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

April 7, 1994

35th Parliament, 3rd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1994 / LOI DE 1994 MODIFIANT DES LOIS EN CE QUI CONCERNE L'AIDE SOCIALE

AVIAN EMBLEM ACT, 1994 / LOI DE 1994 SUR L'EMBLÈME AVIEN

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1994 / LOI DE 1994 MODIFIANT DES LOIS EN CE QUI CONCERNE L'AIDE SOCIALE

AVIAN EMBLEM ACT, 1994 / LOI DE 1994 SUR L'EMBLÈME AVIEN

BLOORVIEW CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL

TRANSPORTATION FOR THE DISABLED

TIINA COTÉ

POLICE SERVICES

EDUCATION FINANCING

ELECTIONS IN SOUTH AFRICA

NUCLEAR SAFETY

TVONTARIO TEACHERS' AWARDS

HIGHWAY SAFETY

VISITOR

HOLOCAUST REMEMBRANCE DAY

PUBLIC SAFETY

FIRE SAFETY

HIV IN CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES

HEALTH CARE

NON-PROFIT HOUSING

TVONTARIO HEADQUARTERS

NON-PROFIT HOUSING

PENSION FUNDS

COMMUNITY COLLEGE GOVERNANCE

FARMPLUS PROGRAM

ARTS AND CULTURAL FUNDING

VISITORS

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

VIOLENCE

COLLINGWOOD GENERAL AND MARINE HOSPITAL

LAND-LEASE COMMUNITIES

ADOPTION

FIREARMS SAFETY

LANDFILL

LAND-LEASE COMMUNITIES

FIREARMS SAFETY

VIDEO GAMES

LONG-TERM CARE

TIME ALLOCATION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

The House met at 1000.

Prayers.

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1994 / LOI DE 1994 MODIFIANT DES LOIS EN CE QUI CONCERNE L'AIDE SOCIALE

Mr Carr moved second reading of Bill 144,

An Act to amend the Family Benefits Act and the General Welfare Assistance Act / Projet de loi 144, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les prestations familiales et la

Loi sur l'aide sociale générale.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): Pursuant to standing order 96(c)(i), the honourable member has 10 minutes for his presentation.

Mr Gary Carr (Oakville South): I want to take a quick moment to thank the people over at legislative research who put together this bill for me and worked very hard on it.

I'll read out the intent in the explanatory note and then I'll get into some of the details.

This bill "amends the Family Benefits Act and the General Welfare Assistance Act to provide investigators with adequate powers to obtain information relevant to determining the eligibility of persons for assistance under those acts. It allows people to provide information even if it is confidential or privileged without fear of a proceeding being launched against them, as long as they do not act maliciously or without reasonable grounds for believing that the information they give is true."

The reason this bill was put in place, and it's similar to a bill that is now in place in Quebec, was to deal with the incidence of fraud in the welfare system.

I think it's important for the members to know that in the province of Ontario today we are now spending $6.2 billion on welfare; it's projected to go to $6.4 billion. To put that into perspective, in 1990 we were spending about $2 billion.

One in nine people now in the province of Ontario is on welfare or social assistance.

That $6.2 billion that we are spending is now more than we are spending for education. To put it in perspective, we pay more money for more people to be on welfare then we do to educate our children in the province of Ontario. I say to you that no society, whether it be Ontario or any jurisdiction, will be able to survive as long as that continues.

The reason I proceeded with this particular bill was as a result of the 1992 Provincial Auditor's report, which confirmed that there are insufficient mechanisms in place within the Ontario social assistance system to bring welfare fraud and abuse under control and to recover lost welfare money. It was the auditor, in his report, who said that. During the public accounts committee hearings, the ministerial staff admitted that they have no statistical profiles on the full extent of welfare fraud or lost welfare payments.

According to the auditor, it could be as high as 10% of the $6.2 billion spent on welfare that was inappropriately allocated either through fraud, ministry error or overpayment. Some people believe it's higher. Some people believe it may be as high as 20%. Some people believe it's as low as 3%, as they do in Metro. In Halton region, the people in the social assistance office believe that welfare fraud is as high as 10%. I suspect they probably have a better handle on it than anybody else, being the people on the front lines. So when you're talking about 10% of $6.2 billion, you can see that the fraud and abuse is a substantial amount of money.

According to the auditor, no outstanding debts through overpayment or fraud were recovered by the government in a full 70% of the cases where they were reviewed. The reason given for this was because the ministry collection program relies on voluntary repayment, while legal recourse is not actively pursued. When we're talking about the dollars that we're talking about here, I firmly believe we must look at it aggressively.

In my own region of Halton, we had an individual who came and worked on looking for fraud. That individual was paid $40,000. In one year, he saved Halton region about $800,000. One man making $40,000 saved us $800,000.

When you look at the headlines -- and over the last little while I looked through some of the papers. "Welfare Fraud Deluge."

"Provincial investigators can't keep up with the flood of welfare fraud cases." This is from the Toronto Sun, February 19. "Either welfare payments" -- in 59% where they were caught -- "were cut off or the claimant was persuaded to withdraw his application.

"Despite the boost in manpower, investigators can't keep up with the fraud investigations passed over to them."

A second one in the Toronto Sun, March 9, "Second Welfare Scam Foiled." "Welfare Duo Rips Off System." "Bogus Welfare Network Busted." Page after page of clippings talking about the fraud and abuse.

I don't suspect that this government will proceed with this bill; I'm under no illusions that it will pass. But I refer to a poll that was in the Toronto Star of January 18, and in that the Gallup organization asked people what they thought about this bill. The vast majority of Canadians, in fact 71%, approve of the welfare probes. The vast majority of Canadians -- actually it was higher in Ontario; it was 71% of Canadians, and in Ontario it was 76% -- believed that the government has the right to verify information given out by people who get welfare payments.

The Gallup organization asked 1,000 adults, "Do you think the government should have the right to verify information given out by welfare recipients, or do you think that such a verification represents an invasion of privacy?"

In Ontario, 76% of the people believe that the government has the right, and that's what this bill does. Some 71% right across Canada believe that the government should be able to test the information, compared with just 24% who said they perceived the verification as a violation of a person's civil rights. Some 4% of the respondents didn't know.

This is another case of bringing a bill before the Legislature where it has broad public support in the province of Ontario. I hear the laughs on the other side. Of course, I guess they don't believe the polls. But in this case, in the province of Ontario, 76% of the people in this province believe this should be brought in. I say to the members opposite, the only poll, I guess, that'll count is a year from now when the government puts its mandate forward.

We called for, I guess a year ago, some tightening of the welfare system. In our pre-budget report, we called for some procedures put in place. My colleague from Burlington South has put forward some of our options to deal with the incidence of welfare fraud and abuse. In fact, the government just as recently as last week has started to add more people to look for fraud in welfare in the system. I think two years ago they wouldn't have done that. We are proud of being able to push this government in the right direction and I give them credit where credit's due: on occasion they do listen to us.

We've called for certain things to be done to be able to take a look at the welfare fraud and abuse because in the auditor's report, they found that the situation is that there isn't adequate verification. As all of us know, people in need of financial assistance must first meet with a case worker to complete an application form. This information is used to determine the applicant's eligibility and the amount of assistance. The case worker is required to inspect the document from the applicant for things such as birth certificate, rent receipts and so on.

The auditor found that this information on which the payments were made was not always verified, either at the time of application or during the annual updates. That's from page 37 of the 1992 auditor's report.

So this isn't me saying this about the verification process. The auditor basically said that if you go into social assistance and give them information, they don't check on it, they believe you, and as a result, we are open for fraud and abuse and it's happening.

The ironic thing about this whole situation, as we found out with the situation with this government, is there is not enough money right now in the system for the people who truly need it, for the people who are disabled through no fault of their own. Those people are suffering because people are on social assistance who should not be. I say to this government, when it came in with all its self-styled, self-serving sensitivity towards welfare recipients, you were going to help the situation and everybody was going to be able to get taken care of.

The fact is, you've had to hold the increases and one of the reasons you've had to is because there is so much fraud and abuse in the system, the people who truly want it can't get it.

I appreciate the opportunity. I hope the government members will support this piece of legislation. I'm not under any illusion they will, but I firmly believe, unless this province moves to correct the blatant abuses and fraud that are occurring in the welfare system, it will soon be without the means to preserve the social system as we know it. This will result in a tragedy for those who truly require social assistance, especially during these tough economic times. Also, I think in these tough economic times the taxpayers who are shouldering the responsibility deserve much better accountability of their tax dollars. This bill will do it and I hope the members will support it.

The Acting Speaker (Ms Margaret H. Harrington): Each party will have up to 15 minutes to debate Bill 144. Further debate?

Mr Bob Huget (Sarnia): First of all, let me say I'm pleased to have the opportunity to speak to this bill this morning. I want to let you know right from the outset that I will not be supporting this bill. I'm quite frankly confident that existing laws and procedures are adequate to ascertain and deal with eligibility or with any possible cases of fraud within the social assistance program. After reading this bill, I cannot possibly be in favour of giving such sweeping powers that would override any rights that individuals currently have in the system.

I'd like to share with the members of this House an incident that recently occurred in my community, and I want to share it with you in an attempt to help everyone understand the implications of such a bill as it relates to persons' rights.

On November 24 of last year, Lambton county council, of which my community of Sarnia is a member, passed a motion directing the social services administrator to make available to the warden of the county a complete list of the names and addresses of all recipients of general welfare. The purpose of this motion, according to some members of council, was to warn the small percentage of people abusing the system that an elected official has access to the system, that knowing this would make people think twice before defrauding the welfare system. That motion was a breach of client confidentiality and, in my opinion, a very feeble attempt to address the issue of fraud.

The reaction from recipients in my community can be clearly seen in a letter written to me from a member of the Council of Consumers. The Council of Consumers, Madam Speaker, as you will know, is the advisory group to the Minister of Community and Social Services, made up of current and previous social assistance recipients. I quote from that recent letter:

"I have a close friend who is involved in an abusive relationship. I almost had her convinced to go to the interval home. The last time I spoke to her she expressed concern that if she left, she would have to apply for welfare and didn't want to read her name on a welfare list in the paper, the post office or someplace else. I tried to assure her that such a thing would not happen. She clearly was not convinced.

"General welfare recipients are feeling very frightened and threatened and many are concerned with what will happen next. Most are too afraid to speak up for themselves for fear of bringing an investigation onto themselves."

The author of that letter feels that county council "has misused its power and must be held accountable."

Clearly, when such incidents occur, the anxiety felt by recipients shows that the action is not justified. Thankfully, the current warden, the new warden, has stated publicly that she has no intention of viewing the names. But the outgoing warden did view the names and addresses.

And what did it accomplish? Nothing. Nothing, that is, if you ignore the fact that it infringed on the rights of every person who was on that list or that it went against the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. But, to reiterate, the bottom line here is that it accomplished nothing positive.

And nothing, I'm certain, can be accomplished from this bill, unless, of course, you are comfortable with deeming social assistance recipients as second-class citizens and you are comfortable with ensuring that individuals cannot retain any privacy rights once they are on assistance.

In my constituency office, as I'm sure in many members' offices, I have heard from hundreds of people regarding social assistance. I hear complaints every day about suspected fraud, about the perception that people on welfare are lazy and about it being too easy to get on our assistance system. I strongly believe that the majority of those concerns and the majority of some of those negative perceptions can be dealt with through a massive public education system where the people of this province understand the system and understand how it works.

For instance, in Lambton county we have a full-time eligibility review officer. This officer investigates complaints about fraud under the General Welfare Assistance Act. Clearly, given this, there appears to be an adequate system in place to address the issue of fraud in my county. What could possibly be further accomplished by introducing the measures outlined in Bill 144?

As a society, we have undertaken to assist those who find they cannot support themselves. I believe we must also ensure that individuals can and do receive the respect they deserve and maintain their dignity while on assistance.

It is my opinion that this bill does nothing to ensure the rights and dignity of individuals, nor does it provide any necessary means to address fraud. In fact, what this bill proposes threatens the fundamental rights of social assistance recipients, and particularly their privacy rights.

This government has undertaken to reform our social assistance programs to ensure that the program is administered as effectively as possible. There are other areas where we have worked to alleviate the financial strain on our social services budget. For example, Jobs Ontario alone has saved $135 million from the province's welfare budget.

In closing, current legislative authorities -- for example, the onus on the client to provide any information needed to maintain eligibility, the power to cancel benefits and the powers of the criminal law system -- are more than adequate to deal with fraud in social assistance. There is no evidence that the broad powers proposed in Bill 144 are needed.

Further, there is no precedent in Ontario for this degree of power being exercised at such a low level in the daily administration of a program. It's interesting to note that in 1964, when the then Attorney General, Fred Cass, introduced the Police Amendment Act, which contained similar powers that were to be used by the police commission to address the more serious issue of organized crime, the ensuing controversy about the denial of civil rights forced the Attorney General to tender his resignation on March 23, 1964, 30 years to the day prior to the introduction of this Bill 144.

As I said in the beginning, I will not be supporting this bill. I refuse to support legislation that turns people in need into second-class citizens, that subjects people in need in this province to even more persecution and humiliation, and I will not take leadership and guidance from the third party, who now speak about New Directions, Volume Four -- the road backwards.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I would like to address the issue which is raised by this bill this morning. I think the issue is timely. I find it unfortunate these days -- well, it's not just these days; I've seen a trend since my beginning in the Legislative Assembly towards political agendas being used in this period reserved for private members' hours, the political agendas of political parties --

Interjection.

Mr Bradley: No, I say that of all parties. I've seen that happen. Mr Jackson's been here a while; he would know as well that what we've gotten away from are individual members raising things that are of particular interest within their constituencies. I accept that, because all parties have participated in that. But I lament that fact, that this private members' hour has really now become a political forum, a straight partisan political forum. Perhaps it was inevitable that that happened, but I think there are individual problems that exist in a constituency that we should be addressing ourselves to.

But this is before us and I think the member for Oakville has raised a legitimate issue, in my view, and that is the issue of fraud within a welfare system.

The Minister of Community and Social Services has indicated that he is aware that this does exist. He has indicated that he is going to hire -- I don't know how this is going to happen; I suspect that you're not going to find that they're really the kind of investigators everybody thinks they're going to be. They'll likely be people who will be bumped through the system, which has to happen within government; so you'll find that the people hired may not be the people who could best handle the job.

I believe that our goal is to try to get the assistance to those who are genuinely in need. My concern today is that it's difficult to do so. We're not in a boom economic time. We're unlikely to be back in that kind of time in the foreseeable future. Therefore, with the scarce resources that we have, I think we have to try to devote and narrow those resources to those who are genuinely in need. My concern is that the people who are genuinely in need are going to find that their level of assistance can't be as reasonable and as high as it could be because of the number of claims out there, some of which are less than legitimate.

We have to always remember that we're also in difficult economic times and that it is more difficult to find a job, particularly for younger people, naturally, but for older people who are out of the workforce who have been the victims of downsizing, for instance. The real way to solve this problem in the best of all worlds is to get people back to work, to create an atmosphere where jobs are created in this province. That would certainly be the goal I would strive for. I would hope it would be everyone's goal.

But to address the specific problem, I do want to discuss one aspect of it that I see as a real problem, and that is one I raised in the House with the minister in as moderate a manner as I could the other day; that is the issue of student welfare.

Once again, there is a legitimate program out there geared to young people who genuinely have a totally unacceptable circumstance at home. There may be continued physical abuse taking place or simply a totally chaotic situation at home. These particular young people, who want to continue their education through a program which has been established, are able to do so.

Unfortunately, a lot of abuse has crept into that program. What we're finding now, in talking to various people within the education system, is that a significant number of those students are simply not attending school, are not carrying out their responsibilities under the program.

The second problem is -- and it must be very difficult for parents who have to go through this -- that some of the kids use it as a lever against the parents. I get very concerned when I hear this. They simply don't like the rules at home, so a few of them will get together in an apartment and get the welfare. You'll get calls from the parents who are beside themselves over this, or parents may simply acquiesce, because the young people might make it so difficult at home that in fact the parents would sign and say there are irreconcilable differences.

My concern is that a legitimate program, a good program with good intentions, could be lost completely because of abuse. That's why it's important to remove the abuse. Similarly, in other forms of welfare, it is important to remove the abuse that might be taking place within the system.

At present, I don't think we have the levers to do it. Whether this bill is the answer or not is open to question. The member for Oakville obviously feels that there is a genuine need to take some pretty drastic action. A lot of people out there would agree. These are people, often the working poor, who struggle on, who don't have the benefits that go with receiving welfare. I'm talking about health care benefits and things of that nature that go along with being on social assistance. They're beside themselves when they see themselves struggling at something just over the minimum wage and find themselves helping to pay the bill for others.

There is a problem out there. I think we have to take more drastic action than we would like to solve it. This bill goes in that direction. If it could be modified, if it could be changed in certain ways -- and I'm sure the member is open to suggestions -- then we would certainly be prepared to see that happen.

It's a legitimate complaint. I think we have to address it. I know that the member for Ottawa-Rideau is going to be assisting us in that regard.

Mr Allan K. McLean (Simcoe East): I welcome this opportunity to comment briefly on the very important private member's bill brought before us today for consideration by the member for Oakville South.

Bill 144,

An Act to amend the Family Benefits Act and the General Welfare Assistance Act, provides investigators with adequate powers to obtain information relative to determining the eligibility of people for assistance. It allows people to provide information, even if it is confidential or privileged, without fear of legal action, as long as they do not act maliciously or without reasonable grounds for believing the information they give is true.

I commend my colleague the member for Oakville South, because my constituents in Simcoe East tell me they are sick and tired of people ripping off the system when they themselves are struggling to survive on smaller paycheques or on fixed incomes.

This is an important bill because the government is sitting on its hands and not dealing with important matters of concern to the people of Ontario. The government is leaving it to us, the PC caucus, to take the positive, effective and affirmative action necessary to stop the fraud and the waste. Welfare and family benefits fraud is a waste. The money is siphoned off. They steal our jobs and close our companies.

I want to make it clear that I know the majority of welfare families who receive benefits, the recipients, are truly in need. But I also know that there's always a small group of people who take advantage of and abuse our caring social assistance system. Many people in Simcoe East have told me they're shocked that over the years the overpayments to recipients of family benefits and welfare assistance in Ontario have passed the $335-million mark.

Fraud and waste account for two types of overpayment. The first are collectible overpayments resulting from delays in reporting information, non-disclosure of information or misrepresentation of facts by recipients. These overpayments, if they are discovered at all, are recovered from the recipient. The second are administrative overpayments resulting from errors on the part of the provincial, municipal or first nation governments that administer social assistance. Those overpayments are not collected but written off because the error was not the fault of the recipient.

Outstanding family benefits overpayments at the end of 1993 amounted to $247 million, while outstanding welfare payments amounted to $88 million. Write-offs totalled $5.3 million in 1993-94.

Ontario taxpayers deserve and are demanding social service, workers' compensation and health care systems that are effective and accountable. Taxpayers understand better than most the need for government to provide services in an efficient, responsible and financially sound fashion. This is not occurring in many government agencies.

In the areas of health, welfare and workers' compensation, we don't have to look very hard to see where tax dollars are being lifted straight out of our pockets. Taxpayers have been shortchanged by a welfare and family benefits system that is fostering a stay-at-home attitude, and at the same time it is being ripped off. That's according to the auditor's report. The Provincial Auditor's report is telling us exactly what's happening.

The Ministry of Community and Social Services collects only 3% of all its outstanding welfare benefits. Social assistance expenditures have more than tripled over the last five years, it is expected the province will spend more than $6.3 billion this fiscal year, compared to $930 million 10 years ago.

The government must take positive, effective affirmative action to put a stop to the fraud and waste because it syphons our money, steals our jobs and closes our companies. The government must be willing to take a new direction, and we'll not only end up having more safety, fairness and equity in Ontario; we'll also have more workplaces with more jobs and more opportunities for the people of Ontario.

In these difficult times, taxpayers want the provincial government to provide good service to those who are truly in need. The passage of Bill 144 will go a long way towards aiding the government in providing services for those who are truly in need and put a stop to fraud and waste in the system. I commend the member for Oakville South for bringing this commonsense bill to our attention and urge everyone to support it.

Mr Kimble Sutherland (Oxford): We are told and have been reminded many times about the 42 years of wonderful government under the Tories in this province. I think this bill today demonstrates how that is such a myth and not the reality.

As they constantly remind us how wonderfully things were managed, we think of our health care system, where the costs of health care went up 10% a year during the 1980s. We think of the Workers' Compensation Board, which had an unfunded liability of about $350 million at the beginning of 1980 and of course by 1990 was up to $11 billion. We think of Ontario Hydro and its significant debt. We think of the people who express concerns about our education system that is still working primarily on a system developed by the Conservative government. Then we come to the welfare system, again still on a basis of something developed by the Conservative government in 42 years.

It seems very clear to me that the health system wasn't managed, the Workers' Compensation Board wasn't managed, Hydro wasn't managed, the education system wasn't managed and the welfare system wasn't managed. Unfortunately, the Liberals had five years to deal with some of these things. We're not sure what they did in all those five years. They made some changes, but not significant changes.

Who's dealing with the health care system? We are. Who's dealing with the Workers' Compensation Board? Our government is going to take the tough decisions. Who's made the tough decisions and provided leadership at Ontario Hydro? Our government. Who's taking the leadership to put strong standards in the education system? Our government is. We are going to deal with the welfare system. Our government has dealt with that and we are going to reform that so it supports people and doesn't denigrate people, as this piece of legislation does.

It is very clear that for 42 years the Tories didn't manage any of the public services. They just let them be and thought they would take care of themselves. They need leadership. They need management. We're providing that. This bill does not.

Mrs Yvonne O'Neill (Ottawa-Rideau): I'm very pleased to participate in the debate on Bill 144, put forward by the member for Oakville South. In the letter sent to me by this member, he introduced his proposed legislation by stating that his bill would allow people to provide information even if it's confidential or privileged without fear of a proceeding being launched against them.

Bill 144, subsection 11.1(3) states that a person "may give the investigator information even if it is confidential or privileged and despite any act, regulation or other law prohibiting disclosure of the information." Wide, sweeping powers.

The member further suggests in his letter of March 31 that his proposed amendments would bring Ontario's social assistance system closer to Quebec's Boubou macoutes. Those who know and understand that system of verifying agents within Quebec are aware of painfully personal questions which are often pursued by the welfare police in that province and which are, more often than not, very intrusive and disturbing. Questions about the frequency and/or use of personal products and the contents of wrapped Christmas gifts have been cited by individuals who are under suspicion in that province.

The operative words here are "under suspicion." We are, I remind you, not speaking about questioning criminal activity. We're talking about questioning social assistance recipients. It seems unfair to me that the privileged and confidential information of those on social assistance should be viewed with less respect than the privileged and confidential information on you and I and every other member of this Legislature. This seems to be vindictiveness. It seems to be injustice against recipients of income support, many of whom are vulnerable and disabled.

Requesting, and perhaps in some cases compelling, third parties to disclose confidential and privileged information about their family members, neighbours, tenants, parishioners or friends seems to be an unconscionable invasion of privacy and personal dignity, and I think it is those things.

The essence of liberalism, even small-l liberalism, is the right of the individual to be protected against capricious actions by individuals, groups, institutions or the state. As my leader, the member for Fort William, has said, "It's not the role of government to direct and control people's lives but rather it is to create an environment in which people can solve problems for themselves."

Many, many individuals on social assistance realize they have a responsibility to contribute to the public good and they do. Some of them write letters to inform those who are less informed. I quote from one of those.

"We are not bums and freeloaders on the system, we are just human beings with feelings and souls. We are prisoners of an image created by a few who abuse the system. You are wrong about us. We need jobs."

I believe, and I'm sure others believe, that we must exercise caution, extreme caution, before we embrace the adversarial investigative procedures which assume everyone is cheating the system until they can prove otherwise. Guilty until proven innocent, in my mind, is a new level of injustice.

Bill 144 completely overlooks, or should I say ignores, those who cheat the system through such avenues as participation in the underground economy, less than accurate reporting of their income on their income tax forms and insisting on exaggerated insurance settlements or workers' compensation claims. Then, of course, we have the cross-border shopper who smuggles, sometimes on a daily basis, and those who engage in tax-evasion deals when they're renovating their homes.

Perhaps this type of cheater is considered more respectable, more sophisticated, by the member for Oakville South. Perhaps these cheaters are not considered such an easy target, for they are members of our community who have arrived, who are secure. Instead of addressing this type of cheating, the member for Oakville South, like the Treasurer, has chosen to concentrate his efforts on what he sees as the easier target, the recipient of social assistance, a person who is often, at least for a time, vulnerable and disabled.

I would like to bring to the attention of the House the efforts of many of the municipalities in this province -- some have been mentioned this morning -- which are to be commended for weeding out the abusers within their own communities. They have not requested the extraordinary powers of Bill 144, but have achieved excellent results within the existing rules and regulations.

In Halton, for example, an eligibility review officer has been working for two years on verifications in that community. After the first year, a saving in excess of $800,000 was reported and that position has been enhanced. In Thunder Bay, four existing investigators have identified 200 complaints, 50 of which have court cases pending. In the Waterloo region, 228 cases were reviewed by the region's fraud unit; of these, 48 people were convicted of fraud.

Municipalities such as these can best pursue individual cases, have access to local networks and have firsthand knowledge of the most likely points of abuse in their own communities, whether these are multiple identities or unreported income.

But we now have a contest at Queen's Park, a contest based on sweeping pronouncements rather than hard evidence, a contest where no tactics are considered out of bounds, a contest that will increase appeals to the Social Assistance Review Board, a contest that is based on confusion, a contest where the prize is unknown. Who will become the captain of the fraud squad, the minister or the member for Oakville South?

I remind the House that the minister himself has stated, as late as last week at his press conference, that he has no proof of widespread welfare abuse. What we really need is real welfare reform in this province, welfare reform that was promised by this NDP government from day one but still has not arrived. What we don't need is a new captain of the fraud squad.

Mr Ted Arnott (Wellington): I'm very pleased to follow the Liberal critic for Community and Social Services in this important debate this morning. She gave a very forthright and thoughtful speech, as she always does, but I'm left wondering again where the Liberal Party stands on this issue. Are they in favour of enhanced efforts to eliminate fraud in our social assistance system today in Ontario, or are they against enhanced efforts to eliminate fraud? Do they think that the level of fraud that's in existence today in Ontario is acceptable, or do they feel that something ought to be done about it to enhance the ability of our local social services agencies to deal with the problem?

There's no question where our party stands on this issue. We feel that the level of fraud in the welfare system today is unacceptable. We feel that the system needs to be revamped and we feel that strong efforts must be made in that direction so that public support and confidence in the welfare system can be maintained. Ultimately, we all accept the fact that there are going to be people who need our assistance, certainly people with physical disabilities who cannot physically work, as attested by a physician.

We want to support them, we want to support them compassionately and generously, but we see examples where the system is abused, and that undermines public confidence and public support in our welfare system.

Last week, I raised in the House an issue that had come to my attention where a 16-year-old girl who lives in Wellington county was living in a self-contained apartment, paying rent to her parents, and applied for social assistance to our local social services department and was refused because there was no reason to give her welfare. She immediately appealed to the Social Assistance Review Board, which is her right and I don't dispute that, but the board, without assessing the merits of the case, without contacting our local social services agency to inquire about it, instantly awarded interim assistance.

As we know, we find that the Social Assistance Review Board is notoriously slow in dealing with appeals and it takes up to 12 months.

This individual right now is receiving welfare and that is wrong. It ought to be corrected. I asked the minister to do it, but I'm not sure what he's done. I spoke to him the next day requesting that something be done, and I doubt very much that anything has been done.

In terms of what we're doing with our welfare system, we've got to look at how we can enhance our local agencies that are there on the front lines to do the job. I think this bill does that and I want to give credit to my colleague the member for Oakville South for putting this bill forward, this Bill 144, because it's a good step in the right direction.

The Acting Speaker: The member for Essex -- no, Chatham-Kent.

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington South): You've got to give more speeches in the House so we know who you are.

Mr Randy R. Hope (Chatham-Kent): Somebody must have just flushed the toilet.

What I would like to do is comment on Bill 144. In the initial comments that were made by the member for Oakville South, I'd like to indicate he referred to the auditor's report about fraud. That auditor's report was done before 1990, and it indicated very clearly, from the then Deputy Minister of Community and Social Services, Charles Pascal, a number of initiatives that we were doing to make sure that support payments, UI eligibility, CPP eligibility and other eligibilities were there for persons on social assistance entitled to those programs. There was a mechanism put in place and that has become very positive.

We're talking about the titles that were indicated in newspapers. While there are a number of newspapers where people -- I know the member from the Liberal caucus brought them up, about intrusion on women who have gone through emotional and also degrading circumstances in their homes when a review officer or any of the officers came into their homes in Quebec.

I would also like to indicate that the member for Oakville South indicated a person, who was hired at approximately $40,000, must be the new eligibility review officer, put in place to deal specifically with these cases, but that review officer is also currently working under the laws that have been provided.

We are opposed to fraud in the system, but we believe that the mechanisms provided in the legislation are adequate powers to deal with fraud as well as non-fraudulent overpayment.

As a condition of receiving benefits, social assistance clients are under an obligation both on the initial application and on an ongoing basis afterwards to supply information that is necessary to establish or maintain eligibility. It also entitles around income, about assets, and all clients are required to sign consents to release information by third parties: schools, banks and other ministries.

It is in the client's interest to obtain the appropriate information to ensure continuing eligibility. Because of the consent signed by clients, there is little difficulty in obtaining the information required from the banks or employers. One of the things that was also indicated was that there is the obligation and there are criminal fines under the Criminal Code. If the amount involves more than $1,000, the person can face up to 10 years in jail; those under $1,000 are looking at imprisonment for under two years.

The eligibility review officers that this government has put in place are dealing with the issues that the general public are talking about as fraud, and we believe we are going at it the right way by not intruding in people's lives, allowing them to have the decisions that are there as dealing with a person.

One of the things we must remember as we talk about the one point something million people on it is that we're talking about a number of children who are on social assistance and we're talking about a number of single parents, and I keep hearing "family of the 1990s." There are separations that occur and economic situations that we're in right now where people are losing their jobs, pressure is created in the homes and families disperse or split up.

We're talking about women who are out there in our communities with children, trying to provide. Some of them and probably most of them have never worked in their lives, but they are trying through initiatives like Jobs Ontario. I know in my community, and my colleague from Sarnia indicated about Jobs Ontario positively, I hear from people who want to get back to work, not be on social assistance.

What we're doing is the more positive way and we are looking at reforming this system. This system is old. But we must keep in mind the rights of the individual. My colleague indicated that back in 1964 a bill was removed and the member resigned. I believe what we're trying to do is not that approach, but a positive approach, understanding the economic situations and the situations of the families involved, with children involved, the community involved.

I believe that through our eligibility review officers and the powers that are bestowed in the current legislation, and in future improvements that we'll be making, we will allow the individuals to have dignity and return back to work and we will get our financial situations under control.

I will not be supporting Bill 144 and I ask all my colleagues not to support it because of intrusion of rights of individuals.

Mr Bernard Grandmaître (Ottawa East): I know what the member for Oakville South is trying to do, I think, but it's the wrong approach. I think what we need in the province of Ontario is welfare reform. The Tories have given up on the government. They've promised us welfare reform for a number of months now and they're acting on their own.

But I don't think we have to use these tactics to dig out the people who are abusing the system. I know that we do have fraud in the system. I don't know if I can accept the 10% mentioned by the member for Oakville, but what we need are more social workers who understand what people are going through and also welfare reform in the province of Ontario.

Mr Jackson: I am very pleased to be able to rise in the House and deal with this issue, a bill put forward by my colleague from Oakville South which deals with the very important issues of accountability and good management of taxpayers' resources in this province.

Quite frankly, I am shocked at some of the comments coming from the Liberal benches. The Liberals indicated that what we need are more social workers and that what we need is social assistance reform. It was the Liberals who invested millions and millions of dollars in a study called Transitions, which was an outstanding blueprint for reform, and then did absolutely nothing with it. What they then did was they proceeded to create some regulatory changes like no longer doing home visits and inspections, like suggesting that the system be opened up and be more accessible.

The laissez-faire attitude of Liberals and their inability to manage the system is well known. I am not surprised that the Liberals would stand in the House today and say, "We've got to hire a bunch more civil servants, but we're not going to give them the tools to do their job for the taxpayer." My colleague from Oakville South has prepared and presented a bill. It may not be a perfect bill, but it's a start. It's the first bill of its type in this province which says we had better empower our civil servants to do the job they're being asked to do, to be accountable with the moneys that are being spent, taxpayers' money, for those in need in this province.

I am also confused at the Ontario Liberal Party's condemnation of the Liberal government in Quebec which has the capacity to manage its province, because that Liberal government brought in the same legislation proposed by my colleague from Oakville South, but Liberals speaking out of both sides of their mouths is not new.

The truth of the matter is that the Liberal government of Quebec said that there's too much fraud going on in its welfare system. Their statistics prove that empowering their civil servants to raise certain questions and do certain investigations assisted them immensely.

In Quebec they did something very interesting, because unlike their Ontario counterparts, they also were compassionate with the results of their efforts. They were allowed to increase support for those in need in Quebec because they took it from those who didn't need it and were taking it illegally, improperly or because of computer errors or whatever. So at least the Quebec government under the Liberals put some of that additional money into the hands of social assistance recipients.

To listen to the NDP about management, I'm not even prepared to comment. We know they have brought in major changes to social assistance to make the system more widely used without making it equally accountable.

I want to suggest a couple of things. When this government took over, there were about 600,000 recipients on social assistance; there are now 1.2 million. Now the government is announcing that it's going to hire a whole bunch of additional civil servants to go and do the reviews that should have been done three years ago.

If you look at the average case load being taken over by a social worker in this province, it's about 300 recipients to one case worker. You cannot manage a system with that ratio. It's impossible to keep proper controls on that system. Now, at the 11th hour, by the minister's own admission, the fraud he hopes to recover is $100 million at least. He's finally admitting to that. That's the kind of money he could have been saving three years ago had he listened to Mike Harris and the Conservative caucus when we began raising the issue of a system which wasn't being managed properly.

You didn't give the civil service the tools to do its job and now you're criticizing the civil service for not having done its job. It was your government's responsibility to do it and you chose not to assume that responsibility.

I heard the government say that the current system of prosecuting fraud is working. I'll tell you a case I recently brought to the attention of the justice minister. I had a case of a social assistance recipient whose ex-husband was not making his child support payments. When that went to court, the province of Ontario wrote off $25,000 in back payments and cut a deal in court to reduce the amount of child support payments this individual would have to pay to the woman on social assistance. I took it directly to the Attorney General, who explained to me in complex terms that there's nothing very much her government could do.

The number of cases going to court in this province is minimal, because the current practice in this province is that if fraud is discovered, the simple defence is, "No one told me that if my husband returned and moved in with us, I was no longer eligible for welfare." That's what's going on.

This government is going to invest millions of dollars hiring a bunch of civil servants to get on the telephone and ask people: "Who's living with you today? Do you have any extra income? Do you have any more children?" If they get the right answers, that's the end of it.

What my colleague from Oakville South is indicating is what municipalities in this province have been telling us, that freedom of information laws, right here in the city of Toronto, are preventing the social assistance office from telephoning down the hall to ask the public utilities commission if the person who put the deposit on that apartment is the same person collecting social assistance. A simple phone call like that is against the law in this province.

In Quebec they said: "That's ludicrous. You're tying our hands. We can't do our job." There are municipalities that support this bill because in Quebec it's working. The proof of it is that we've had a huge increase of Quebec residents drawing welfare cheques in eastern Ontario as a direct result of the accountability tests that have been occurring in that province.

The bottom line is that this may not be the total solution to the problem, but we have got to provide legislation which will provide the new civil servants that this government's hiring to do these checks of welfare recipients, to allow them to ask the appropriate questions.

The Acting Speaker: Thank you. The member for Oakville South has two minutes to conclude.

Mr Carr: I appreciate all the members who participated in the debate. Very briefly, I say to the member for St Catharines, who spoke about it being political, this was not political. We don't decide what to do. I decide what I'm going to bring forward. I don't discuss it with anybody else. When I picked this position, I decided it was going to be something that I believed in, and I believe welfare fraud and abuse should be stopped in the province of Ontario. I brought it forward because Gary Carr wanted it, not because the PC Party of Ontario wanted it.

To the member for Ottawa-Rideau, the critic for Comsoc: Here you are; you talk about welfare reform. Would you people take a position on something? Would you take a position on one thing? You want all the fraud to be eliminated, but when something's brought forward to do it, you won't support it. The fraud is going to drop from the heavens and end because you say so.

The Liberal Party in this Legislature wants to eliminate fraud and abuse in the welfare system, yet they won't support anything that's brought forward. It was brought forward by a Liberal government in Quebec, just like a Liberal government in New Brunswick has had to take tough measures, because when you get in power, you have to make the tough decisions, you can't walk the fine line and sit on the fence in opposition. That's why the people of the province of Ontario are cynical, because of politicians like the member for Ottawa-Rideau.

The people out there, the abusers, are laughing at us. The abusers are laughing at us in this Legislature for not taking these messages.

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker: Order. Members come to order.

Mr Carr: The workers at the social assistance offices are frustrated that they don't have the powers to eliminate the abuse. The taxpayers are being ripped off and every member of this Legislature who doesn't support this bill is helping the taxpayers being ripped off in the province of Ontario, and it's wrong and you should all be ashamed of yourselves.

The Acting Speaker: The time for this ballot item has expired. A vote will take place at noon.

AVIAN EMBLEM ACT, 1994 / LOI DE 1994 SUR L'EMBLÈME AVIEN

Ms Murdock moved second reading of Bill 147,

An Act to designate an Avian Emblem for Ontario / Projet de loi 147, Loi désignant l'emblème avien de l'Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (Ms Margaret H. Harrington): Pursuant to standing order 96(c)(i), the member has 10 minutes for her presentation.

Ms Sharon Murdock (Sudbury): Matthew Conroy is the reason that I'm bringing forward this bill today: Matthew Conroy and about 5,196 other children in this province who made an effort to contribute to something that they wanted to see.

Matthew Conroy, in December 1987, was one of the many nine-, 10- and 11-year-olds who answered the call of Vincent Kerrio, the then Minister of Natural Resources. The ministry had put out a request:

"Ontario has an official flower" -- which is the trillium -- "an official tree" -- which is the white pine -- "and an official mineral" -- which is the amethyst -- "but there is one emblem we lack, which most other provinces have. That's an official bird.

"'I am asking youngsters aged nine to 11 to help fill that gap by participating in a contest to choose an official bird for Ontario.'" That's what the minister asked for.

"'Birds are a significant part of Ontario's natural heritage. They play an important role environmentally, and provide hours of enjoyment to people like myself, who like to watch them,' he said.

"All types of birds, such as waterfowl, songbirds, game birds and birds of prey should be considered for the emblem.

"The contest is part of the province's Wildlife '87 activities marking the 100th anniversary of the founding of Canada's first wildlife sanctuary."

That was dated December 10, 1987.

On August 23, 1988, MNR's news release under the then Liberal government state:

"The common loon was the overwhelming choice of children who entered a contest to recommend a provincial bird, Natural Resources Minister Vincent Kerrio announced today.

"More than 1,000 entries, out of a total of 5,195, suggested the loon.

"'The children have told us their preference and it's a wonderful choice,'" and I emphasize "The children have told us their preference." "'I'd like to thank all the youngsters who took the time to send in their suggestions. Judging by the interest and the effort they put into the contest, it looks like the future of our natural resources is in good hands.'"

Mr Kerrio also said that his parliamentary assistant would be introducing a private member's bill.

Matthew's eloquent explanation of the loon's unique attributes won him top honours for the contest. For the record -- I know it's in the Hansard for 1988, but I'm going to read it again for the benefit of those members present:

"Hi, my name is Matthew Conroy. I am 10 years old and I live near Lively. My dad showed me the news release about naming a provincial bird and I have a suggestion for Ontario's official bird. I think it should be the loon.

"We live on a lake and in the summer we spend time fishing and canoeing. That gives us lots of chances to hear and see loons. I love to see them when they have their little loons with them. On land, they look so funny when they walk. When we are fishing or tenting, the call of the loon makes me tingle all over.

"I looked up some interesting things about loons that would make it perfect for our official bird. It is the most ancient of Canadian birds. The loon is 'deliberately designed as a fish-catching machine,' and Ontario has lots of lakes and fish. They are a big, impressive black and white bird that almost everyone recognizes when they see it and certainly when they hear it.

"My dad says that they could be killed by acid rain since the pollution kills the fish that they eat. Maybe if we use the loon as our bird, it will help fight this pollution.

"I hope the official bird for Ontario becomes the loon."

That was written on December 29, 1987.

The media of the day, when it was announced in August 1988, made much of the selection. The choice of the loon and the selection of the winner, Matthew, were discussed by all of the leading papers, all of the dailies in the province. Of course in my area we had the Sudbury Star; the North Bay Nugget had it on the front page. The Manitoulin Expositor and the Walden Weekly, which is the paper for the Lively area, all covered Matthew's story.

But it isn't just Matthew's story; it is the story of the school children of this province feeling that choosing an avian emblem for Ontario was important enough to write in with their explanations. On Tuesday, August 23, 1988, the Minister of Natural Resources under the Liberals felt that it was an important enough decision to fly from Toronto to Sudbury to present Matthew personally with a beautiful limited-edition print by a famous artist, Michael Dumas.

Matthew also got an unexpected helicopter ride from Science North to the airport and back. But he also -- and if you remember that day, and I'm sure many of us don't because it's not, in my view, all that important -- had to compete for the front page of the Sudbury Star with Prince Andrew and Fergie's wedding, and he made it to the front page of the paper.

Matthew also thinks it's important enough that he, his mother, his father and his aunt came down from Sudbury today; they're sitting in the members' gallery. His sister --

Applause.

Ms Murdock: Wait, I'm not finished. His sister came from Guelph. They think it's an important enough thing that they should be here, so I welcome them.

Matthew Conroy represents all of the children of this beautiful province. His selection of the loon as an emblem to represent Ontario's beauty, its wilderness and its environmental fragility is today believed to be the provincial bird.

After the presentation to Matthew, the Liberals introduced first reading on May 23, 1989, and second reading came on June 15, 1989. It is now April 7, 1994, and the loon is still not the official bird of Ontario.

There has been plenty of time to offer the public the opportunity to dissent from the loon if they didn't want it. No one has. The Progressive Conservatives, in 1983, put forth an Avian Emblem Act where they wanted the blue jay, but unfortunately Prince Edward Island had already selected the blue jay so the bill did not go through, and I understand that. But there's no rational explanation as to why the loon is still not the official bird of Ontario.

The people of Ontario believe our bird is the loon. Tourists who come to our province don't even question it, because wherever they go, whatever store they enter, whatever parkland they see, the loon is prominently displayed on sweatshirts, pins and logos.

I'm not speaking today about why the loon should be the bird of Ontario. I think the loon is a given. It's, as they say in law, res ipsa loquitur. My emphasis today is that the children were asked to choose our avian emblem. They did that. Now, as teenagers, they are still waiting for it to be made official, finalized, confirmed. I think what this is saying to the children of our province who took the time to enter -- they are now sitting here wondering why the process and the system hasn't worked, why this is not the official bird.

I think that it's important for us here today, and for the rest of the people who are watching the channel, to confirm to our children in this province that what we do in this House does have relevance and is worth their time. I'm hoping that I will have the support of all the House when it comes time to vote.

Mr Alvin Curling (Scarborough North): I too want to welcome Matthew Conroy to the Legislature, and his family too. There's one lesson you must have learned, Matthew: that to have any legislation, it takes a long time. I think today what you're going to see is a very unusual situation where I think all three parties will be supporting that. I can't speak for the Conservatives, but I know of their love for nature and their love for Canada and Ontario. Naturally, we'll support this legislation, and I will be supporting this legislation.

I recall, Matthew, that in 1989 I was in the House then, and a wonderful, passionate and dedicated member of Parliament at the time, Mr Ballinger, had introduced his private member's bill and how excited he was about this. He was excited and so were many of us, because, as the member from Sudbury stated, it was the children who had participated and the children who had decided that this should be our bird, our symbol for Ontario.

I am from a riding where the beauty and the nature of the Rouge Valley have made an impression not only on Canada or on Ontario or the surrounding country but over the whole world, for us to appreciate the environment and also to appreciate the natural surroundings of what the world has to offer us, and I too have become very sensitive to that situation.

You know, when I heard about this avian emblem for Ontario, it said something more. It says to me, "Listen to the children." Of course, as the member from Sudbury stated, it was the children themselves who had said, "This is the way to go; this is the bird," and not only saying that; they put it in words.

Matthew knew that the competition he was in was extremely difficult because not only he, who had expressed so eloquently why we should have this bird and, as a matter of fact, the role that it plays in our nature, but there was a wonderful person too by the name of Erica Fowlie from Deep River, who was so inspired and so moved by the loon and the cry of the loon that a poem was written.

It was stated already in Hansard, but I will read it again because not only the written word but, I think, the sound of the word and the music within this poetry will move all of us to support this legislation and not be in any way taking partisan views of it.

The loon is my choice,

Mostly because of its voice.

He's one of Ontario's most ancient birds,

Whose wild yodelling by early explorers was heard.

His call chilled their blood in the dead of night,

But he mocked them by laughing at dawn's first light.

He's found throughout Ontario's rivers and lakes,

His black and white plumage a chequered picture he makes.

This powerful diver winters in coastal seas,

As well as the Great Lakes in Ontario, if you please.

Back home in spring comes our wandering loon,

His haunting call we'll hear very soon.

On the Canadian coin for all of us to see,

This bird I do love and is special to me.

I'm sure many have, as I have, sat on the dock or by the water of the lake and watched the loon -- this goes on -- and the symbol and the impression that it brings to us all. That bird also exemplifies how we should treat nature. By studying that bird, it tells us how sensitive and delicate nature is. But if we have no respect for the environment, eventually the death of the bird will come.

I remember too that I heard an Indian, a native person, state in a speech one day that the land is our mother and we should never in any way abuse our mother because, in itself, that's one of the worst crimes any human being could ever do. If we abuse the land and abuse the water, we abuse the bird and we abuse ourselves. That cycle of nature that this represents tells us that to be sensitive to the loon is to be sensitive to life.

I think there is no other bird, in fact, that could exemplify life and existence for all mankind, birdkind, or any nature, in itself, that this bird exemplifies in that form. It seems to me, as I started and I stated: Listen to the children. Because the fact is, we may many times in this House debate all types of legislation, and if we bring it down to the simplest form and listen to the children, they have said this bird itself is the bird of life.

Of course, as you know, it's on our coins, and on those coins sometimes we have mocked the loonie and what have you. But to go deeper, it forces us to understand what's happening. Not only in this example will we listen to the children, because they've asked that the avian emblem as the loon be recognized in Ontario, but I think there is more for us to start listening to our children. As I said, I don't want to make this political, but at times if we step back a bit for a moment in the heat of debate, in the heat of partisan interaction, there is a message that can be said by the -- I don't want to call it a simple language, but very plain language and direct language to us as adults.

This bird represents more than just being on the coin or just being mocked. It forces us to understand nature. It forces us to understand life. It forces us to come together as one. The last straw that is being put to this wonderful legislation is the support of all parties, of all individuals here, who will speak of course about the loon.

The northern people are blessed much more than, I would say, we here in the suburbs, where at times we cover the land with a lot of concrete and drive away many of nature's beautiful things to appreciate. So they themselves can listen to the loon much more than I. But again, thank the gods, whoever they are, whoever she be, that the gods have blessed Scarborough North with the Rouge Valley. At times we can hear some of those natural things, and at times, of course, we can hear the loon.

It's one of the few places, Matthew, that we can ever come to, and one day, of course, I'll invite Matthew and the Speaker, who's a lover of nature too, who will come to the Rouge Valley and not only appreciate the fact that the loon will sing to you, sir, but will sing to all of us so that we should come together, should recognize nature, appreciate nature and appreciate, all of us, that life does not only exist in human beings, but exists in the water, in the air, in the trees and all the animals and birds around us so we become one. That's the fortunate situation that I have in Scarborough North.

Even today, we appeal to the government of the day and the present government to save the Rouge Valley, to put sufficient money and funds there so that we can maintain that, so the singing of birds and the watching of the deer and the trees and the walk and the good smell of the flowers can continue for us to enjoy, not from a mind point of view but from a health point of view.

If we do pollute and destroy those natural things of life, we're destroying life as a whole. Life does not only exist with us, all-powerful man or all-powerful woman, as we destroy and cut trees and pollute the waters and pollute the air. But to pollute or destroy one or the other is to destroy life in its entirety.

So I say to the Matthews and Ericas, who have written such beautiful verse and brought to our attention to appreciate things more as we hurry through our life and getting material things, to understand the simple things of life, that life begins there and the cycle continues.

As I speak on the private member's bill, I don't speak completely for my party. But many of the members, who are now in meetings, support this legislation and want to say: "Thank you, children. Thank you all for reminding us what life is all about." So we support that.

Mr Leo Jordan (Lanark-Renfrew): I'm pleased this morning to have the opportunity to speak on the second reading of this act to designate an avian emblem for Ontario. As most of you know, this emblem we are speaking of is the Gavia immer, or common loon.

I would like at this time to also officially recognize our visitors in the gallery, especially Matthew, and say that I will be supporting this bill.

This morning, we have been given an opportunity to discuss symbolism. We are talking about the creation of an emblem of something that is above and beyond common politics, of something that represents the great province and not its politicians or its politics.

I know this government is all too happy to divert attention away from itself and on to symbols. Perhaps for their sake this is a wise use of their time in the Legislature, because if we were to discuss a bird which truly portrays the government, I think it would be more fitting to choose Daffy Duck.

But in fairness, we are talking about Ontario's symbols, which in every case are signified by a natural resource of the province. Ontario's floral emblem is the trillium. The white pine is our tree emblem, and our provincial mineral is the amethyst. By designating the loon as our wildlife official symbol, we will have a more complete representation of Ontario's many natural resources.

To put this debate in perspective, we should examine the history of efforts to designate an official bird in the province. This history takes us back to 1983, when the Conservative government of the time tried to designate the blue jay as the official bird in Ontario. This ruffled the feathers of opposition members such as the member for Renfrew North, who bitterly opposed the legislation and condemned it as a waste of time. The blue jay was never adopted by the province, and the matter of an avian emblem was not to arise again until 1987, during the Liberal administration.

Ironically, the party which had thought such issues were a waste of time spent a great deal of time and money on the designation of an avian emblem. The Liberals vigorously tackled the Ontario bird issue by spending taxpayers' loonies on a province-wide contest and public relations campaign. Despite all these efforts, Ontario is still one of the two provinces without an official bird.

In 1987, the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters made the loon its symbol. They chose the loon because it is sensitive to environmental changes and reflected the OFAH's strong commitment to conservation. That makes this bill a little ironic in that here we have these thoughts coming forward from the member for Sudbury, and at the same time the government is cutting back on funding to the conservation authorities across this great province.

The conservation authorities have offered many solutions on how to save money and still provide the necessary regulations for conservation, but they have yet to be listened to by this government. The symbol chosen by the OFAH is most fitting and true to the nature of its resource management.

The common loon is a bird which truly represents Ontario's natural heritage. As Canada's most ancient bird, the loon has been around for over 20 million years. Native Canadians have looked to the loon as a spiritual symbol. One Cree legend claims that the lonely wail of the loon is the echo of the cry of slain warriors calling back to the land of the living.

Unlike most birds, which have air-filled bones to make flight easier, the loon has solid bones that enable it to dive to depths of 30 metres to catch fish. Although the loon requires a quarter of a kilometre runway to become airborne, it can reach speeds of up to 100 kilometres an hour when it takes flight. For the most part, the loon spends its time in the water, except when nesting or migrating.

The loon's summer breeding range spans from Iceland to Greenland, Alaska, the northern US and almost all of Canada. In a geographical sense, the loon is truly a national bird.

The loon has also etched its way into the hearts and minds of all Canadians through our monetary system now that its likeness is on our $1 loonie. The loon design for the Canadian dollar was really introduced by accident when in 1987 the Royal Canadian Mint misplaced the original voyageur design which was originally chosen for the 11-sided coin.

It is no coincidence that Ontarians have traditionally chosen natural resource symbols to represent their province, for Ontario always had a vibrant resource economy, an economy which built this province and an economy which should be able to sustain this province. I would urge the government, and especially the Minister of Natural Resources, to step back and take a look at some of the policies, bills and regulations that he's been bringing through that are turning our natural resource industry away from the economic status that it once enjoyed.

Mr Len Wood (Cochrane North): I'm very pleased today to rise in support of second reading of Bill 147, the Avian Emblem Act. As we know, and has been commented here, this bill has been revived from the past government.

Back in 1987, the Minister of Natural Resources held a contest among children nine to 11. There were 5,195 entries and of these, 1,000 children suggested the loon. It was announced in April 1988 during National Wildlife Week that the loon would soon be proclaimed as the provincial bird. Matthew Conroy's elegant explanation of the loon's unique characteristics won him top honours in the contest for the best entry.

I'm sure there are some people who wonder why we would need an official bird, but as has been pointed out, we have the trillium as the official flower, the white pine as the official tree, the amethyst as the official mineral. I think Matthew Conroy says it all in his letter to the Minister of Natural Resources where he expressed the reason why he felt the loon should be recognized as the official bird. I just want to quote from his letter:

"My dad says that they" -- the loon -- "could be killed by acid rain since the pollution kills the fish they eat. Maybe if we use the loon as our bird, it will help fight this pollution."

It is true that the loon could become endangered by this type of environmental hazard. In 1972 the population was in serious decline because of the environmental problems such as caused by the use of DDT, a pesticide which has since been banned.

Another problem is the use of the motor boats on lakes. After the chicks are born, they need to be taught how to swim, and because of the wave caused by the boats some of the chicks are drowned before they are able to swim. Through public awareness, many cottagers learned of this problem and have formed cottage associations which have been able to alleviate the problem to a certain degree. Fortunately, back in 1974 there was an early spring and an increased number of chicks learned to swim before the cottagers arrived.

Although these particular instances have been addressed, for the most part the species is still on the decline because of their sensitivity to existing similar conditions due to our other harmful pesticides causing pollution in the food chain.

It's important that our children learn about Ontario's wildlife and natural resources and the contribution they make to our own personal health and welfare as well as the natural environment, the important role they play in sustaining healthy ecosystems. The more children are able to learn about our environment, the more likely they will want to protect it by using resources wisely.

I think when the children choose the loon as the provincial bird, they choose it wisely. It's an interesting bird and being part of the oldest bird family in the world, it has been around for more than 20 million years. It can fly up to 100 kilometres per hour.

Isolated lakes attract the loon. That is why Ontario's more northerly lakes are found to be sufficient habitat for them as well a sustainable breeding range. The loon spends most of its time in the water except when nesting and migrating. Nesting occurs during May, June and July.

Loons have proven to be devoted parents. One of the mates must always watch over throughout the 29-day incubation period of the eggs. After the chicks hatch, they are usually in the water swimming around within one day. They are self-sufficient by the time they are six weeks old and can migrate by 11 weeks.

The winter migration occurs in October and November. They often spend the winter travelling on the water in large groups. During this time, they head for destinations along the Atlantic coast, from Newfoundland to the Florida Keys, and along the Gulf of Mexico from Florida to Texas, along the Pacific coast from southern Alaska to California. When they return in early spring they split up into pairs. Often, there's only one nesting pair on a lake. Although the male and female partners do not always winter or migrate together, they usually return to the same nest site each year.

The loon has also been noted for its striking beauty. Male and female loons have identical and distinctive markings; adults in summer plumage have glossy black heads, black and white necklaces and chequered backs.

Many of the top 10 winners of the contest commented on these characteristics and felt that they were representational of some of Ontario's greatest strengths.

I'd like again to say that I support this bill.

Mr Allan K. McLean (Simcoe East): I welcome the opportunity to comment briefly on the private member's bill that would designate the common loon as Ontario's official provincial bird, and I commend the member for Sudbury for bringing this legislation forward.

The loon is a migratory aquatic bird found in both fresh and salt water and in colder regions of the province. Even where I live on Lake Couchiching, we see the bird quite often. The bird is a swift flyer, a strong swimmer and an adept diver. The common North American loon, or Great Northern Diver, is a black and white bird about 22 inches in length.

Designating the common loon as Ontario's official bird is an issue that the member for Sudbury wants us to debate and deal with here today. I remember back in 1983 speaking on the same issue in this Legislature. The member from Peterborough -- I believe it was the Peterborough area -- Jim Pollock, brought the resolution through to have the blue jay designated as the official bird. There are probably many other birds that people would like to designate, but the loon to me today appears to be the one that most people would like to see.

This edition of Ontario Outdoors has a beautiful picture in it of loons, and there are two full pages regarding stories about "the enchanting moonlight world of the mysterious loon."

I've been informed that loons mate for life. They raise their young, they stay together as a family and they stay together, as I said, for life. If one mate passes away and if the other one does remate, then they will mate for life again.

I see what the federation has done with regard to the emphasis that it's putting on the shirts that it sells. It was in 1987, I believe, that they adopted the loon as their official emblem. There's been a lot of excitement with regard to the emphasis on the loon. Last year there was a group of people, volunteers, who got together to organize the Orillia Waterfowl Festival. The Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters, in cooperation with the community, had a waterfowl festival in the city of Orillia on October 15, 16 and 17. In cooperation with regard to the community, the volunteers had visited other parts of the country.

The Eastern Maryland Waterfowl Festival is where Canadian artists join their counterparts from around the world to display and sell their works. The craftsmanship that goes into making and doing the art, the creative work that goes into painting the loons, the pictures of the loons with the beautiful black and white, is something to be admired.

I think it's fitting that we designate the loon as the official bird, because I remember reading when the trillium was made Ontario's official flower. Every May, if you go into the bush, and I go into the bush at the back of my farm, it is beautiful with those trilliums. I think it was fitting that happened. When we look at the many aspects of creating and designating something special, I think this is very important.

I want to just speak a little about the waterfowl festival, because it all fits in. Carvers come there from all over, from the States. It's becoming a major festival in the city. I believe that the loon stands out as the main attraction. They have arts, they have crafts, there are sculptors, carvers, artists, authors. They gather resources for local and national conservation projects.

I believe that events like the Orillia Waterfowl Festival will go a long way towards educating the public that our wetlands are a critical component of the natural environment. Wetlands are vital to Ontario's economy because they maintain and improve water quality, help control flooding, provide a habitat for fish and wildlife, and contribute substantial social and economic benefits.

I just wanted to put those comments on the record this morning because to deal with this very issue is something nice for a change. It's something that I hope will become official because then we'll be able to recognize the loon. When I look out my window on to Lake Couchiching and see them there, they are to be admired, and I compliment the individuals who are here this morning to witness this debate that's taking place. Thank you for your efforts and your letters.

Mrs Irene Mathyssen (Middlesex): I'm most pleased to participate this morning in the debate of the member for Sudbury's bill to make the loon the avian symbol of Ontario.

I think it's most appropriate to begin with sincere thanks to Matthew Conroy for his interest in the original 1987 contest and his concern for the environment. I believe that thanks must also be extended to Matthew's family. Clearly, Matthew's awareness of some of the problems faced by all the creatures of the earth, including the loon, is a result of family concern and interest.

It's very important for all of us to listen very carefully to Matthew's message and the message sent by the more than 5,000 children who responded in 1987 to the Ministry of Natural Resources contest. They want an Ontario where the lakes, rivers, air and soil are clean and able to sustain life, and they have the right to expect a healthful environment.

The loon has been described as a barometer of environmental health, and there is some evidence that its breeding success may be lessened on lakes affected by pollutants such as acid rain. Loons, like all living creatures, will be hard pressed to survive in acid-ridden lakes and chemically damaged waterways.

Ontario has the fifth-largest source of fresh water in the world. It's a tremendous resource and we're most fortunate, but with that good fortune comes tremendous responsibility.

We have an obligation, as a people, as a government, to address issues like acid rain and chemical dumping into our lakes, soil and air.

We are also obliged to make progress in the fight to end such contamination. Some of that progress includes the issuance in 1993 of clean water regulations for the petroleum and pulp and paper industries. Draft regulations for the metal mining, industrial minerals and metal castings sector were released for public review in 1993.

Finalization of all these regulations will improve the water quality of all of our lakes, reduce persistent toxic compounds by up to 90% of their 1990 levels, reduce organochlorines, a family of chlorine-based chemicals that includes known cancer-causing agents, and protect human and aquatic health, and perhaps, Matthew, helps to preserve the food supply of loons and other species dependent upon fish stocks for survival.

Another initiative that helps preserve water quality is the investment by the Ontario government to upgrade and build water and sewage treatment plants. Between 1990 and March 1993, the Ontario government invested $538.5 million to improve treatment plants, $258 million in 1993 through Jobs Ontario Capital for new construction and upgrades to treatment plants and has set aside an additional $350 million for 1994-95.

The new Ontario Clean Water Agency, and I know the Conroys are familiar with that, will help Ontarians to develop the water and sewer infrastructure we will need in the future if we are to continue to be successful in our collective efforts to eliminate and clean up existing pollution and prevent pollution in the future.

I'd like to also speak briefly to the issue of acid rain. Despite the fact that as much as 50% of the acid fallout on Ontario comes from the US, it's incumbent upon us in Ontario to do our part to reduce and eliminate acid rain if we're ever to persuade American legislators to move ahead with acid rain controls. One step in that direction was the decision in September 1992 to ban future construction of municipal solid waste incinerators. The province also placed more stringent performance requirements on existing incinerators.

The air emissions from incinerators are a potential threat to both human health and the environment. Incinerators generate a wide variety of toxic heavy metals and organic contaminants. They also emit waste gases that cause smog, global warming and acid rain. Even when equipped with the latest state-of-the-art emission controls, solid waste incinerators release a wide range of chemicals, like dioxins and furans, mercury, arsenic and cadmium. These pollutants may travel hundreds of kilometres before they drift to the ground, settling on our homes, soil, crops, farms and lakes and the wild animals and birds that depend on healthy lakes for survival.

There is still a great deal to learn with regard to the use of incinerators; the data are still largely incomplete. But we in Ontario have decided to act on the side of caution and have chosen the more prudent route that bans incineration before we create yet another environmental problem.

Finally, I'd like to remind those here today about the Environmental Bill of Rights. As you know, Mr Speaker, the Environmental Bill of Rights, proclaimed this past February, affirms that the people of Ontario have a right to a healthful environment and a responsibility, shared with government, to ensure that the inherent value of the environment is not compromised.

The bill provides Ontarians with the means to act to protect the environment through the creation of an environmental registry, increased public participation in environmental decision-making by government and improved access to the courts, including the right to sue polluters. We are very proud of this important bill of rights; it's part of an effort that must not diminish so that the loon will continue to endure, as it has for the past 200 million years.

I would like to thank Matthew Conroy and all the children who entered the Ministry of Natural Resources contest for reminding us that our obligation to the environment, to all living things and to the future is here and now. I would like to present this Environmental Bill of Rights poster to Matthew as a token of our gratitude, and I will be asking members to sign it later and to say thank you to Matthew.

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Waterloo North): I am pleased to join the discussion today to speak to

an act which would designate an avian emblem for the province that has been brought forward by the member for Sudbury. I certainly support and congratulate the member on the bill she's put forward, putting the common loon in place as the province's official bird. As has already been said, we have an official flower, we have an official tree, we have an official mineral, but there is one emblem that we presently lack, and that is an avian emblem.

The reason I'm speaking today is that I've had an opportunity now for approximately 16 years to listen to the loon each spring, each summer and each fall, and as we return each year to the north to our cottage, it is a sign of hope for us. It's also another sign, because we know that if the loon is gone from our lake, obviously the level of pollution has increased. So we are always rewarded as go back in the spring, and we always feel somewhat better once we hear that plaintive cry of the loon as it resounds across the lake during the night.

During the course of each summer, we're usually rewarded as we see the family of loons gliding across the lake and we see the babies and we see how quickly they can submerge their bodies and appear, it seems like a mile down the lake. They truly are a wonderful bird. They are a bird that seems to have gained the respect and the admiration of people throughout this province, and it certainly is a pleasure for me to be able to support the bill that has been put forward.

I know as well that the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters supports the loon, because it symbolizes for them, as it does for all of us, the Ontario wilderness. Mr Morgan had stated at one time that the loon might well be described as a barometer of environmental health, because there is evidence that breeding success may be lowered on lakes affected by acid precipitation.

Certainly, I am pleased today to have the opportunity to support the bill.

Hon Floyd Laughren (Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance): I am pleased to take

part in this debate. My memory, which isn't always the best, does serve me well in this regard, however, going back a number of years to when we thought this bill was going to be debated at an earlier time and events transpired against that happening. Nevertheless, we're here today and I'm very pleased that the debate is taking place to name the common loon as Ontario's official bird. The word "common" I think should be stricken from the description of this bird. Nevertheless, that is what it's called.

Members have referred to the contest back in 1987, when among over 5,000 entries, Matthew Conroy won the contest. It's just a coincidence -- I don't think he'd brag about this -- but he's my neighbour. I've known the Conroy family for a long time, and if I could be somewhat familiar, I'm pleased that Nels and Carol and Heather and Matthew are all here, and their Aunt Harriet as well. It really is good to have them here in the assembly this morning.

Matthew was only 10 years old when he won the contest and a student at George Vanier school in Lively, a school with which I have some familiarity as well. So it really is good to have him here.

There is complete agreement, and I very much appreciate the contribution of other members in the assembly this morning on this. People seem to understand that the loon is a symbol of Ontario. There is an appreciation of that and a very warm feeling towards the loon. It's easily recognized by most people in the province. Even if they don't know the difference between an osprey and an owl, they know a loon when they see one.

It really is a great barometer of our lakes and rivers in this province. It is a truly haunting symbol. There's a loon researcher, if you can imagine, by the name of Judith McIntyre and she said this about the loon, "The loon has been called the symbol of wilderness, the positive affirmation of wild places, wild things and wild sounds in the night." That always stayed in my head as a nice description of the loon.

I can remember, if I can be personal once again, being on a canoeing trip on Lake Killarney, at about 8 o'clock one evening in a secluded bay, with the campfire going. Out in the bay were three loons, two adults and a chick. I don't know their habits that well, but it looked to me like they were teaching the little one how to dive. The adults would scurry off to different points once the chick had dived, the chick would come up and look around to see where the adults had gone, and then they would dive down. It was a particularly precious moment.

I can tell you that I felt incredibly privileged to be sitting in that secluded bay watching this happen with the two adult loons and the chick. It was truly a beautiful, beautiful moment that has stayed with me to this day.

The popularity of the loon is evident. You can see loons not only on money but on T-shirts and mugs and posters and coasters. They're everywhere. It really is a tribute to this wonderful bird. The public support is evidenced by the Canadian Lakes Loon Survey, which is headquartered in Long Point, I believe, in Ontario. People who want more information can contact them.

In the very limited time I want, as others have done, to congratulate Matthew and his patience over these years for this moment to actually happen. I was starting to have second thoughts myself as to whether I'd have to witness this day from outside the chamber, but I'm really pleased that I'm able to be here and to be part of the debate this morning and I congratulate, particularly, Matthew.

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): I'm pleased to have the opportunity today to speak in support of Ms Murdock's bill. Being from the north and from Algoma-Manitoulin, particularly from Manitoulin Island and particularly from Mudge Bay, one of the things we look forward to every spring is that moment when northerners cease to walk on water. I know the Treasurer and I believe that we walk on water most of the year, but for about six months of the year we actually do and that's one of the things our southern people can't do.

We look forward to a number of things, and I'm glad the Treasurer is here today, because the first thing we're looking forward to on Manitoulin Island, on Mudge Bay at Kagawong, is the smelt run. I know the Treasurer will want me to bring some smelt to him, or mail him some, as I have in previous years, so that we can celebrate spring. But one of the most important moments, and seriously, one of the most fortunate things in my life and the lives of many of my constituents, and I believe all the people of Ontario, is the return of the loon in the spring.

Having the good fortune to live on Manitoulin Island, the good fortune to live in Kagawong and the good fortune to live in the north, to hear the sound of the loon in the spring, to watch the loons in front of our home, to watch them across lakes, to watch them in other wonderful parts of my riding -- Killarney, as the Treasurer has mentioned -- is something that strikes more than a small sense of the beauty of nature in the hearts of most of us in this province.

I believe that the contest initiated in 1987, one that I remember the parliamentary assistant at the time, Mr McGuigan, was very interested in, and then the next parliamentary assistant, Mr Ballinger, was tremendously interested in, is finally getting somewhere and that Matthew Conroy will be recognized as the person who has won this.

As the critic for Natural Resources in our party, I am fully cognizant of the importance of the environment, of the ecology and how the loon represents at least in some small part an achievement by the province in better water quality and better environment.

I was once at a conference where someone described water quality. The best way to determine water quality is to determine fish stocks, and certainly fish stocks are what the loon needs to survive. To see, at least in our area, more loons each year is something that I think we can take at least some small pride in in this province.

I don't want to take a long time because I don't have it, but I'm sure I want to congratulate Mr Conroy, Matthew, on his excellent suggestion and his excellent work, and indicate that we also appreciate Ms Murdock bringing this before the House this morning and our full support from this side.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I want to join in supporting this matter before the House today and I want to congratulate Matthew Conroy on being very instrumental, actually, in having this before the House. I well recall sending him a letter of congratulations in a previous incarnation for his work in this regard.

There are seldom areas where we reach a consensus. Even the Treasurer and I today would probably agree on this issue because both of us hail from -- at least, I hail from northern Ontario originally and he is now from northern Ontario. I think we recognize the significance of the loon.

My intervention today is to congratulate Matthew once again and to indicate my clear support for this.

Ms Murdock: I want to thank all of the members of the House both for their contribution and for their support. It has been 11 years since the Avian Emblem Act was first introduced. It's been six years since the contest. It's not a parochial issue, as has been made clear today in the debate. It's not exclusive to my Sudbury riding. I think it transcends all of that. It's not controversial; it is agreed upon. I think what is most significant is that it has been chosen by the children of this province.

In 1988, when Matthew received the gift from the Minister of Natural Resources of the day, he was 11 years old and about four feet, 10 inches high. Matthew, I'd like you to stand up there. You can see that he's almost six feet tall and he's now 17 years of age. I would hope that we will have passed this for third reading and made it official before Matthew is an elected person in this House, because that's what it's going to come to. So I'm hoping that everyone will be in support.

The Deputy Speaker: The time provided for private members' public business has expired.

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1994 / LOI DE 1994 MODIFIANT DES LOIS EN CE QUI CONCERNE L'AIDE SOCIALE

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): We will deal first with ballot item number 45, standing in the name of Mr Carr. If any members are opposed to a vote on this ballot item, will they please rise.

Mr Carr has moved second reading of Bill 144,

An Act to amend the Family Benefits Act and the General Welfare Assistance Act. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour of the motion will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the nays have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1203 to 1208.

The Deputy Speaker: Mr Carr has moved second reading of Bill 144,

An Act to amend the Family Benefits Act and the General Welfare Assistance Act. All those in favour of the motion will please rise and remain standing until your names are called.

Ayes

Arnott, Bradley, Brown, Carr, Cunningham, Eves, Harnick, Jackson, Johnson (Don Mills), Jordan, Kwinter, McLean, Miclash, Murdoch (Grey-Owen Sound), Poole, Runciman, Sterling, Stockwell, Tilson, Villeneuve.

The Deputy Speaker: All those opposed to the motion will please rise and remain standing until your names are called.

Nays

Akande, Beer, Carter, Charlton, Cooper, Crozier, Duignan, Fawcett, Fletcher, Frankford, Mr Grandmaître, Haeck, Hansen, Harrington, Hayes, Hope, Huget, Johnson (Prince Edward-Lennox-South Hastings), Klopp, Kormos, Laughren, MacKinnon, Malkowski, Mammoliti, Martin, Mathyssen, Mills, Morrow, Murdock (Sudbury), Murphy, O'Connor, O'Neill (Ottawa-Rideau), Owens, Rizzo, Sutherland, Waters, White, Wilson (Frontenac-Addington), Wilson (Kingston and The Islands), Wood.

The Deputy Speaker: The ayes are 20; the nays are 40. I declare the motion lost.

AVIAN EMBLEM ACT, 1994 / LOI DE 1994 SUR L'EMBLÈME AVIEN

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): We will now deal with ballot item number 46, standing in the name of Ms Murdock. If any members are opposed to a vote on this ballot item, will they please rise.

Ms Murdock has moved second reading of Bill 147,

An Act to designate an Avian Emblem for Ontario. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Pursuant to standing order 96(k), the bill is referred to the committee of the whole House.

Ms Sharon Murdock (Sudbury): Mr Speaker, I would ask for unanimous consent from all parties to order it for third reading.

Interjections: Agreed.

Mr Chris Stockwell (Etobicoke West): No.

The Deputy Speaker: It's not agreed.

All private matters and private members' business having been debated, I shall leave the chair and the House will resume at 1:30 this afternoon.

The House recessed from 1213 to 1330.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

BLOORVIEW CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL

Mrs Elinor Caplan (Oriole): During these tough economic times of fiscal renewal, it is my pleasure to stand in this House and tell the people of Ontario that Bloorview Children's Hospital, in the riding of Oriole, has been granted a three-year accreditation.

Bloorview Children's Hospital is a remarkable place, providing the highest quality of care to many very special children.

I'd like to share with you some of the comments made in that accreditation survey:

"The mission statement states, 'We are committed to providing high-quality interdisciplinary assessment, treatment and continuing care.' This is clearly reflected in the work of the interdisciplinary team and documentation of the care process.

"Board management, physicians and staff of all departments and volunteers are commended for their commitment to patient and family care and to the interdisciplinary team approach.

"On management services:

"The strategic plan is excellent and has received input from external and internal stakeholders. Mechanisms are in place to monitor progress and this is noted with approval.

"Good communication is apparent throughout the organization, as is the positive working relationship among board, management and medical staff.

"The medical staff are commended for their focus on patient care, quality of life, planning for independent living and attention to the family and patient concerns and wishes.

"All staff and volunteers 'live' the mission statement."

This is just a highlight of an excellent survey. I would like to congratulate Bloorview for the outstanding service it provides to those children who need it most.

TRANSPORTATION FOR THE DISABLED

Mr David Johnson (Don Mills): I rise to take strong exception to the comments of the member for St George-St David, who yesterday imparted erroneous information about the manufacturing design fault in Orion buses experienced in Toronto and other cities and who has also directed a personal attack on the general manager of the TTC, Mr Al Leach.

As political representatives, we have an obligation to present accurate information, but particularly, in this case, involving such a necessary service for the disabled community.

The member said that Mr Leach "has done nothing and failed to provide adequate alternative modes of transportation." False. The TTC has had parts air-freighted to Toronto; some are expected today. The TTC has increased its taxi fleet and rented every available private vehicle and taxi. Local manufacturers have been contacted and will likely supply equivalent parts.

Al Leach and many concerned and committed TTC staff recognize the seriousness of the problem, are pursuing solutions on several fronts and are targeting for a return to normal service within a week. Even today, every priority is placed on medical and employment trips so that 90% of these requests are satisfied.

This information was readily available, if only the member had contacted the general manager of the TTC. I sincerely hope the member for St George-St David did not have a political motive for his comments. If so, he does his constituents and this chamber a great disservice.

TIINA COTÉ

Mr Ron Hansen (Lincoln): I rise to pay tribute to Tiina Coté, Grimsby's 1994 Citizen of the Year. I had the pleasure of attending a banquet in her honour last night at Place Polonaise in Grimsby, sponsored by the chamber of commerce.

I knew Tiina long before her family moved to Grimsby. We were involved in many of the same activities and groups in the Welland area.

Born and raised in Welland, Tiina went on to earn a bachelor's degree in geography and urban studies from the University of Toronto.

After working in the city of Welland's planning department for a number of years, Tiina chose motherhood and family development as her next career. When she and her husband, Gerry, brought their family to Grimsby, Tiina began a concentrated and continued involvement in the community. Welland's loss is certainly Grimsby's gain.

Tiina is currently superintendent of the Sunday school at Trinity United Church and a member of the senior choir. She volunteers one day at week at her children's school as receptionist and clerk-typist.

As co-chairman of the Grimsby Concerned Citizens' Committee, Tiina has made many presentations before Grimsby and regional boards and the Ontario Municipal Board. The concerned citizens' committee has been quite a force on the political scene in Grimsby. It has sponsored many public forums for candidates in municipal, provincial and federal elections.

Tiina has also shown a strong commitment to the environment. As founder and chairman of the Friends of the Forty, she's worked hard to renew and preserve Grimsby's beautiful Forty Mile Creek. Tiina's enthusiasm for the environment has grown into the annual school children's tree planting project, a program which places thousands of seedlings in parks each year.

But above all, Tiina is a devoted wife, mother, caring friend and neighbour. She is certainly worthy of her new role as Grimsby's 1994 Citizen of the Year. Congratulations, Tiina. Your dedication to the people of Grimsby will be remembered for years to come.

POLICE SERVICES

Mr Tim Murphy (St George-St David): I rise today to discuss something I think of concern to all members, and that is the unfortunate shooting Tuesday at Just Desserts restaurant. I want first to pass on my condolences, and I'm sure those of all members, to the family and friends of Georgina Leimonis as a result of that unfortunate incident.

I think it's important for us as members also to recognize the fear that these kinds of actions are creating in our communities. We have, I think, a responsibility to respond to that fear and to the concerns about many other incidents that have created fear in our communities. In Metropolitan Toronto, for example, over the last eight or nine years there's been a threefold increase in robberies and an enormous expansion in the violence and use of weapons involved in robberies of businesses. There are home invasions that are causing concerns.

I think we have a responsibility to recognize that one of the things we can do is to enforce and reinforce efforts by police forces to do community policing. I've been working together with Inspector Ed Hegney, the head of 51 Division in my riding, to try and encourage this, but he has told me that because of cutbacks, he has been unable to support the foot patrol. There have been continuing efforts to recognize that that's the best way to police but that we have a responsibility to give support to foot patrols, because we as legislators and the public recognize that's the best way to police our communities.

I would call on the government to do what it can to support foot patrols in our communities.

EDUCATION FINANCING

Mr Allan K. McLean (Simcoe East): Hundreds of my constituents have written to express their concerns about education funding in Ontario.

The current funding formula does not provide equal access to financial resources for both the public and separate education systems. This results in separate school boards spending less on a per capita basis than their public counterparts, and they often run deficits. Prior to 1989, separate boards were forced to rely on provincial grants and residential property taxes because they did not have access to commercial and industrial assessment as a source of revenue.

The former provincial government provided for the sharing of commercial and industrial assessment between public and separate school boards based on the level of residential and farm assessment in the municipality.

The pooling of commercial and industrial assessment was phased in beginning in 1990, but the separate system will not have full access to commercial and industrial assessment until 1995. Separate school supporters are not satisfied with this system because they want the pooled funds distributed on the basis of enrolment, and not residential and farm assessment.

Hundreds of my constituents in Simcoe East want the government to introduce legislation to establish a provincial property tax on commercial and industrial assessment. This revenue would then be distributed equally to all boards. They want this legislation introduced soon to give us appropriate time to study it carefully to ensure it results in equal funding throughout Ontario's education system. I have met with Steve Hinton of the Simcoe County Separate School Board over this very issue.

ELECTIONS IN SOUTH AFRICA

Ms Jenny Carter (Peterborough): I want to express in this assembly the best wishes of the people of Peterborough for a fair and democratic outcome to the elections which will take place in South Africa on April 27. We hope these elections will prove to be the beginning of an equitable, non-violent, non-racist society for all.

On Tuesday, April 5, a send-off was held at the Peterborough Public Library for Linda Slavin, executive director of the Kawartha World Issues Centre. Linda was one of a group selected by Oxfam Canada to monitor the election.

Linda will fly to Johannesburg tomorrow and will be based in or near Durban. She takes with her many local messages of support for citizens of South Africa, including drawings from children and group messages from churches, school classes and businesses. I am proud of Linda and of the many people in the Peterborough community who have been involved.

Our thoughts and our hearts will be with Linda and the people of South Africa on April 27. Changes will take time, but there is now hope for true multiracial democracy and the benefits which democracy should bring to all. May there be no more violence.

NUCLEAR SAFETY

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex South): My statement is with regard to the ongoing health and safety concerns at the Fermi II nuclear plant located in Monroe, Michigan, only 15 kilometres from the southwest border of Essex county and the town of Amherstburg.

On Christmas Day 1993, a fire broke out as a result of a mishap in the plant, causing the plant to be flooded with radioactive water. That water was subsequently discharged into Lake Erie in four separate batches, the most recent occurring only last Thursday.

Although the radioactivity found in the water is within present government standards in both the USA and Canada, there is a concern that the contents can be lethal, even in the smallest doses. In fact, a recent report of the International Joint Commission recommended that in light of recent evidence, governments move towards a policy that will enforce zero discharge of hazardous materials.

Because of these concerns, a local citizens' group, known as the Essex County Citizens Against Fermi II, held a public meeting a week ago Wednesday in order to increase public pressure on all governments so that action can be taken to prevent future situations that threaten our health and safety.

While it is true that this is an international matter and that our federal government is continuing to monitor the situation, I urge the Minister of Environment and Energy to become involved in this issue by assisting in the process of gathering the necessary authorities together in an attempt to resolve not only the Fermi II situation but also our larger concerns: the broader health, safety, environmental and commercial fishing issues in the region.

TVONTARIO TEACHERS' AWARDS

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Waterloo North): This June, TVOntario, in conjunction with the Ontario Teachers' Federation, will be honouring two teachers with the TVOntario teachers' award. The winners will have demonstrated excellence and outstanding achievement in their profession.

These awards bring prestige and recognition to the winners, their schools and their communities. They highlight the innovative and outstanding work that is happening in classrooms around Ontario.

Last year, Yvonne Day of my constituency was honoured for her contribution to elementary education. Kevin Hotten of North Bay was the winner in the secondary school category.

Mrs Day pioneered MICOT, the Media Integrated Classroom of Technology, at St Teresa of Avila School in Elmira. She brought together computers, video cameras, tape recorders, CD players and robots to enhance group work. Students also performed research in language arts, machines and structures, and mathematics.

I am sure that Mrs Day found the experience of developing MICOT and witnessing her students learning from it to be very fulfilling. To be honoured by your peers for your work is a double bonus.

TVOntario and the Ontario Teachers' Federation will be receiving nominations for the 1994 award until April 15. I urge all members of this House to encourage their constituents to consider outstanding candidates in their communities for this award.

HIGHWAY SAFETY

Mr Donald Abel (Wentworth North): Volunteers with the Trauma Prevention Council of Hamilton-Wentworth want Highway 6 to lose its reputation as a killer highway. The council has targeted the stretch of road through Flamborough, between Highways 403 and 401, to launch Safe on 6, a community safety program to make Highway 6 a model of driving safety. Program organizer Penelope Hill and a group of volunteers will be working to change drivers' attitudes and behaviour on the road.

Statistics have shown that every year there are about 200 crashes on the highway, many of which result in serious injuries or death. Most of those killed are between the ages of 17 and 40.

Although the Ministry of Transportation is working diligently to improve conditions on Highway 6, Hill and other volunteers will work to change the attitudes of drivers on the killer highway. Hill claims that the highway can be difficult to manoeuvre but, basically, the accidents have been a result of driver error. Speeding has been the number one cause of fatal accidents on the highway in the past five years. Other factors included disobeying stop signs, driving while intoxicated, following too closely and driving with no strategy to avoid accidents.

Penelope Hill and the other volunteers are to be commended on their efforts to make Highway 6 a model of driving safety.

VISITOR

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): I invite all members to join me in welcoming to our chamber this afternoon and seated in the members' gallery west Mr Janko Peric, member of Parliament for Cambridge, Ontario. Welcome.

Mr Charles Harnick (Willowdale): I would like to ask for unanimous consent so that I can provide some remarks regarding Holocaust Remembrance Day.

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous consent? Agreed.

HOLOCAUST REMEMBRANCE DAY

Mr Charles Harnick (Willowdale): Thank you, Mr Speaker and members of the Legislature, for permitting me to make a few remarks about Holocaust Remembrance Day.

Tonight at sundown, candles will be lit by Jewish families around the world to mark the remembrance of the six million Jews systematically murdered by Nazis during the Second World War.

In the visitors' gallery today, I would like to acknowledge the presence of several extraordinary individuals, individuals who were survivors of the Holocaust, individuals who were partisans during the Holocaust and an individual representing the Righteous Among Nations.

I would like members of the Legislature to welcome, and if they could please stand: Mr Herman Gottesman, Mr Henry Zagdanski, Cantor Louis Danto, Mr Adam Fuerstenberg, Mr Max Guttman, Mrs Eva Kerenyi, Mr Noah Norman Shneidman, Mrs Maria Son, Dr Norbert A. Kerenyi.

I would also like to acknowledge Mrs Joyce Miedema, who received a medal today on behalf of her husband, Pieter, for being among the Righteous Among Nations.

Welcome, honoured guests, to the Ontario Legislature.

I would also like to acknowledge the presence of my very good friend who is also seated in the visitors' gallery, the Consul General of Israel, Mr Dror Zeigerman.

I would also like to acknowledge the presence of Dr Joel Dimitry, national chairman of the Canadian Society for Yad Vashem and the co-chair, Mrs Miriam Gelbloom.

In this year there has been a remarkable occurrence in so far as knowledge being conveyed to people about the Holocaust. I'm sure that most members of this Legislature, if not all, have had the opportunity to see a film by the name of Schindler's List. As a result of this remarkable film, more people have been given somewhat of an education about the Holocaust than anyone really imagined was possible.

I would like to think that this is the beginning of an educational process that we in Ontario will recognize, and recognize with vigour. I would hope that this educational process will continue as part of the regular curriculum in every school in this province. I would hope that we can do this without any further delay, because the number of survivors of the Holocaust dwindles with every passing year. I think it's incumbent upon us to seek the survivors so that they can tell their story, because it's a real story.

Fifty years ago the liberation began, and through the gates of camps, returning to familiar landscapes, lonely, emaciated survivors went back home. The roads were bombed, the earth was scorched and the skies were covered with smoke. When the survivors reached home, they generally discovered that their last hopes were false and that all other members of their families were dead. Strangers now lived in their homes and the townspeople wished that the survivors had not returned.

With great difficulty and tremendous adversity, many survivors settled in Israel and became a major force in rebuilding a new state. Others came to North America, built new lives and became an inspiration to those who were spared the agonies of the Holocaust. I am one of those who has been so inspired, and I suspect I can speak for everyone in this Legislature and say that they too have been inspired as leaders in the province of Ontario to go back to their communities and ensure that we will never forget.

I'd like to conclude my brief remarks with a quotation from the rabbi of Bluzhou, Rabbi Israel Spira, a Holocaust survivor. In his teachings, he stated, "Every day, every child, after studying the daily lessons prescribed by our sages, should learn about the Holocaust, for it says in our holy Torah, 'Then it shall come to pass, when many evils and troubles are come upon them, that this song shall testify before them as a witness.'" It's from Deuteronomy, verse 31, line 21.

The sufferings and the testimonies when told by Holocaust survivors are a song, a hymn of praise, a testimony to the eternity of the Jewish people and the greatness of their spirit.

Hon Elaine Ziemba (Minister of Citizenship and Minister Responsible for Human Rights and Race Relations): On behalf of the government of Ontario and the Premier of Ontario, Bob Rae, I too wish to commemorate this very significant day, Yom Hashoah, Holocaust Remembrance Day.

On this very important and significant day, it is important for all of us to remember the events that took place in Europe during the Second World War. Fifty-one years ago, on April 19, 1943, the Jews of the Warsaw ghetto took a heroic stand. Sick, starving, with no resources, quite debilitated and against all odds, they rose up against the Nazis in a struggle that would last 42 days. For any group to have resisted such a force, and for so long, speaks well of the human spirit. It is even more powerful when one remembers their condition. Many of them, some as young as 11 or 12 years old, joined the partisans who were fighting the Nazi oppressors.

During the Second World War, over 50 years ago, six million Jews were sent to gas chambers and other forms of death simply because they were Jewish. They became the victims of a regime that hated them, that abused them and that displa