial taxpayers money; it also poses a real security risk. What is our government's position

with regard to the refugee claimant system?

Hon Carl DeFaria (Minister of Citizenship, minister responsible for seniors): I thank my hard-working colleague for this question. It's a real

shame that the federal government has lost track of 36,000 failed refugee claimants in the process. We have publicly called on the federal government to reduce the time it takes to make decisions

about refugee claims. We want the federal Liberal government to remove those individuals whose claims have been rejected or withdrawn. We have also called on the federal government to assume all

provincial costs that provide services to refugee claimants. It costs the province millions of dollars to support refugee claimants. The province has been funding refugee claimants for legal aid

and housing. We say, "No more." The refugee claimant system is a federal responsibility. The federal government should pay for all the costs.

Mr Gill: I'd like to thank the minister for that answer. This mismanagement is appalling. Clearly, the federal government has not managed the

immigration system effectively or safely. Please inform this House of the other costs that Ontarians incur due to the federal mismanagement of the immigration program.

Hon Mr DeFaria: Another area of concern for our government is the lack of federal enforcement of family sponsorship agreements. When an

Ontario resident sponsors a family member, he or she agrees to pay to take care of the sponsored relative's financial needs. However, some sponsors do not live up to their obligations. As a result,

there are thousands of sponsored immigrants in Ontario who have turned to provincial social assistance. This is a burden to Ontario taxpayers. The combined provincial and municipal cost for social

assistance for refugee claimants and failed family sponsorship is about $200 million a year. Again we say that this is unacceptable, and we'll put a stop to it. The federal government must live up

to its obligations.

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

Mr George Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale): My question is to the government House leader. Your propensity to eat, drink, work and play at

taxpayers' expenses is now common knowledge. What isn't known yet is the total cost of your ways. We know about the $3,000 in late-night pub crawls and the $60,000 European tour, but I want to give

you a chance to come clean on yet another one of these excursions. Would you stand before this House and tell us, just how much did you, your family and your staff bill the Toronto Olympic bid for

your travels over the last few years?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): I don't have any knowledge of what you're speaking of. If you

could expand on that, it would be wonderful.

Mr Smitherman: Information has become known to us that in the course of Toronto's bid for the Olympic Games, in your capacity as an Ontario

minister you attended several very hot world spots, maybe Sydney, perhaps even Moscow. The fact of another level of government, or in this case an agency, receiving government funding doesn't

excuse you from being accountable for those dollars. Given your track record, we think that the public has a right to know.

I'd like to ask you to put On the public record how much you billed the Toronto Olympic bid for staff, personal and family travel that you made to those hot

spots. We understand that your in-laws might have been along for at least one of those trips. Can you please tell us if they picked up their own expenses.

Hon Mr Stockwell: That's ridiculous. That's an absolutely ridiculous question. Furthermore, I was there with a number of politicians,

went.

TOURISM

Mr AL McDonald (Nipissing): My question today is for the Minister of Tourism and Recreation, the Honourable Brian Coburn, MPP for

Ottawa-Orléans. You're well aware that convention business in Toronto and around the province has taken quite a hit because of our health challenges. I understand that you were at the Metro

Toronto Convention Centre this morning to make an important announcement. Could you please tell us more about this announcement and how it will strengthen our struggling convention business?

Hon Brian Coburn (Minister of Tourism and Recreation): I thank the member from Nipissing. He's absolutely right. I had the pleasure this

morning of announcing a $5-million convention development fund, which is over two years. That is to go toward the convention facilities that we have across Ontario so they can secure and recapture

some of the business that we have lost over the last short while, and market and develop plans to grow that business as we go forward into the future.

The primary goal of the fund is to strengthen Ontario's position as a premier destination for major conventions here in Toronto and in Ontario. This will help

us maintain jobs in the tourism business, encourage partnerships and private sector initiatives and investment in tourism development.

This is part of the program that the Premier announced a couple of months ago, $128 million toward tourism recovery in the province. This is one part of that

program, along with the other one that we made, from May 1 to the end of September, in terms of no taxes on accommodation and an admissions tax holiday to help the tourism industry.

Mr McDonald: Thank you, Minister Coburn, for your response. This announcement was great news for Toronto and many other cities around the

province.

I've read recently and heard from many people who believe that the summer tourism season is over in Ontario. Communities throughout the province are seeing the

number of visitors decline, and many doubt that the tourism will be able to recover this summer. As you know, Ontario is a first-class tourism destination. However, it seems that in the eyes of the

world we're losing that edge this summer. Minister, could you tell me your thoughts about this tourism season and your response to those who believe that the summer tourism season is over?

Hon Mr Coburn: As far as I'm concerned, the tourism season is far from over for this summer. The Premier has stated quite clearly that we'll

do whatever it takes for our province to recover from the unprecedented challenge that we're facing here in Ontario.

Our government has developed, as part of the $128-million program, a program to rebuild global confidence here in Ontario. We've invested in major events and

promotions to attract more visitors to stay in our hotels, eat in our fine restaurants and go to the major festivals that we have around the province.

We're developing marketing campaigns to showcase Ontario to the world. We have devoted funds to tourism partnerships to promote Toronto and the rest of

Ontario. We're pleased to partner with Mirvish Productions, for example, and the initiative they've taken. We've had an outstanding response from that initiative and other initiatives that we've

had here in Ontario. The most recent one, of course, is the Toronto concert. We've sold out the tickets to that and we look forward --

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

AUTISM TREATMENT

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a question for the Minister of Community, Family and Children's Services. The following notice was

posted on the Halton autism society Web site: "Johnny's 1st Annual Fundraiser Garage Sale and Car Wash, Saturday Morning, June 21, 2003," in Burlington.

"Johnny has autism. All fundraising is for Johnny's IBI medically necessary treatment. On May 18, 2003, Johnny had his sixth birthday. As a birthday present,

the Ontario government cut funding for his treatment, as they are doing with all children with autism when they turn six. Treatment costs up to $55,000 a year. We don't have it."

Minister, why are you forcing Ontario families to these lengths just to get medically necessary treatment for their autistic children?

Hon Brenda Elliott (Minister of Community, Family and Children's Services): My colleague from across the way in the third party has asked me

in this House before about autism. I have indicated to her and I indicate again that this government is very concerned about the children who are diagnosed with autism. We are a government that is

so concerned that we have undertaken one of the most comprehensive programs in North America.

In Ontario before 1999, there was no program -- not one cent spent by either the Liberal or the NDP government before it on autism. Our government recognized

that this was a serious disorder that was of great concern to the children and their families. We have acted and began, from 1999, with a modest amount of $5 million put to this program, to now an

expansive program that is going to, when it's finally rolled out, be a $100-million investment in children with autism.

Ms Martel: Minister, Johnny's family is in the gallery today -- his mom, dad and grandfather -- and like me, they don't believe that garage

sales should be used to fund IBI treatment. The government should fund IBI treatment. But they don't know what else to do. IBI treatment is medically necessary and should be funded through OHIP. We

don't ask families to fundraise for cancer treatment, and we should not be demanding that they fundraise for IBI treatment for their autistic children.

Minister, tell this family today to cancel the garage sale and cancel the car wash. Tell them you're going to do the right thing and cover IBI treatment

through OHIP for every autistic child who needs it.

Hon Mrs Elliott: As I indicated, we have an expansive program in autism. It began from nothing in 1999 to become one of the most comprehensive

in the country. We are also one of the only governments that invests heavily in intensive behavioral intervention programs. Why? Because research tells us that is a very key time to help those

children, and that's exactly what we're trying to do.

We know we need to do more, and that is why this government is not only investing intensively in IBI, the early intervention program, but is also in the

process of working with the Ministry of Education on their special education autism standards and designing for the first time an out-of-class, out-of-school program to help children with autism

receive the help they need, because we know it matters to help them get the best start.

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): My question is for the Minister of Consumer and Business Services. You oversee the Liquor Control Board of Ontario,

the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario, the Ontario Film Review Board and the Ontario Racing Commission, among other responsibilities. Can you tell us if you have ever charged expenses

through any of these organizations or through your riding association, for example? If so, for what and how much in total have they paid on your behalf?

Hon Tim Hudak (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): The member has asked a question about information I don't particularly have at

hand. But I think the member knows the system we have put in place, where any expenses incurred in ministers' offices are referred to the Integrity Commissioner, who of course is the second-highest

jurist in the province of Ontario, to be reviewed to make sure they fit with integrity principles.

Mr Crozier: Minister, quite frankly, that was not the answer I expected. I didn't know that you refer those kinds of expenses to the Integrity

Commissioner as a routine. That's news.

The Minister of the Environment has said to us repeatedly that everybody does these kinds of things. Quite frankly, that reflects on each of us in this place,

and that's why I wanted to ask you today, because you have a number of boards and commissions under your jurisdiction.

So you're telling me that as a routine -- this isn't something that, for example, is a directive from the minister's office or Management Board -- if you're

going to travel, you first refer this to the Integrity Commissioner. Is that what you're saying everybody does over there?

Hon Mr Hudak: I think the member misconstrues my response. I think the member well knows that for any expenses that are incurred to my

ministry budget as a minister of the Crown, under our legislation our procedure is to refer those to the Integrity Commissioner to make sure they fit in with strong integrity principles on an

annual basis. In fact, the most recent report came out a few weeks ago. It basically raised no red flags whatsoever. All members of this cabinet were consistent with those integrity principles.

I must say that one thing that did come up a few weeks or months ago was the member's leader, who I think spent some $17,000 of taxpayers' money to go to image

consultants in Chicago and Washington. The top mud throwers of the Democratic Party were giving advice to the Leader of the Opposition. I don't know if it was for what shoulder pads to wear, how to

cut his hair, or how to come across in front of the public. He certainly needed the help. But $17,000 of taxpayers' money was charged for political purposes. I want to know when Dalton McGuinty and

Bruce Crozier are going to pay back that money to the taxpayers of Ontario.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mr Bart Maves (Niagara Falls): Unlike my Liberal colleagues across the floor, I'm interested in policies and issues that impact the people of

Ontario.

My question is for the Minister of Labour. As a former parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Labour -- in fact, the parliamentary assistant who led a

province-wide consultation with labour and employers on health and safety issues, as well as on WSIB reform -- I know that our government is committed to ensuring that employers observe their

responsibilities when it comes to workers' health and safety. But I know that some employers have been more successful than others in doing so. I understand that you visited an employer recently

who is doing extremely well in this regard. Could you please inform the House about this visit and this organization?

Hon Brad Clark (Minister of Labour): I thank the honourable member for the question. As members of this House are aware, the government is

extremely concerned about health and safety, and we've made partners with numerous organizations across this province.

Since 1995, more than one million new jobs have been created in Ontario, and during that period of time, the lost-time injury rate in the province of Ontario

has dropped by 30%, which is, in itself, a remarkable achievement. But there are many organizations and many companies that have gone one step further.

Last Monday, I visited Ontario Power Generation's Sir Adam Beck generating station in Niagara Falls. The facility has 240 employees. They have gone 1,045 days

without a single lost-time injury, which is an incredible accomplishment. They believe in zero injuries on the job. They're making it happen.

I commend Ontario Power Generation, the workers at the plant, the Canadian Union of Public Employees and the Society of Energy Professionals for their

commitment to health and safety in the plant.

Mr Maves: Thank you for that answer and for your visit to Niagara Falls to the Sir Adam Beck generating station.

We also were happy to announce this past week that Ontario Power Generation is expanding and bringing in 80 employees, engineers and financial staff to Niagara

as they redeveloped and really rescued an old Adam Beck building. Now 80 new employees will work out of the Niagara Falls office.

We're proud of the progressive employee-employer relationship that the Power Workers' Union has with OPG in Niagara Falls.

Can you tell me how Ontario Power Generation managed this extraordinary achievement, so that other employers might take heed of their model for workplace

health and safety?

Hon Mr Clark: What I have found through my experience as Minister of Labour is that there are companies that have achieved exceptional health

and safety records and have consistent approaches to workplace safety. Successful companies have a system of checks and balances. For example, at OPG, attention is to detail. Every employee at OPG

has a safety checklist that they have to complete before each and every task. The checklist is particular to the task at hand. What is crucial is not only working through the safety stipulations

for that task, but also filling out the list. It makes the employee stop and think about safety. It puts the employee into the safety mindset.

Every day starts with a tailboard meeting. During that meeting, the work group reviews the jobs for the day and the safety procedures that are required and are

to be followed.

Successful companies right across this province are doing these types of things. They have joint health and safety committees. They work with the employer.

They've changed their cultural attitudes to ensure that workplace injuries become nonexistent in the province of Ontario.

FOREST INDUSTRY

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): My question is to the Minister of Natural Resources. The forest products industry in this

province is in a state of crisis. Thousands of people are being laid off all across the north, with further job losses and mill shutdowns announced on an almost daily basis.

This past Friday, I attended an emergency meeting in Nipigon, attended by all stakeholders, which focused on finding both short- and long-term solutions to

this very grim situation.

One of the central points made at this gathering was that the province of Ontario does not seem to remotely acknowledge the gravity of the situation, which is

extraordinary, considering the fact that the forest products industry is the second-largest in the province, next to the auto sector. This is not simply about federal issues, so I hope you won't

use that as an excuse for your lack of involvement.

My question is this: Minister, do you understand just how serious the situation is, and are you and the Premier prepared to get directly involved to help out

the industry during this very perilous time?

Hon Jerry J. Ouellette (Minister of Natural Resources): Absolutely. We actually know how serious this issue is. While the member was in

Nipigon at the meeting -- I had staff in attendance there -- I was in Ottawa dealing with Alberta, Quebec, British Columbia and the feds on forestry issues. We know there are a lot of factors that

are in play here, including the value of the Canadian dollar, which has a substantial impact, the weak market and of course softwood lumber.

We are doing everything we can to make sure that those flows that are affected by the softwood lumber players, to the pulp and paper mills, for example, are

continuing to go to keep those workers going and to keep as many people going in northern Ontario as possible during these tough times.

Mr Gravelle: Minister, we need a lot more than that from you. We need more than words; we need some real action related to provincial issues

that you can deal with. The fact is that from Thunder Bay to Marathon and White River, from Atikokan and Dubreuilville to Cochrane and Kirkland Lake, communities and people are fighting for their

very survival. The issues you could help us with range from wood supply concerns to exploding energy costs to rising insurance rates. But most of all, northerners are expecting to see you and your

government on the ground helping us find solutions. These layoffs hit our sawmills first, and they hit them hard. Now the pulp and paper mills like Bowater are announcing massive layoffs as part of

the fallout of the lack of fibre and wood chips.

It is my understanding that the Premier will be spending some time in the north later this week. Would that not be a good time to sit down with municipal

leaders and industry representatives to offer them direct help? Minister, can you guarantee us today that you and your colleague, northern development minister Wilson, will not only treat this as a

top priority for your two ministries but you will see that the Premier deals directly with this issue when he's in the north later this week?

Hon Mr Ouellette: The Premier is well aware of everything. We, for example, within the past week met with Tannis from the Northwest

Association of Chambers of Commerce. We met with the mayor of Atikokan to discuss these issues. As well, we've been able to work and assist in a lot of areas such as a salvageable wood program so

that blow-down or firewood that's taken where a fire has gone through -- we've sped up the process to make sure that that fibre is available.

Not only that, we work with a number of other areas that the forest industry has some concerns with that deal with the guidelines. There's no foxing around in

these issues at all. Quite frankly, we're dealing with those issues and we're making sure that the industry is dealt with on a regular basis because we know how important the fibre industry is to

the province of Ontario.

IMMIGRATION POLICY

Mr Steve Gilchrist (Scarborough East): My question is for the Minister of Citizenship. The federal Minister of Immigration, Mr Denis Coderre,

is on record as saying that Ontario has not been "engaged" on immigration issues. He has also indicated that Ontario has shown little interest in the selection of economic immigrants. Immigration

is important to this province; indeed, it's vital to its future. Ontario deserves a hand in shaping the policies that bring newcomers here.

Minister, I wonder if you could clarify: what is Ontario's immigration position when it comes to the selection of immigrants?

Hon Carl DeFaria (Minister of Citizenship, minister responsible for seniors): I wish to thank my colleague, the hard-working member from

Scarborough East. Immigration issues have always been a priority for our government. In fact, over the past year I personally met and spoke with Minister Coderre on a number of occasions. I clearly

expressed Ontario's concern about the inefficiency of the overseas selection process for economic immigrants. The federal system is just too slow; it's just too inefficient for Ontario's dynamic

economy. The average waiting time for an applicant is two years. A faster, improved overseas selection process is imperative. We need to ensure that Ontario's employers receive the kind of skilled

immigrants they need --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. Sorry to interrupt the minister. You have about 10 seconds. The member for Windsor West, please come to

order. The member had about 10 seconds to wrap up. Sorry for the interruption.

Hon Mr DeFaria: The new federal point system for economic immigrants is a barrier to many tradespeople. To remain competitive in attracting

skilled workers and business immigrants --

The Speaker: The minister's time is up. Supplementary?

Mr Gilchrist: I thank the minister for his response. All I can say is, having heard the heckling from the folks on the other side, the member

for St Catharines and others seem to have forgotten that they voted in favour of the resolution when Mr Tascona brought forth, a resolution that spoke specifically to Ontario standing up and being

able to have its own views and take a stand on making sure we get great immigrants coming to Ontario.

Mr Minister, thank you for your response, but what other things has Ontario done and committed to with regard to attracting skilled immigrants to our great

province?

Interjections.

Hon Mr DeFaria: I again thank my colleague for the question. Obviously the opposite side realize the impact our government has in the diverse

communities of Ontario and the support I have from the immigrant communities.

Our government supports a number of initiatives to help newcomers succeed in the labour market. Our government provides bridge training programs, an academic

credential assessment service and partnership with occupational regulatory bodies. The federal government has talked a lot about helping skilled immigrants enter the market, but they have done

nothing at all to accomplish that. The province needs skilled immigrants. We know that and we are doing whatever is necessary to accomplish that. We need a federal financial commitment to get

skilled immigrants here, to help them with training and entering the job market.

The Speaker: The minister's time is up. New question.

SCHOOL SAFETY

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): My question is to the Minister of Education. Minister, Toronto parents want your promise that no more

staff will be cut from the Toronto schools. Jordan Berger, the NDP candidate in Davenport, marched with his community to "Take back the day" after some terrifying incidents involving children. Many

parents asked him to bring this message back to you: there has never been a worse time to cut caretakers, vice-principals and education assistants. These people are the eyes and ears in our

schools. They keep our children safe.

Will you promise that your board supervisor will listen to frightened parents and that no more staff will be cut from the Toronto board?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): I thank the member for his question. As the member knows, our government has

been very concerned about the safety of our children in our schools. That's why, in 2000, my colleague introduced the Safe Schools Act. Despite what the member is saying today, both the NDP and the

Liberals did not support, and voted against, that Safe Schools Act, which was introduced to help our children.

Mr Marchese: The Safe Schools Act does not protect children. The question I asked you and that Jordan Berger wanted to ask you is, we need

caretakers, vice-principals and education assistants in our schools. Why? Because they are the eyes and ears of school safety. Dr Rozanski has shown you how you can do this. All you need is the

will and the desire to do so. You can fire your supervisor and we can have our vice-principals, our caretakers and our education assistants. The people of Davenport are doing their part to keep the

kids safe. They want assurances from you that you will do the same.

So the question is, will you listen to these parents who fear their children will be less safe if they have fewer staff such as caretakers and education

assistants and vice-principals in the schools, and will you simply promise that no more staff will be cut from our Toronto schools?

Hon Mrs Witmer: It still perplexes me that the member over there can stand in his place despite the fact that he and his party voted against

the Safe Schools Act in 2000. That was exactly the reason we introduced it: in order to ensure the safety of our children within the schools. As the member knows, it had a tremendous impact on

making sure that persons could not be on school premises without being authorized to do so. In fact, if a person was convicted, there was a fine. We set up this provincial model for a local

police-school board protocol in order to ensure there were protocols which protected our children within the school community.

We have developed the procedures and we will continue to do what is needed to ensure our children are safe within the school community.

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): I want to return to the Minister of Consumer and Business Services. Minister, I understood your answer. I understand

that ministry expenses are reviewed by the Integrity Commissioner, but that's not what I asked.

I asked this, and it's very simple: have you or your staff ever charged expenses through the LCBO, the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario, the Ontario

Film Review Board or the Ontario Racing Commission? If so, for what and how much in total have they paid on your behalf?

Hon Tim Hudak (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): I appreciate the question. I guess that's the tone they struck across the floor,

unfortunately. I guess that comes from Dalton McGuinty's high-priced advisers over there in Chicago and Washington, DC -- $17,000 to give that kind of advice.

If the member has a particular question, I'd invite him to ask me or talk to me about it, if there's a particular concern he has. My understanding of the

agencies he mentioned -- not in my recollection. But the best way to deal with this, as the member has, if there's a concern about an expense, is through the Integrity Commissioner, as I've said,

and the member he referenced has said in his answers in the House.

Mr Crozier: But, Minister, you said, "not in my recollection." I would have thought that you would know this. What still bothers me -- all I

need is a definite yes or no -- is that these boards and agencies aren't reviewed by the Integrity Commissioner.

Interjections.

Mr Crozier: Well, the Minister of the Environment said that everybody does these things. I'm simply, on my side, trying to ask if any of these

organizations, a minister who has a great deal to do with a number of organizations -- I'm simply asking, yes or no?

Hon Mr Hudak: Again, if the member has some information he is aware of, let me know, and I'll look into it on behalf of my ministry and staff.

My understanding is that it's not the case; we have not done that. But if there is a concern that a minister of the crown has with respect to expenses and an arm's-length agency, I think the best

way to deal with it is through the Integrity Commissioner to make sure it passes muster with respect to integrity.

I would respect the member's question a lot more if he had a particular concern -- he's down in the mud here -- to bring forward to me. I would have a lot more

respect for the individual member, before he started throwing accusations across the floor, if he would deal with one thing that is clear and evident: the $17,000 that his leader, Dalton McGuinty,

has expensed to the taxpayers of Ontario to help pay for political image consultants from the Democratic Party in the United States. I would like to have a value-for-money audit on what exactly

he's getting for that $17,000. I would respect that question a lot more if first he went after the $17,000 that is clearly on the record on the backs of taxpayers of the province of Ontario.

KIDS' FISHING DAY

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): My question is less exciting, but it is to the Minister of Natural Resources. Minister, many Ontarians, including

members of my family, have frequently taken time to experience the great features that nature has to offer in the great province of Ontario. One of these activities, of course, is fishing.

I was very pleased to be part of the third annual Kids' Fishing Day on May 31, 2003. Once again, there was a tremendous turnout and a wonderful opportunity for

everyone involved. Could you please explain to members of the House what Kids' Fishing Day is and how it benefits Ontario?

Hon Jerry J. Ouellette (Minister of Natural Resources): We appreciate the hard work from the member from Durham in bringing people out. This

was an opportunity for those that may not be as fortunate to experience fishing and get out and participate. On this day we had over 1,000 people show up. We had a number of other activities on:

Ducks Unlimited had a marsh display to show the great work of the marshes; we had a dog demonstration to show active working dogs; we had fly-tying demonstrations; we had natural heritage, along

with nature hikes and a lot of other activities.

It wasn't just that weekend. Prior to that, the first weekend in May, in the Minister of Finance's riding in Uxbridge, we had over 2,100 people show up for the

same opportunity. We had participation from the Legion, the Optimist Club, the Masons. As a matter of fact, Canadian Tire even participated in sponsoring the great event. That's over 3,000 people

in that short period of time. This is an excellent opportunity for thousands and thousands of recreational hours of fishing in the province of Ontario.

Mr O'Toole: Minister, I personally want to be on record as thanking you, because it's the enthusiasm for this activity that has made this

project so successful, and not just in my riding. Certainly when I looked at the faces of the over 500 children that day, many from my riding, the gratitude and the expressions on their faces are a

memory you should certainly be proud of. You've left that legacy and arguably given them a greater appreciation for our natural resources in this wonderful province.

I know this is but one of the programs. For those members of this House interested in listening to the ideas you have, what other programs are you undertaking,

besides an awareness of fishing? Perhaps you could share those with members of the House.

Hon Mr Ouellette: Actually, there have been a large number of opportunities. The member from Peterborough had Ducks Unlimited sponsor, with

Dan McWilliams, over 5,000 kids participating in an activity up in Peterborough in his riding.

We have Fish'n Canada, with a travelling fish pond going around to various businesses and putting it up to give new opportunities for people who haven't had

the chance in the past.

We have classroom hatchery programs, where kids actually participate, right from streams to watching the eggs hatch in aquariums in classrooms, swim up and

then get released back into the environment.

We have Healthy Waters, where we're trying to return many streams to cold or cool-water status by planting trees and stopping bank erosion and things like

that.

Through the Living Legacy program, we're creating thousands of recreational opportunities. For those who don't know it, on an annual basis with our partners,

we release over 10 million fish into the province. That's great news.

With all these opportunities, by the end of next month I expect that tens of thousands of individuals who never had the opportunity to fish before will have

that opportunity in Ontario.

MINISTER'S EXPENSES

Mr Michael Bryant (St Paul's): This question is for the government House leader.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Stop the clock for a moment; actually, I wanted to consult about something anyway.

We can start the clock. The member for St Paul's.

Mr Bryant: We have a question about your communication with the Integrity Commissioner. Last week, you said you would make that available to

the public. You've now changed your story. This is not the first time. You changed your story as to who paid for what for this particular trip, you changed your story as to what was said to a

reporter in the Globe and Mail and now you've changed your story as to whether you're going to make information available to the public. Now you won't even answer the questions.

This stock Stockwellian response of taking the Fifth is a true affront to this Legislature. Why will you not answer questions on this issue when you know very

well that your credibility and accountability are on the line? Why will you not release this letter that you said you would release last week?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): I think it's better to give it to the Integrity Commissioner so he

can do a full review and determine exactly what will and will not be released.

Mr Bryant: I think it would be better if you did what you said you would do and released the letter to the public. I think it would be better

if all members of this House were able to know that when they ask you a question, they're going to get a straight answer, not a selective answer, not a selective accounting of the facts containing

some truth but leaving a little bit out. We need to know the truth here.

You've been spending taxpayers' money, OPG money, the public's money, and the public have a right to know how you spent the people's money. Why will you not

release the letter that will make very clear that the inquiry by the Integrity Commissioner is on an extremely narrow question and your credibility and accountability are another matter that must

be answered in this House?

Hon Mr Stockwell: I think those are the very questions the Integrity Commissioner will be reporting on.

AUTISM TREATMENT

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): My question is for the Minister of Community, Family and Children's Services. I listened rather

intently to the question that was asked by the member for Nickel Belt. It pertained to particular services for autistic children over the age of six. I understand there are children under the age

of six who still do not have service, and I know that significant funds are being channelled into new programs. But I'm wondering why not every child from one to six with autism is getting

care.

Hon Brenda Elliott (Minister of Community, Family and Children's Services): I thank my colleague for the thoughtful question. We have had a

number of questions here in the House about autism, and all of them have centred around the fact that our government has been working very hard to find ways to meet the need. My colleague has asked

about children who are under the age of six.

We started this program, based on the best research advice, to give the attention to children between the ages of one and six. We were told that that's where

dollars invested and intensive behaviour intervention would be most effective. We are continually trying to do that. We now have $33 million devoted to delivering programs for those very young

children. The challenge we are having across this nation, as more and more children are being diagnosed with autism, is that we are having a tremendous amount of difficulty in finding qualified

individuals to provide the service. I want to assure my colleague that we are going to colleges, we are going to conventions and we are developing marketing activities --

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

Ms Mushinski: It's interesting that that didn't come out in the questioning earlier. Given that we know there's a great deal of emphasis on

early identification for children with autism, it would be interesting if you would tell this House how the programs funded by your ministry compare with other jurisdictions. In other words, what

are other jurisdictions doing compared to what your ministry is doing with respect to children under the age of six?

Hon Mrs Elliott: Again, we are having a terrible time in Ontario in trying to find enough qualified trainers. As this disorder is being

diagnosed in children, we're needing more and more trainers. It's a very intensive, challenging program. We are going to colleges and we are working with the Ministry of Training, Colleges and

Universities to try to find ways to bring these people to Ontario to help our children between the ages of zero and six.

Across the country, our province is definitely a leader. For instance, in British Columbia, about $3.42 million is allotted to IBI programs; in Alberta, about

$6 million; it's just starting in Newfoundland and New Brunswick; in Saskatchewan, $25,000 per child --

The Speaker: I'm afraid the minister's time is up.

HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): My question is for the Deputy Premier. Yesterday, the leader of the federal New Democratic Party, Jack

Layton --

Interjections.

Ms Churley: -- and I held a press conference with representatives from the hotel and restaurant employees' union to call once again for your

government and the federal Liberal government to act now to help laid-off workers. They've had a plan we've told you about several times now that would involve your government's topping up EI

payments during the times they are laid off or their hours are cut back while they're upgrading their skills. Minister, I'm asking you again: will you commit to this plan?

Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Deputy Premier, Minister of Education): The Minister of Municipal Affairs will respond.

Hon David Young (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): We're prepared to commit to continue to fight for and support the people of this

province. I suspect that the member opposite is aware of the fact that we did come forward last Friday to announce a compensation program for those ordinary Ontarians who committed extraordinary

acts to protect their neighbours. We came forward to protect and support those people. There are additional challenges. The member for Windsor, across the way, quite rightly says that the federal

government is missing in action in many respects. I'm hopeful that will change. I'm hopeful that before the end of this week we will see action, not words, in the way of dollars emanating from

Ottawa. I compliment the member opposite and the leader of the federal NDP for taking a stand this past weekend.

Ms Churley: I noticed when I got up and mentioned Jack Layton, the leader of the NDP, that all the provincial Liberals yelled and heckled.

That's because their federal cousins in Ottawa are on an early holiday and not doing a darn thing about this. They just took off to play golf.

Very seriously here, there are 12,000 hospitality workers laid off and 10,000 more on part-time. Minister, you're still here, at least. We're in this House. We

have been calling on you and federal government since March to work with the federal government to bring in this program. Their rent has not been paid. They're facing eviction notices. Gas and

hydro have been cut off. These are some of the most vulnerable, lowest-paid workers in Toronto and across this province. They need your help. Will you commit to topping up EI so they can get the

full salary during this terrible time for them?

Hon Mr Young: As the member opposite indicates, we haven't seen a lot of action, and more particularly, we haven't seen a lot of words

emanating from Ottawa. I am going to be meeting with the defence minister this Thursday. You asked whether or not I would work with the federal government. The answer is yes. We are prepared to

work with the federal government. Quite frankly, we've been trying to work with the federal government for an extended period of time. I wrote to the federal defence minister on April 11, I wrote

again on May 23, and I wrote again last week. On each occasion, I indicated that we, the Ernie Eves government, would continue to work for the people of this province.

I would point out that our Premier, Premier Eves, came forward at a very early stage to support those in the hospitality industry. In excess of $130 million

was committed by the province of Ontario to support that industry. There is more to be done. I'm prepared to work with you. I'm prepared to work with our colleagues in Ottawa.

PETITIONS

EDUCATION

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I have a petition that reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Conservative government has spent over $385 million to fire teachers and education workers in our public school system;

"Whereas there are 26% fewer teacher-librarians and 22% fewer physical education teachers in our schools today than there were in 1997;

"Whereas the Eves government diverted over $100 million in federal transfers for early childhood development into tax cuts for corporations and slashed all new

grants for child care spaces;

"Whereas there are almost 40,000 students with learning difficulties waiting to be assessed by a professional;

"Whereas a study by the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto says that `teachers are demoralized, student achievement has

stalled, and school and school districts report great difficulty in meeting local needs';

"We, the undersigned, call on the Eves" -- Conservative -- "government to return peace to our public school system and return $1.6 billion in essential

services that has been removed from the public education system and used to pay for misguided corporate tax cuts and partisan government advertising campaigns."

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

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the citizens of Kent county and Chatham had no direct say in the creation of the municipality of Chatham-Kent in 1997; and

"Whereas the Ontario government, by regulation and legislation, forced the amalgamation in accordance with the Meyboom report against the will of the elected

local and county officials; and

"Whereas the municipality has not delivered the promised streamlined, more efficient and accountable local government, nor the provision of improved services

at reduced costs;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, demand that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Immediately rescind the forced amalgamation order and return our local municipal government to the citizens in a two-tier model of government to be approved

by referendum by the electorate in the 2003 municipal election."

This petition is signed by literally hundreds and hundreds of persons from across the municipality of Chatham-Kent.

HIGHWAY 69

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): Another tragedy on Highway 69 last week, so it is with sadness that I read the following petition.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas modern highways are economic lifelines for the north; and

"Whereas the stretch of Highway 69 from Sudbury south to Parry Sound is a treacherous road with a trail of death and destruction; and

"Whereas the carnage on Highway 69 has been staggering; and

"Whereas the Harris-Eves government has shown gross irresponsibility in not four-laning the stretch of Highway 69 between Sudbury and Parry Sound; and

"Whereas immediate action is needed to prevent more needless loss of life; and

"Whereas it is the responsibility of a government to provide safe roads for its citizens, and the Eves government has failed to do so;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to urge the Eves government to begin construction immediately

and four-lane Highway 69 between Sudbury and Parry Sound so that the carnage on Death Road North will cease."

Of course, I affix my signature again to this petition.

HYDRO RATES

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): I have quite a number of petitions.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"The Harris-Eves government has mismanaged the electricity policy of the province of Ontario;

"Mike Brown, MPP, has been fighting for rural rate assistance;

"The Ernie Eves government forces Great Lakes Power customers to pay into a fund for rural rate assistance, and rural rate assistance would reduce the

distribution bills for customers by hundreds of dollars each year;

"Therefore I support the efforts of Mike Brown, MPP, to have rural rate assistance extended to the Great Lakes Power service area immediately."

This is signed by many of my constituents, these particular ones from Richards Landing and mostly from St Joseph Island.

SCHOOL BUS SAFETY

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas some motorists are recklessly endangering the lives of children by not obeying the highway traffic law requiring them to stop for school buses with

their warning lights activated;

"Whereas the current law has no teeth to protect the children who ride the school buses of Ontario, and who are at risk and their safety is in jeopardy;

"Whereas the current school bus law is difficult to enforce, since not only is the licence plate number required but positive identification of the driver and

vehicle as well, which makes it extremely difficult to obtain a conviction;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"That the measures contained in private member's Bill 112,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act to protect children while on school buses, presented by Pat

Hoy, MPP, Chatham-Kent Essex, be immediately enacted. Bill 112 received the unanimous all-party support of the Ontario Legislature at second reading on June 13, 2002.

"Bill 112 imposed liability on the owner of a vehicle that fails to stop for a school bus that has its overhead red signal lights flashing and....

"We ask for the support of all members of the Legislature."

HOME CARE

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This petition again concerns homemaking skills, which would be cut off in Sudbury by the CCAC due to a lack of

funding:

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

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"

(1) Provide enough resources to the Manitoulin-Sudbury Community Care Access Centre so that they can provide homemaking services; and

"

(2) Instruct Associate Minister Dan Newman to" attend a public meeting with MPP Rick Bartolucci "to hear stories about what will happen when homemaking

services are cut off."

I affix my signature to this petition, as I did last week.

SCHOOL BUS SAFETY

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): I have yet another petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas some motorists are recklessly endangering the lives of children by not obeying the highway traffic law requiring them to stop for school buses with

their warning lights activated;

"Whereas the current law has no teeth to protect the children who ride the school buses of Ontario, and who are at risk and their safety is in jeopardy;

"Whereas the current school bus law is difficult to enforce, since not only is the licence plate number required but positive identification of the driver and

vehicle as well, which makes it extremely difficult to obtain a conviction;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"That the measures contained in private member's Bill 112,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act to protect children while on school buses, presented by Pat

Hoy, MPP, Chatham-Kent Essex, be immediately enacted....

"Bill 112 imposed liability on the owner of a vehicle that fails to stop for a school bus that has its overhead red signal lights flashing and....

"We ask for the support of all members of the Legislature."

This petition is signed by persons from Acton and Rockwood, and I too have signed it.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

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

effective August 1, 2002; and

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

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

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

and

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

nursing and personal care; and

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

and

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

long-term-care residents to those in Saskatchewan in 1999" -- if you can believe it -- "and

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

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

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

support for nursing and personal care to adequate levels."

Of course, I affix my signature and give it to Timothy, our page from Don Valley East, to bring to the table.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I have a petition that is addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads as follows:

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

effective August 1, 2002; and

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

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

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

and

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

nursing and personal care; and

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

and

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

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

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

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

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

support for nursing and personal care to adequate levels."

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

EDUCATION TAX CREDIT

Mr Joseph Spina (Brampton Centre): "Whereas the province of Ontario has delayed the second phase of the equity in education tax credits for

parents who choose to send their children to independent schools; and

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

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

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

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

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

Since I am very much in agreement with this, I am pleased to sign it and clearly indicate to the Toronto Star that this is not a voucher and that's an outright

lie.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): I would ask the member for Brampton Centre to withdraw that comment.

Mr Spina: I withdraw.

HOME CARE

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

"Whereas well-managed and adequately funded home health care is a growing need in our community; and

"Whereas the provincial government has frozen community care access centre budgets, which has meant dramatic cuts to service agency funding and services to

vulnerable citizens, as well as shortened visits by front-line workers; and

"Whereas these dramatic cuts, combined with the increased complexity of care for those who do qualify for home care, has led to an impossible cost burden to

home care agencies; and

"Whereas the wages and benefits received by home care workers employed by home care agencies are well below the wages and benefits of workers doing comparable

jobs in institutional settings; and

"Whereas front-line staff are also required to subsidize the home care program in our community by being responsible for paying for their own gas and for

vehicle maintenance; and

"Whereas other CCACs and CCAC-funded agencies across the province compensate their staff between 29 cents and 42.7 cents per kilometre; and

"Whereas CCAC-funded agency staff in our own community are paid 26 cents a kilometre, with driving time considered `hours worked';

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

"To act now to increase funding to the CCAC of Kingston, Frontenac, Lennox and Addington in order for it to adequately fund service agencies so they can fairly

compensate front-line workers."

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

EDUCATION TAX CREDIT

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

riding of Durham. I have a number of petitions here.

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

independent schools; and

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

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

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

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

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

I'm pleased to advise the House that this has in fact been changed and this petition has been addressed. I'm pleased to sign this petition.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bert Johnson): I just wanted to explain to the member for Brampton Centre, I may have been in a little bit of a rush to

defend the institution that you were referring to, but I still think that it's maybe not parliamentary to use those words. It kind of leads us down a road that we don't want to go on. I may have

been a little hasty, and if I was, I wanted to apologize to the member for Brampton Centre.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

ONTARIO ENERGY BOARD

CONSUMER PROTECTION AND GOVERNANCE ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 SUR LA PROTECTION

DES CONSOMMATEURS

ET LA RÉGIE DE LA COMMISSION

DE L'ENÉRGIE DE L'ONTARIO

Mr Baird moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 23,

An Act to Amend the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998 and the Municipal Franchises Act in respect to consumer protection, the governance of the Ontario

Energy Board and other matters / Projet de loi 23, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1998 sur la Commission de l'énergie de l'Ontario et la

Loi sur les concessions municipales en ce qui a trait à

la protection des consommateurs, à la régie de la Commission de l'énergie de l'Ontario et à d'autres questions.

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Energy, Minister responsible for francophone affairs): I will indicate at the outset of my remarks that I'll be

splitting my time with the hard-working member for Scarborough East, who not only acts as the parliamentary assistant at the Ministry of Energy but is also Ontario's first commissioner of

alternative fuels, someone who is very highly regarded in the alternative energy sector in the province of Ontario for his outstanding work and leadership. He does a tremendous job.

I'm very pleased to have the chance to talk about Bill 23, which obviously seeks to overhaul and reform the Ontario Energy Board. The Premier ordered this

review last fall. He ordered a quick review and gave us 100 days to listen to what stakeholders, citizens, unions and other market participants had to say. We did that and were able to report back

to cabinet some 100 days later. We took the time to appropriately draft the legislation, table it in this House and enter into a debate.

The Ontario Energy Board's mandate has really grown so quickly, perhaps more quickly than the board could grow. This bill gives them the tools to more

effectively address the challenges that they're now facing. They used to regulate the distribution of natural gas and provide advice with respect to electricity. Now they are a comprehensive

regulator of all facets of the electricity industry, whether you're talking about transmission, distribution, retailing or even generation. They do a terrific amount of that.

The legislation that is in front of us today allows us the opportunity to really equip the board with additional powers to reform it and enable it to do its

job better. I think if all members look at it, this is not a partisan bill. It's a bill that I hope all members will look at and give consideration to supporting in this place.

The legislation that we're presenting is the result of a lot of consultation, and I'd be remiss if I didn't talk about that. We had the opportunity to get

written submissions on this issue. We invited public comment, and I had the opportunity to sit down with well over 50 individuals at round tables to personally spend some time with them and hear

what their concerns were.

We met with AMPCO, the Association of Major Power Consumers in Ontario. That's a group that provides us with a lot of good support and advice.

We also heard from the member opposite. She put a submission in, I understand.

We heard from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. Judith Andrew does a great job to forcefully bring the concerns and interests of small and

medium-sized enterprises to decision-makers on all sides of the House at Queen's Park.

We heard from the Consumers' Association of Canada.

We heard from Energy Probe and my very good friend Tom Adams.

We heard from Enersource, the old Hydro Mississauga, which is a leader in conservation.

We heard from the Industrial Gas Users Association and the Independent Power Producers' Society of Ontario. John Brace works as the president of that

organization.

We heard from Bernie Jones and others from the Ontario Energy Association.

We listened to people at the board -- staff, employees and officials -- themselves to find out what they would have to say. I had the opportunity to sit down

with Floyd Laughren, now the former chair, to get his assessment. I said, "Give the government and the Legislature your best advice and counsel on this initiative." I asked him particularly, "Are

there any anomalies, things that we can correct that would provide a smoother operation of the board?" He came forward with a number of ideas.

We met with Pollution Probe, an environmental group.

We met with Don McKinnon and Bob Menard of the Power Workers' Union. I should go out of my way to say that -- the Minister of Labour is here -- the Power

Workers' Union does an outstanding job in representing the interests of their membership. I have an open-door policy, and it has meant an incredibly productive relationship, by and large, with

those gentlemen. They're a union in the province of Ontario who want to embrace change, and have been perhaps one of the most successful unions in representing their membership to the government. I

enjoy and value the relationship that we have with them.

We heard from the Stakeholders' Alliance for Electricity Competition and Consumer Choice, headed up by David McFadden, a former member of this place, who

provided us with some useful advice. They're a group that has come together representing various interests to give ideas, suggestions and support for reforms in the energy sector.

I could go on. We got submissions from some 78 groups in Ontario. We listened to that advice and were able to come forward with a plan that I think, by and

large, has gotten overwhelming support, if you talk to folks in the energy sector and energy consumer representatives. I think it's a good bill.

The legislation before us today, Bill 23, would make the Ontario Energy Board self-financing while maintaining its status as a crown agency. This is very

similar to the reforms that were undertaken by the Ontario Securities Commission. The Ontario Securities Commission was reformed in the past number of years, and I think that has given it more

teeth and the ability to do a better job of protecting the interests of consumers in the province.

It provides for terms for initial periods, and renewals to ensure that we can get qualified members. It establishes a management committee to deal with the

day-to-day administrative duties of the board, thereby allowing the board members to focus their full attention on hearings. That's something which will be beneficial. It establishes an advisory

committee of stakeholders, industry representatives and consumers to review annually the board's performance measures. This is so important. Too often we don't look at performance measures. We can

bring that to the table, to invite stakeholders, participants themselves, consumers' groups, to give some input and advice on that.

We're establishing a regulatory calendar with a statement of priorities to increase accountability and ensure that stringent timelines are established. For

example, we know we have to give a general rate order for natural gas, whether it's to Union Gas or Enbridge. We know we're going to have to do that this year and next year. We go through a huge

amount of effort. It's important to set a timetable. The management committee could perhaps even look at two-year decisions. They deal with these things every year. There's a lot of stability in

the gas market, as far as the regulatory regime side of it. In fact, if you look at it historically, over the last 10 or 15 years under governments of all three political parties, they have, more

or less, got inflation. So that would be of assistance.

We'll allow board members to delegate some routine decision-making responsibilities to officials. This is done in just about every government ministry or

agency. For example, the registrar general doesn't have to sign every birth certificate himself, or any amendment. The Attorney General doesn't have to process every single paper before a court. As

long as there was the ability to appeal to a panel on the board, that might be able to provide some more advantageous performance for the board.

We're developing criteria for consumer protection support to ensure that consumers have input into the hearing process. That's something that's important,

particularly where the mandate of the board is there to really reflect the marketplace that doesn't exist when you have a monopoly. That's important.

We want to look at ways to harmonize the powers of the Ontario Energy Board to eliminate duplication and streamline the regulation of natural gas and

electricity. These systems evolved separately, and too often there would be one rule for natural gas and another rule for electricity. The bill allows those to be harmonized.

This is something that I think is quite important: it enhances the board's mandate with respect to communications and involving the public. The board should

have those powers and part of its fundamental mandate to get out there and explain its role to the public and consumers, so consumers would better understand what goes into a decision and what

their role can be. So I think this is an important group of reforms that will allow the board to move forward in the future and do a great job.

We've learned in the past how important sound leadership is. Floyd Laughren served with great distinction, not just in this place but at the Ontario Energy

Board. His predecessor, Marie Rounding, was appointed by the Liberals and then renewed by the New Democrats, if I'm not mistaken. I think she did an outstanding job. She's someone whom I had the

opportunity to work with as a member of the Agency Reform Commission, a commission I worked on for the better part of a year, where we looked at what we could do to reform administrative justice

and provide better results in terms of the work that our tribunals do. Of course, Hugh Macaulay was chair of the board for a number of years.

With Mr Laughren's decision to retire, I think it was tremendously important, with the importance that energy plays in our economy -- it's particularly high on

our economic and political agenda in the province. We needed someone of outstanding abilities to provide new leadership to the board, particularly in light of this reform and with the huge amount

of consultations that we began right across the province of Ontario.

Everywhere we went, people said, "Look at the reforms that the Ontario Securities Commission made." It better protects investors, whether that be the widow

with some mutual funds or stocks in her pension plan or whether it be other market participants. We looked at the huge changes that went on there.

One of the great things about having the opportunity to serve as the Minister of Energy is -- as you'll know, the Ministry of Energy is a small ministry; the

ministry's budget is approximately $20 million -- it allowed me the opportunity to have a chance to sit down and talk to a number of individuals whom I hadn't met before and say, "What qualities

and capacities do you think should be prevalent in the next chair of the energy board?" I sat down and listened. My first conversation was with Floyd Laughren, and he was able to provide some

first-hand experience. I spoke to a number of energy stakeholders here in the city of Toronto and in Ottawa and made a number of phone calls. I was able to identify an absolutely outstanding

candidate, someone whom I hadn't had the occasion to personally work with, but someone about whom everyone I talked to and whom this gentleman had worked for had something good to say.

I approached the Honourable Howard Wetston. Mr Wetston is currently completing his five-year term as vice-chair of the Ontario Securities Commission. Howard

Wetston agreed to accept the challenge and the opportunity to become the chair. I think the people of the province of Ontario are tremendously fortunate that he has taken on this challenge.

Mr Wetston has five years under his belt, helping lead the reform at the Ontario Securities Commission. He has been able to see first-hand the administration

and process side, but on the other side of the equation, he has heard cases and some pretty significant hearings with respect to issues that are before the commission.

Before taking that responsibility on, he was a Federal Court judge in Ottawa. Before that, he served as the director of the Competition Bureau for the federal

public service in Ottawa. If you do a search of his time there, he was a real advocate for consumer protection, and he did a tremendous job in the federal sphere. He did serve as a deputy counsel

to the National Energy Board in his early days of practising law.

I just think we are tremendously fortunate in the province of Ontario that this individual has agreed to be involved in public service.

Mr Wetston was called before the all-party committee of the Legislative Assembly. I'd like to quote what some of the members had to say about him. Michael

Bryant, the member for St Paul's, said, "We believe that the Honourable Mr Wetston is in fact very qualified and is best prepared to take on this challenge."

The member of this Legislature for Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke, Mr Conway, said, "I want to just briefly recommend to the committee the concurrence in support

of this nominee, who obviously comes to this responsibility with a very, very powerful and, I think, impressive resumé. I was particularly struck by his testimony here today. It is, as my

friend Bryant says, not going to be an easy job."

Mr Conway's words again: "I also want to say to Judge Wetston that I particularly like what he said about transparency, about consumer protection and about an

honest and frank recognition of a very complex set of forces that are at play on an absolutely vital public interest, especially as it relates to electricity."

I'll go on. Mr Conway said, "It's hard for me to imagine a stronger candidate than Howard Wetston, because he brings the judicial, the consumer, the OSC -- all

of that is a tremendous recommendation for this job."

I was very proud that members on both the opposition and the government sides saw fit to vote concurrence on Mr Wetston. I think he's undoubtedly one of the

most qualified candidates to ever come before that committee, certainly in my eight years. I should underline that Mr Wetston has no political background and is a public servant in the very best

tradition.

We announced these reforms, and we did receive a good amount of stakeholder support. There are a number of members from Toronto in the House today. Courtney

Pratt, of Toronto Hydro, wrote, "Congratulations on the appointment of the Honourable Howard Wetston as the new chair of the Ontario Energy Board. Mr Wetston's diverse experience in business

regulation and consumer advocacy, along with his service on the National Energy Board, will be invaluable....

"I would also like to congratulate you on your 10-point reform plan. These reforms are very progressive and they represent a positive step toward ensuring

Ontario's regulatory regime provides a fair, efficient and predictable set of rules for all market participants."

That's from the head of the publicly owned Toronto Hydro.

The Electricity Distributors Association of Ontario -- the EDA -- put out a press release: "EDA Applauds Reforms to Ontario Energy Board." Many Electricity

Distributors Association recommendations are adopted in the legislation we've presented here today.

"The Electricity Distributors Association (EDA) applauds today's announcement by energy minister John Baird in which he announced a series of reforms....

"`Today's announcement directly responds to the key recommendations made in the EDA's submission to the government consultation process on the review of the

Ontario board's mandate,' said EDA CEO Charlie Macaluso.

"The provincial government's acceptance of the EDA's recommendations affirms the EDA's belief that by working together, the regulatory framework governing

Ontario's electricity market can be dramatically improved to the benefit of consumers, shareholders and all market participants...."

Mr Macaluso goes on to say, "`We are encouraged by the government's increasing willingness to work with and respond to the recommendations of Ontario's

electricity distributors.... I would like to congratulate the Honourable Howard Wetston on his appointment as OEB chair. We welcome his appointment and will continue to work closely with government

and the OEB in ensuring that Ontario has a strong and vibrant electricity industry.'"

The Ontario Energy Association wrote: "The members of the OEA were very pleased that you `heard' and are implementing so many of the OEB reforms" that were

recommended in their submission, and they "look forward to working with" the new chair.

I look forward to hearing the NDP critic for energy, probably close to the end of the day today, because we'll be using our leadoff time.

Enersource Corp, the local distribution company in Mississauga, put out a press release in support: "Enersource Corp expressed further optimism....

"`The range of structural changes as announced today, steps to accelerate the regulatory decision making process and the appointment of a new chair with the

experience of the Honourable Howard Wetston is another signal to us that this government is open and receptive to the views of stakeholders....'" That's from Gunars Ceksters, the CEO of Enersource.

And I could go on.

It shows there was a genuine willingness to work with consumer groups, with energy stakeholders, to listen to and hear what they have to say. I know there are

a lot of others. I'm trying to think if there is anyone in the great city of Hamilton who put in a submission. I'd have to look closely, but I suspect we did get some good advice from Hamilton.

I would be remiss if I didn't wish a friend of mine in Hamilton who's running for mayor my best in his efforts. I don't agree all the time with that friend,

but I know him to be an honest, decent person, and honourable, someone who will work hard and work with people on all sides of the House. I want to wish that friend of mine in Hamilton, the member

for Hamilton West and former member for Hamilton Centre, all the very best.

This legislation we're debating today was the result of consultation, and I think that too often we neglect to give credit to the people who in a very real

sense make this happen. If I could just list the people at the Ministry of Energy who worked very hard: my very capable deputy minister, Bryne Purchase; Judy Hubert, probably the most outstanding

public servant in the Ontario public service, who joins us here today, and my good friend; Rosalyn Lawrence; Helmuth Schumann; John Lang; Betty Morgan; Sheri Bizarro; Kaili Sermat-Harding; Ted

Gruetzner; Barry Strader; George Nutter; our lawyers Susan Serena, James Rehob and Mike Lyle; Rose Norohna, Betty Arsenijevic, Elaine Gittens, Marie Cadena and Noreen Hickey, who helped with our

OEB consultations; and in addition to the great people in the minister's office: Will Stewart; Lisa Pearson; Dan Miles and Suzanne Bezuk. These people all worked tremendously hard and helped us

craft the legislation that is before us.

I would like to underline the balance we're seeking at the Ontario Energy Board. There are two fundamental things that have got to be balanced, particularly in

those areas of the board where it's the board's responsibility to substitute for a free market. We obviously can't have distribution systems for natural gas competing with one another. We couldn't

have a set of five or six sets of pipelines going up and down every street in Ontario and in industrial areas, so the nature of that distribution business is obviously a monopoly.

The board's mandate there is to act as the balance between the interests of consumers, who need to be protected in the absence of a market -- if it's another

good or service, you can choose to go across the street to someone else who sells the product or perhaps even substitute the product for a comparable one. You can't do that with respect to the

distribution of natural gas. So the board is there to act as a balance between the legitimate interests of consumers who require protection and also the legitimate interests of capital to get a

fair and reasonable return on equity. No one in this House, I think, would deny that it's a difficult balance but one that is required.

For example, I was quoting Enersource, a publicly owned company. It's owned 90% by the city of Mississauga -- that's the residents and businesses in the city

of Mississauga -- and 10% owned by Borealis, which is a pension fund of the Ontario municipal employees. It's a pension fund for those people who require a pension, and what they want is some

confidence that if they play by the market rules they'll get the return on equity that they believe they're entitled to. That's why the board has to step in and provide that type of balance. People

have to know that if they make investments in Ontario, they'll get a fair return and it won't be done based on the public outcry or the demands of big business; it'll be done based on what's

actually before them. So consumer protection and fair treatment for investment are what we seek the board to do.

I say to all members of this House, the legislation we've got in front of us today better equips the board to be able to provide protection for consumers. The

legislation before us will serve everyone. We need to have more expeditious decisions. I think it is wrong for something to take 12 to 18 months to come to a decision from its first application

before the board. We know about many of these issues years ahead of time. We're going to give the tools to the dedicated staff and team at the Ontario Energy Board that will allow them to get their

job done. Some of the timelines can be, perhaps, one of the biggest concerns there.

There was a huge amount of public concern and public interest with respect to retroactive charges. We heard those loud voices and have come forward with some

reforms that help to deal with that and address it head on. With performance measures and with an annual regulatory calendar, what we seek to do is to effectively eliminate the need for retroactive

charges. Consumers don't like them, and they don't instill confidence in the regulatory regime, which I think is important for consumers' interests and for investment in the province alike. If we

can get into a situation where we can provide a fair and expeditious hearing, together with these reforms, we will effectively eliminate the need for retroactive charges in the province. That is

something that is tremendously important.

Some people will say, "Well, you should be retroactive and go back and change things over the last 25 or 30 years." I guess what we're seeking to do with the

legislation before us is to deal in a pretty fundamental way with the challenge before us. The legislation that we're bringing forward will do just that.

I will be concluding my remarks and I'm looking forward to -- I deliberately have not talked about the new mandate for the board with respect to conservation

and alternative energy. I'll leave that to Commissioner Gilchrist to talk about and address.

I was pleased that Howard Wetston, the incoming chair of the Ontario Energy Board, has said very strongly that he wants a role in policy and that there is a

legitimate role for the regulator in that. We look forward to receiving his suggestions and his advice on these issues.

I'll turn it over to Commissioner Gilchrist, and I would be remiss if -- the more I have the opportunity to meet with stakeholders, people who are advocating

green energy and green power, windmills, solar, biomass, whether it's net metering, whether it's any range of conservation and alternative energy, they all, without a doubt, speak with great

affection for their chief advocate within the Ontario government, someone who, while he works with the Ministry of Energy, really is the czar of alternative energy and can work with natural

resources on the use of public land, with the Ministry of the Environment on those issues, with the Ministry of Finance on tax issues, and can work with my colleague, the Minister of --

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): Natural Resources.

Hon Mr Baird: -- Natural Resources, who I work very closely with on an issue in my community with the Ottawa-Carleton Wildlife Centre,

something he knows I have a tremendous concern about. I am hearing from a number of constituents who want Katie the fox returned to her owners. I've done that in a very public way, asking the

minister to give consideration to that.

But the legislation before us today will do a great job. Whether you're a young person coming out of university named Michael Lebrock, this will provide you

with better support; whether you're a small business person in Hamilton, this will provide you with better support; whether you're a big business like Stelco or Dofasco, this will help give you

greater certainty that there will be someone representing your consumer needs. When we think of consumers, we're not just thinking of residential customers; we're also thinking about industrial

customers that depend on electricity to fuel their operations. So I'm very pleased.

I would legitimately ask all members of the House to look at Mr Wetston's background, to look at the legislation before us here today. I know I've had some

quiet discussions with some of the opposition members. I would hope they would give consideration to supporting the bill. I don't think it's perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but I think

it represents a huge amount of consultation where we didn't just listen to what people said, we heard their message, and we've come forward with, I think, a very outstanding piece of legislation

and one with which I think we'll do a great benefit to working families and to enterprise in the province of Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (Mr David Christopherson): To continue the lead-off, the member for Scarborough East.

Mr Steve Gilchrist (Scarborough East): I'd like to start my comments by thanking Minister Baird for his very kind comments and congratulating

him on the content of this bill, a bill that certainly will advance consumer protection. It is long overdue in terms of updating the very structure of the OEB. I want to say further that whatever

successes we've achieved so far in advancing the cause of alternative energy and energy conservation we would not have done without the fulsome and complete support of Minister Baird and the

Premier himself, as well as the other ministers I am privileged to work with in that regard.

Today we are debating Bill 23, the Ontario Energy Board Consumer Protection and Governance Act, 2003. I think it has to be said at the outset that as important

as this bill is, it has to be seen as just one more piece in a co