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

April 28, 2005

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2005-Apr-28 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Thursday 28 April 2005 Jeudi 28 avril 2005

PRIVATE MEMBERS'

PUBLIC BUSINESS

EASTERN ONTARIO ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT FUND ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR LE FONDS DE

DÉVELOPPEMENT ÉCONOMIQUE DE

L'EST DE L'ONTARIO

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(SCHOOL CROSSING GUARDS), 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LE CODE

DE LA ROUTE (PASSEURS SCOLAIRES)

EASTERN ONTARIO ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT FUND ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR LE FONDS DE

DÉVELOPPEMENT ÉCONOMIQUE DE

L'EST DE L'ONTARIO

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(SCHOOL CROSSING GUARDS), 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LE CODE

DE LA ROUTE (PASSEURS SCOLAIRES)

WEARING OF RIBBONS

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

CANADA-ONTARIO MUNICIPAL RURAL

INFRASTRUCTURE FUND

EARTH DAY

UKRAINIAN EASTER

MICHELLE AND BRETT QUANCE

COMMUNITY LIVING OAKVILLE

KINGSTON ART DISPLAY

EASTERN ONTARIO

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES

STUDENT LEADERS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

BREAST IMPLANT REGISTRY ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR LE REGISTRE

DES IMPLANTS MAMMAIRES

PAYDAY LOANS ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR LES PRÊTS

SUR SALAIRE

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

DEFERRED VOTES

MANDATORY GUNSHOT WOUNDS

REPORTING ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR LA DÉCLARATION

OBLIGATOIRE DES BLESSURES

PAR BALLE

DAY OF MOURNING /

JOUR DE DEUIL

ORAL QUESTIONS

MUNICIPAL FINANCES

GREENBELT

CHILD CARE

PROVINCIAL REVENUE

GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING

EMPLOYMENT SUPPORTS

HIGHWAY 417

SCHOOL CLOSURES

GROWTH PLANNING

FABRY DISEASE

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

IDENTITY THEFT

EASTERN ONTARIO

PETITIONS

PROPERTY TAXATION

ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION

EDUCATION FUNDING

HALTON RECYCLING PLANT

CREDIT VALLEY HOSPITAL

JUSTICE SYSTEM

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

ORDERS OF THE DAY

PRIVATE SECURITY AND

INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR LES SERVICES PRIVÉS

DE SÉCURITÉ ET D'ENQUÊTE

The House met at 1000.

Prayers.

PRIVATE MEMBERS'

PUBLIC BUSINESS

EASTERN ONTARIO ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT FUND ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR LE FONDS DE

DÉVELOPPEMENT ÉCONOMIQUE DE

L'EST DE L'ONTARIO

Mr. Sterling moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 187,

An Act to establish the Eastern Ontario Economic Development Fund Corporation / Projet de loi 187, Loi créant la Société de gestion

du Fonds de développement économique de l'Est de l'Ontario.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Pursuant to standing order 96, Mr. Sterling, you have up to 10 minutes.

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): This bill tries to establish an economic development fund for eastern Ontario, eastern Ontario being

defined as all of that area east of the region of Durham, roughly speaking, all the way to the Quebec border, save and except for the city of Ottawa; it cuts out the city of Ottawa. I will explain

to members and to the public why that is necessary to do. The fact of the matter is that the city of Ottawa, which contains half of my riding, has done quite well over the last two decades, since I

started representing that area, while the rest of eastern Ontario has not benefited from the growth our economy has seen and has some unique characteristics that are very similar to northern

Ontario.

This fund would be created like the northern Ontario heritage fund, which we established by legislation in this Legislature some time ago. The northern Ontario

heritage fund has about $60 million per year to spend in northern Ontario to help municipalities' economic development through direct grants to new businesses that might go into northern Ontario.

It helps business associations establish economic opportunity in their area. The ambit of the northern Ontario heritage fund and that of the eastern Ontario economic development fund would be

similar in that it would have quite a wide scope in terms of what it could do for this very unique part of Ontario.

This part of Ontario, which I have driven through, back and forth, along Highway 7 from Ottawa to Toronto on many, many occasions, comprises what I would

describe as probably some of the most scenic, most beautiful country in Ontario, but it's also very, very harsh. It's the Precambrian Shield, which sort of wraps from the south of Ottawa all the

way around, through Peterborough and of course up north.

It's very difficult in these areas to provide some of the infrastructure we need for our population. The areas cover a population of approximately 900,000

people, very similar to population numbers to the north, which has about 850,000 people.

Two organizations have risen out of the eastern Ontario community, and both organizations have expressed support for this bill even though they did not know

about it until two weeks ago. I refer to the Municipalities United for a New Deal, which includes the cities of Peterborough, Prince Edward, Belleville, Quinte West, Kingston, Brockville, Pembroke

and Cornwall. I have received an endorsement of this legislation from the mayors of the two largest municipalities, Kingston and Peterborough. There is another organization called the Eastern

Ontario Wardens Caucus, which I would characterize as representing the smaller towns and rural areas of eastern Ontario encompassed by the scope and breadth of this bill.

We all know, and I want to try to illustrate, the problems this kind of fund may address. Last Thursday night I was in the town of Lanark, which is about 20

kilometres from the town of Perth. This is a small town of about 450 homes. They don't have sewer and water in that area. I believe there is a significant health risk to the residents there. They

should have had sewer and water 20 or 30 years ago, but for some reason, as we went down the path, it never happened. It never happened primarily because there was never enough wealth in the

community to make it happen, and they face the same problem today as they did then. A new system would cost about $18 million to put in, and even if they were lucky enough to get, under the new

federal-provincial program -- I believe it's COMRIF. That program provides one third federal funding, one third provincial funding, and it is expected that one third would be raised locally.

In my example, it would mean that each household would be required to come up with about $15,000; that would be the capital cost of putting this system forward.

It would probably end up even higher than that when you look at the difficult topography of that town. The Clyde River runs through it, so there are significant problems in crossing that river and

dealing with people and homes on both sides. But the town can't go forward in terms of economic development until this problem is solved. It can't attract a new restaurant, it can't attract new

industry, because who is going to come to a town where there is not safe drinking water and sewage disposal services? If it costs $15,000 per home -- and you're talking about family incomes that

are about 40% less than the average in Ontario -- how are these people going to pay for this very large ticket? They are surviving hand to mouth in terms of what they are trying to do on a daily

basis. To go in with a program like COMRIF and say to the town of Lanark, "Come up with a third" -- it's an impossible task. We need some kind of mechanism in government to help small towns like

Lanark be able to go forward and get the necessary services their residents need to have safe drinking water and adequate sewage capacity.

I note, in some of the examples on the Web site with regard to the northern heritage fund, that grants have been given, for instance, to North Bay, $2 million

for a waterfront development project, and to West Nipissing, $186,000 for water treatment plants. There are many, many other examples of where there was an extra top-up given to these particular

municipalities to try to meet some of the regulations and standards that we require of these people.

As well, eastern Ontario has received about 40% of former provincial highways in the readjustment of that particular responsibility, and that has fallen, to a

great degree, on rural municipalities. We can argue here about whether that should or should not have been done, but that's the way it is at the present time, so these particular areas are

wrestling with it.

These communities are characterized by low commercial and industrial tax bases. They are characterized by average incomes, both household and individual, of 15%

to 20% below the Ontario average. They are characterized by a much larger aging population than the Ontario average of 12%. In some of these communities, 20% or 25% of the community are old-age

pensioners and that kind of thing, and are living on small fixed incomes.

As well, the infrastructure in these areas has been aging and much of it needs repair. This area is characterized as well by a lot of crown land where there is

no tax assessment or any kind of income coming back. Hydro corridors don't receive the same kind of treatment as they do near urban areas. The tax revenue that local municipalities get from these

particular areas is much smaller than it is near urban areas because of its characterization as an easement rather than ownership. We go on with a whole number of other new challenges they have

with regard to regulations under the environment: septage, waste, and it goes on.

These communities really need some extra help, and this gives the government a great opportunity to provide that help. Thank you very much.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate?

Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): I'll be supporting my colleague from Lanark-Carleton's bill, Bill 187, the establishment of the Eastern Ontario

Economic Development Fund Corp.

I want to acknowledge this morning Helen Chong, who did a lot of background research for me to prepare to make a few remarks on the issue. Some history is

interesting.

The Eastern Ontario Development Corp. was established in 1973 by the government of Ontario to provide financial and advisory services to business to stimulate

growth, economic development and employment opportunities in eastern Ontario. The original mandate for the EODC was to serve the counties of Victoria, Haliburton, Peterborough, Hastings, Prince

Edward, Renfrew, Lennox and Addington, Frontenac, Lanark, Leeds, Russell, Stormont, Prescott, Glengarry and the regional municipality of Ottawa-Carleton.

I went back to review a document produced by the Honourable Claude Bennett, a former colleague of the member from Lanark-Carleton back in 1975. In his document,

Mr. Bennett clearly identified what the EODC was to do. Its first mandate was to provide incentive loans and term loans to prospective businesses in eastern Ontario. Its second mandate was to

provide loans specifically to small business, to start their activity in eastern Ontario. The third was to provide venture capital for new ideas, for those business people who wanted to establish

in eastern Ontario, to give them a leg up. Another one that was identified, and certainly what the member from Lanark-Carleton identified, was that they also provided loans for pollution control

equipment -- for those municipalities that had low assessment bases, an opportunity to upgrade their facilities. EODC would provide to its municipal partners loans for pollution control equipment.

Also, something that's so important to eastern Ontario, they provided tourism industry loans for new resort facilities, cottage development and others in the heart of eastern Ontario. It also

provided mortgages and leasebacks to new manufacturers that were being established in eastern Ontario. Mr. Bennett, the minister of the day, provided what I thought was a very comprehensive mandate

to support those businesses in east-central Ontario.

I was concerned that in 1996, the minister of the day, the Honourable William Saunderson, wound down the activities of the Eastern Ontario Development Corp. at a

time when the free trade agreement was coming into its era of great expansion, when the Governor of New York state, George Pataki, was bringing in a very aggressive bonusing system in New York

state to allow industries in that particular state to defer property taxation for many years in order to attract business. When you look at the activities of the EODC, to have it wound down in 1996

I think was a strategic mistake. I'm pleased that we're here today to have the opportunity to discuss it.

When you look over the briefing material that was provided, I say to my good friend from Haliburton-Victoria-Brock, I notice that Sir Sam's Inn, back in the

early 1990s, was a recipient of EODC money to expand development. To my good friend from Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke, in 1991 there was an EODC loan to a company in Pembroke that manufactured

cooling suits for American Armed Forces personnel serving in the Persian Gulf at that time. The EODC has a long history of providing innovative support to manufacturers in eastern Ontario, and I'm

very pleased, as the member from Peterborough, to support Bill 187.

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): I'm pleased to rise in support of the bill brought forward by my colleague the member from

Lanark-Carleton. The bill would provide a means for the government to address the economic disparity that exists between eastern Ontario and much of the remainder of the province. Northern Ontario

has benefited from this type of economic support for years.

The bill would establish the Eastern Ontario Economic Development Fund Corp., and that fund would be able to maintain the eastern Ontario economic development

monies. The money in the fund would promote economic development growth in rural areas and in smaller urban municipalities in eastern Ontario. My riding of Haliburton-Victoria-Brock is

predominantly rural, and we have many small municipalities that could benefit from the provided support of the eastern Ontario economic development fund. Eastern Ontario lags behind the rest of

Ontario in population growth and in income, and that was well articulated by the member introducing the bill today. Northern Ontario lags behind the rest of Ontario, and they have had the Northern

Ontario Heritage Fund Act fund set up there.

One of the areas in my riding most in need is Haliburton county. I've mentioned many times in the Legislature that it has the second-lowest average income in the

province and has the lowest average household income in the eastern Ontario region. The closure of the Frost Centre by the present Liberal government made a precarious situation for local residents

still struggling economically, and we're hopeful that we'll have a good outcome on that later in the year. In Haliburton county, the average household income is $35,268 and in the city of Kawartha

Lakes it is $46,156, while the provincial average is $53,626 for household income. So the disparities are remarkable.

I have met with many local businesses in the area about setting up a fund like this. They could see benefits in businesses developing and employing local people,

helping the area economically, good jobs that could keep our young people in our communities. In the city of Kawartha Lakes, I can think of three villages -- Omemee, Norland and Kinmount -- that

would benefit from updated water systems that would help entice more businesses to their area.

The Eastern Ontario Wardens Caucus has told the government that property taxes are going to jump, thanks to the government's new funding program. In their press

release of April 25, they said, "The new formula sidesteps eastern Ontario's crucial need for help with its share of downloaded provincial roads and bridges." They also noted that, "The formula

caps funding for social housing at 2002 levels." It doesn't address big increases in operating costs due to rising energy rates and it doesn't increase the capital improvements, some of which I

just mentioned.

We have a large proportion of seniors in my riding -- Haliburton county has the highest percentage of seniors in the province, for example -- so right now, we

don't have the labour force participation. Haliburton county has a labour force participation rate of only 50%; the city of Kawartha Lakes only 60.3%. That's much lower than the province-wide rate

of 67.3%. This fund would help municipalities develop economic support, increase their tax base and revenues.

Sylvia Sutherland, the mayor of Peterborough and chair of Municipalities United for a New Deal, is fully supportive of this economic development fund and has

said, "It is long overdue." Harvey Rosen, mayor of the city of Kingston, says, "I have no doubt that the council of the corporation of Kingston would support this bill with a large majority if not

unanimity." Margaret Walsh, reeve of the township of Tyendinaga, says, "Thank you for giving me an opportunity to express my support for Bill 187."

There are a lot of positive effects that could happen in our communities. In Peterborough county, there are two topics -- I know the member from Peterborough

just spoke. The skating oval project and the DNA cluster are just two examples of larger projects that are on the books. Either one of these projects, if they could get some economic development

money, would provide significant benefits in terms of jobs, the spinoff of housing and the purchase of goods and services that would be required to support them in the future. This is in

Peterborough county.

The agricultural crisis has taken quite a toll in eastern Ontario and presented more challenges for our local small businesses. Haliburton county passed a motion

last night that the proposed private member's bill that would create an Eastern Ontario Economic Development Fund Corp. -- would have the potential to provide much-needed additional government

investment.

I can see that there is a clear need across my riding and that this would help them out. I urge all members opposite to support this bill.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I'm speaking not only in my own right but on this occasion on behalf of the NDP caucus when I express my

support for this particular bill by Mr. Sterling, which correctly identifies an incredible hurdle and burden that a whole lot of smaller-town and small-town Ontario is carrying, along with, from

time to time, larger-municipality Ontario as well.

It's interesting, when you read today's Toronto Star, to learn that Ontario's economic growth again lagged behind the national average in 2004, and the trend is

expected to continue this year. These are tough times for Ontario, and even tougher times for communities like some of the communities in eastern Ontario that Mr. Sterling is addressing, as well as

some of the communities down where I come from, in Niagara, that have lost significant high-wage industries: communities that, as a result of losing significant heavy industries, have lost the tax

assessment associated with them; communities that are struggling with the downloading that persists. It's the very illustration that Mr. Sterling gave of a community where the per-household cost

would be extraordinary to participate even in a program where there's shared funding with senior levels of government: extraordinary to the point of being incapable of being done. Of course, then

you create a downward spiral. You've got the dog chasing its tail, where you never get out of the dilemma.

So I say that this bill is a very legitimate effort to create a vehicle for economic development in eastern Ontario, and I look forward to every member of this

Legislature supporting it. More important is that the bill then has to move on to committee. I'm confident that the author of the bill, Mr. Sterling, will be identifying at the appropriate time,

after a successful second reading vote, the committee to which he wants it to go, and not only that the bill go on to committee but that it be addressed in committee. The communities that Mr.

Sterling is speaking to deserve an opportunity to make their case directly to elected representatives at Queen's Park during that committee process.

It's important. I don't know if the author of the bill had in mind the legislation in Bill 136, so-called places to grow. The fact is -- look, think about it --

if you want to talk about smart growth, you want to address the incredible impact of constant larger and larger concentrations of population in the greater Toronto area and the incredible cost

that's inherent in that. People talk about efficiencies with that type of density, but I tell you, at the same time, there are incredible costs associated with that kind of density, including

environmental costs.

I say we'd be making a lot more headway in terms of addressing environmental concerns, good planning concerns, if we gave small- and smaller-town Ontario --

that's been whacked hard -- some of the financial resources that they need to make themselves more attractive to Ontarians, to newcomers to Ontario, to newcomers to Canada, not only as places to

live in but, if you're going to live there you've got to work there, so as places where there are jobs to do that work in.

As part and parcel of that, I want to make this observation. With all due respect, the Minister of Economic Development has a whole lot of explaining to do, not

only in response to the

article in this morning's Toronto Star about Ontario lagging once again and expected to continue to lag behind the rest of the country. Lagging -- not even on par, falling

behind, and you've got this government here that wants to identify Ontario as the economic engine of Canada? That isn't what the data and statistics tell us, is it? The loss of jobs in this

province has been those high-wage jobs, unionized jobs, value-added manufacturing jobs, and all the service sector jobs in the world don't make up for the loss of half a dozen value-added

manufacturing jobs. Those value-added manufacturing jobs are the wealth creation jobs. You don't create wealth in a casino economy; you simply stir it around a little bit. You don't create wealth

in the hospitality sector. You create wealth in steel mills, in lumber mills, in pipe mills. You create wealth when you're building ships and building airplanes and helicopters. You create wealth

when you're processing food and foodstuffs. You create wealth when you're taking raw materials and adding value to them, with the labour of hard-working Ontario women and men.

We've got a government that's indifferent to the plight of small- and smaller-town Ontario. Let me deal with one issue alone, the issue of brownfields. In the

city of Toronto or in the city of Winnipeg or Vancouver, brownfields could be remediated by the private sector, because the value of land is so extraordinarily high that the, yes, acknowledged

incredible cost of remediating toxic lands is part and parcel of the investment, and there'll still be return on the investment from the private sector at the end of the day. But down where I come

from -- places like Welland or Thorold or Port Robinson or Port Colborne or St. Catharines; quite frankly, Peterborough; parts of Niagara Falls as well -- the value of land simply isn't adequate to

support the private sector investment if that investment includes the cost of remediation. There are acres and acres and acres of toxic land -- I was going to say "lying fallow," but that would be

a contradiction of their toxicity. But there are acres and acres of inner-city land that would be efficient places to develop on -- you talk about efficiencies, right, Mr. Leal? -- but they can't

be developed because they're former industrial sites, some of them going back 100-plus years.

Smaller-town Ontario -- yes, places like Peterborough, I dare say, and places like where I come from -- Welland, Thorold, Port Colborne, Port Robinson, Thorold

South, St. Catharines -- need some direct assistance in remediating those brownfields. You want smart growth? You want places to grow? Help those communities in Ontario. Restore those brownfields

to the point where they can be built on and developed. Inevitably, they're inner-city. They're already serviced or a hair away from being serviced. They contribute to the vitality of those

communities, should they be developed, yet they are being left behind in a disturbingly centralized approach to planning on the part of this government, a very disturbingly Soviet approach to

planning, which ignores the potential of grass-roots development, grass-roots input and, quite frankly, smaller-town community-building.

I'm grateful to Mr. Sterling because his bill today permits us to discuss that facet of the reality of Ontario.

I'll tell you this: For most of Ontario the services underground don't consist of subways; they consist of a rotting infrastructure -- sewer pipes, water pipes.

Not just a disturbing number but a radically alarming number of sewer systems in communities across Ontario still aren't segregated, where either storm water is flowing into sewage treatment plants

and communities are bearing an incredible cost -- there's a real cost. The cost to the community is not the potable water; the cost to the community is the sewage treatment. So millions of gallons

of surface rainwater are flowing through sewage treatment plants, and similarly, there is an inexcusable amount of sewage flowing into natural waterways still, in the year 2005.

I admire those municipal leaders who understand that perpetual growth isn't the solution. Again, it's the dog chasing its tail. But what happens when you have

growth that isn't self-financed, when you have growth that's on the periphery rather than the utilization of brownfields within the boundaries and in the inner parts of those cities, is that you

have older-town Ontario subsidizing newly developed Ontario, at great risk not just to older-town Ontario but to the community in general. By subsidizing, I mean that municipalities have, under the

surface, sewer systems and water systems, among other things, that are deteriorating, that are not up to code, not up to par in the first instance and that continue to deteriorate, whether it's

under the surface or whether it's the foundation of roadways, so that at the point in time when you are going to address them in terms of repairing and rebuilding, the cost is 10 times, 10-fold, 20

times, 20-fold, what it would have been had it been addressed at an appropriate time, which in the case of most municipalities was 10 and 15 years ago and certainly, at the latest, now in the year

We'll hear, as we did last week, the Minister of Economic Development and Trade talk about the jobs he's bringing into Ontario. He says he's bringing jobs into

Ontario. OK, like the cleaning jobs at the new hotels in downtown Toronto. Oh, yeah, we need more of those $9-an-hour and $10-an-hour jobs; they really help economies. Oh, yeah. Then of course

you've got a government that wants to extend card-based certification only to -- we know that unionized jobs are safer jobs, that unionized jobs are better-paying jobs, that unionized jobs have

benefits and pension plans attached to them. We know that. That is clear. We've got a government here that wants to continue to pursue the anti-union, anti-worker agenda of the government before it

by continuing to deny the vast majority of the workers in this province the right to card-based certification when it comes to organizing a trade union in their workplace.

Unions in workplaces mean better wages. Better wages mean more affluent consumers. More affluent consumers mean a more active economy. A more active economy

means that more people get to share in the prosperity of this province rather than just the Conrad "Tubby" Blacks of the world, the robber barons of the 21st century, who will soon, hopefully, be

Martha Stewarting in his own right. Skip the ankle bracelet for Conrad Black and his partner, Ms. Amiel.

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): She's done pretty well by that.

Mr. Kormos: Ms. Amiel's done pretty well by that, Runciman says, which gets him into Hansard as an interjection. Runciman participates in the

attack on the excesses and the criminality of Conrad Black and Babs Amiel, and it's nice to see an ally. Mr. Runciman is a law-and-order guy in his own right and has been consistent in that regard.

He's not just about throwing drug traffickers and people who hurt other people into jail; he's about throwing crooks in general in jail, and in my books, that means Conrad Black and Barbara Amiel,

along with a few others, Nortel-related, in their own histories.

I look forward to being able to vote for this piece of legislation. It's about making smaller- and small-town Ontario better and healthier places to live,

stronger places, which means a stronger, better, healthier Ontario. It's about restoring prosperity that the historical advent of free trade, among other things, have undermined. Young people in

this province deserve to have some of the same hope for the future that our hard-working parents and grandparents generated for us.

Thank you kindly, Speaker, and thank you to the author of the bill.

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): I appreciate this opportunity to speak to Bill 187. I will be supporting Bill 187, I would

like to say at the outset. But I would like to preface my remarks on the bill with, why now? Why at this stage of life here at Queen's Park? Why now? We had eight years when this bill could have

been brought forth, eight years when the member for Lanark-Carleton could have stood up for the constituents of his riding and all the ridings in eastern Ontario and worked with his government at

that time to get an Eastern Ontario Economic Development Fund Corp. established. But I'm delighted and very pleased that, at least now, it's being brought forward in a private member's bill, and

that's why I say this morning that I'm going to support the bill brought forward by the member from Lanark-Carleton.

I was elected to represent a riding from eastern Ontario and I came here to do my very best to promote any opportunities for economic development for the

citizens of the riding, for organizations that work so hard in those ridings. This is just one example where it's important that I support the establishment of the Eastern Ontario Economic

Development Fund Corp.

I know of the hard struggles we've had in recent months in my riding of Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh with some of the problems at Domtar -- we're trying to

work on some solutions with regard to stabilizing opportunities there at Domtar -- and then the closing of Gildan Activewear, a textile facility in my own municipality of South Stormont. This kind

of corporation, this kind of funding, would certainly help in keeping industries, establishing industries and giving some sound foundations to the industries that are there or that want to

locate.

I also want to say that we as a government do have a very important program, COMRIF, in place to help our small, rural municipalities.

This past Monday I was delighted to attend at the council chambers in North Stormont in my riding to announce some very important supports for bridge replacement

and rehabilitation. I think we had about six bridges on our list, and I know that three municipalities were absolutely delighted with what we were doing.

With that, and with what my good eastern Ontario member from Lanark-Carleton is doing, I would like to say I will support this bill that he has brought

forward.

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): It is indeed a pleasure and a privilege to speak this morning to my colleague from

Lanark-Carleton's Bill 187,

An Act to establish the Eastern Ontario Economic Development Fund Corp. It is not hard at all to make a prima facie case for the approval of that bill.

For years we have been saying in eastern Ontario how difficult it is to develop our area when we seem to always be playing at a disadvantage. Governments talk

about funding formulas as being fair and equitable. Well, "equitable" does not necessarily mean "fair." That's why years ago the northern heritage fund was instituted, because it addressed the

inequities faced by people in northern Ontario. Is it equal? No, it's not. But it's fair because they're not playing on a level playing field. In fact, we're not doing that in eastern Ontario

either.

If you look at the median incomes in ridings in eastern Ontario -- and I'll speak more specifically about Renfrew county for the most part, but in eastern

Ontario in general -- they are far less than the average in the rest of the province.

Years ago the Eastern Ontario Wardens Caucus began. Those people have made a tremendous difference, as they have articulated the needs and concerns of eastern

Ontario to various provincial governments. I give them a lot of credit. When Minister Gerretsen visited AMO this year and basically insulted them with the offer, I give the Eastern Ontario Wardens

Caucus a lot of credit for forcing the McGuinty government to come up with a new formula within a couple of days. They were the ones who were front and centre in saying, "I'm sorry, but this is

simply not enough. Pay your bills." In fact, they forced and embarrassed the government into doing just that.

When you talk about funding formulas, you talk about something that applies across the province. Those things are usually designed by bureaucrats who are looking

for something: They analyze information and say, "Well, this is the formula," and then they apply it across the board. Across the board simply doesn't work. We've been disadvantaged in eastern

Ontario and, in my riding of Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke, particularly Renfrew county, for years because of an education funding formula that does not address the specific needs and inequities that

are faced by Renfrew county and most of eastern Ontario.

If there were a fund such as the one that Mr. Sterling is proposing, it would make it far easier to attract much-needed doctors to Renfrew county -- a minimum of

17 short today, and that number is growing. This kind of fund would assist us in attracting physicians to those rural communities that we simply can't under the current arrangements. Also education

transportation funding: We're not even eligible for rural and remote funding in Renfrew county because of geographical quirks. If there's any county that is justified to have special funding for

education transportation, Renfrew county, the largest county in Ontario, is it.

Crown land: 40% of the land in Renfrew county is crown land. There's no tax revenue off that land for those municipalities. How are they supposed to compete with

areas in southwestern Ontario, where there's virtually no crown land? How are they supposed to compete when they've got all of these vast tracts of land they must service but get no revenue from? I

could go on and on.

I want to give a couple of quotes. Norm Lentz, the good reeve of Brudenell, Lyndoch and Raglan, is very much in favour of this: "Bill 187 would greatly help

eastern Ontario's communities and in particular communities in Renfrew county." Sandy Heins, the good mayor of Renfrew: "...we applaud and support your efforts in this initiative." Bob Sweet,

warden of Renfrew county and chair of the Eastern Ontario Wardens Caucus: "We want to thank you for bringing forward this necessary legislation in support of eastern Ontario." And Neil Stewart, the

good reeve of McNab/Braeside, is very supportive of this.

My time is just about up. I'm wholeheartedly in support of this bill and I thank my colleague Norm Sterling for bringing it forward.

Mr. Lou Rinaldi (Northumberland): I'm delighted to stand up and speak about this bill. Off the bat, I want to congratulate the member from

Lanark-Carleton for bringing this forward. If I could, I'd vote twice, if the Speaker allowed me.

Coming from an eastern municipal area, I'm delighted he's doing this. I'm also very delighted that he had a change of heart, because while he was minister

under that government, we had a program and they cancelled it. I was a municipal politician. To make matters worse, they downloaded a whole pile of infrastructure that municipalities had to take

over.

Why would I not support this? I will. I guess I want it to be a bit more specific. During their era, I happened to be a municipal politician in one of the

communities that the member referred to in this bill. I was also the chair of the Northumberland tourism advisory committee and chair of the Quinte Economic Development Commission, which is part of

the greater eastern Ontario economic development folks who are doing a great job.

Mr. Leal: They brought a speedway to Brighton.

Mr. Rinaldi: Well, they didn't quite do that, but they did help a lot of people. I know campgrounds in my riding that benefited. In my

municipality, they were able to get extra assistance.

The challenge was, as I mentioned, that the municipalities, which in turn affect businesses, were given an extra burden with the downloading of functions and

responsibilities and, at the same time, we lost a great function to look after eastern Ontario.

I'm in overwhelming support of this, and also for it to go to committee to make sure that we get it right, to make sure that we have things in place to do the

right things for these communities, to complement some of the things the present government is doing. As a matter of fact, the COMRIF announcement we made in the last week will be another cog in

the wheel to help those municipalities. For example, I want to refer to my riding. Under the new municipal partnership program to replace the old CRF, we were $3.1 million to the plus in my riding.

So the municipalities in my riding were a total of $3.1 million positive. With that in mind, with the COMRIF announcement we just made in the last few days, my community, my riding, benefited to

the tune of just under $1 million to help with its infrastructure needs. If we can put in something like this to stimulate economic development, there is hope for eastern Ontario.

I'm going to leave some time for my fellow members to comment further, but I'm prepared to support this.

Mr. Runciman: I'm pleased to participate and give acknowledgement to the member from Lanark-Carleton, one of the deans of the Legislature. One

of the reasons for his continued success at the polls over the years is his never-ending advocacy on behalf of eastern Ontario. This is another example of that, and I compliment and commend him for

introducing this legislation.

It sounds like the bill is going to pass, and that is hopefully good news for eastern Ontario. Frequently I think that eastern Ontario is not a subject of

discussion in this place, and that's regrettable. When people look at eastern Ontario, generally, if they don't live there, they tend to look at Ottawa and perhaps Kingston. When you look at

economic results, again, they tend to look at some of those larger municipalities rather than focusing on the smaller communities, which indeed are having very difficult times.

This is something that has been the case for many years. I recall that Paul Dick, a former member, I think from the same riding as Mr. Sterling, did a study

when he was a member of the Mulroney cabinet that indicated quite clearly that in eastern Ontario the poverty levels, in certain pockets within eastern Ontario, were the highest in Ontario.

Look at some of the statistics that Mr. Sterling provided about differences in median income across the province. He indicated that in Haliburton they are 30%

lower than median income levels. Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry is close to 18% lower. That should be a concern of the government and should be a concern of members of the assembly, and we should

all wish to do something about it.

A couple of members of the government asked the question: Why now; why is this bill before the House now? I can just speak to my own riding and the impact of a

decision that is also directly impacting on Mr. Sterling's riding, and that's the expedited closure of Rideau Regional. We're talking about 800 very good jobs. When those jobs are lost it will have

a devastating impact on both Mr. Sterling's riding and my own and certainly right across eastern Ontario in the villages and small, rural communities we're talking about.

The government has decided not to proceed with phases 2 and 3 of the St. Lawrence Valley Correctional and Treatment Centre. This was going to be designed as a

centre of excellence to treat inmates in the corrections system in Ontario. We did phase 1, which deals with sentenced inmates who have some degree of mental illness -- very innovative and the

first of its kind in Canada. Phases 2 and 3 would have involved the transfer of OCI from Brampton and would have built, here in Ontario, a centre of excellence for the world in terms of treatment

of inmates with a variety of afflictions.

I must point out that Mr. McGuinty, at the time the opposition leader, went into Brockville before the election and was asked the direct question, "Will you

continue and complete phases 2 and 3 of the Brockville treatment and corrections centre?" He said, "Absolutely. This is worthwhile. This is something we want to see happen." We know that that now

has been cancelled. Minister Kwinter has said, "Forget it; it's never going to happen while there is a Liberal government in office." You have to wonder about the rationale for that. Was it pure

politics? Certainly it was an indifference to eastern Ontario and the financial challenges that many, many small communities are facing in eastern Ontario.

I have a couple of letters here today.

Robert Lawn, an outstanding mayor in my riding, an outstanding mayor in the province, from the town of Prescott, talks about the population decline in

Prescott, a 5.6% drop in the last census; that they are providing filtered water and waste water treatment, and the cost is almost insurmountable; that they have lost a number of their

manufacturing facilities; that they're losing their tax base; the senior population is increasing significantly above the Ontario average; low-income households.

Peggy Taylor, the mayor of the township of Edwardsburgh/Cardinal, Leeds-Grenville, reiterates the concerns of Mayor Lawn, also endorsed by a number of other

municipalities in my riding.

This is a growing crisis, one that the current government seems unwilling or unprepared to recognize. One of the things we can do immediately is pass Mr.

Sterling's legislation, but we can also look at the decentralization of government operations, which was standard practice by the Bill Davis government and had an enormous and positive impact on

that part of Ontario.

Mr. Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): I'm also pleased to join the debate on this bill. I want to make it clear up front that I could

not be more supportive of economic development in eastern Ontario. Eastern Ontario has faced some particular challenges over the years, and I certainly would support an initiative that I think is

going to improve their situation.

But I'm kind of intrigued at how suddenly caring and creative the former government became when they moved from this side of the House to the other side. If

this was truly a wonderful idea, why did the former government kill what was doing essentially the same thing? I don't have an answer to that. I believe that Mr. Sterling is an extremely

intelligent man. He's an engineer, by definition an extremely intelligent person, intelligent enough not to be in the profession, as I have chosen -- seemingly intelligent. So why was it killed at

the time that this member was at the table? I believe there may be a better way to do it than this.

I know that municipalities face challenges. When we go to attract industry to my community, one of the first questions they ask is, will their employees get a

family doctor? That's a crisis in all of Ontario, certainly in eastern Ontario, but it isn't a crisis that developed in 2003. That was a crisis that existed for some time. During the previous

government's term, we didn't see substantial increases in the number of doctor training positions. Foreign-trained doctors, during those eight years, continued to drive taxicabs, while at the same

time my constituents suffered without a family doctor. I'm thrilled at some of the things our government has done to address that. I think the family health teams that were announced about a week

ago will do wonders to attract doctors into eastern Ontario, and industry will follow that.

I know that one of the major challenges facing municipalities is the cost of the downloading they incurred under the previous government. One of best

attractions for an industry to come to your community is for someone from that industry to drive through your town and see empty fields with fire hydrants sticking out of them. That says to anyone

who's looking that the land is developed, is ready, and, "We can move into place and get going." But municipalities have struggled with just maintaining their current stock, without having the hope

of finding funding to expand.

The downloading of provincial highways, with the bridges being part of that -- sure, there were some one-time dollars, but municipalities now struggle with

that. The COMRIF funding announced last week will go a long way to address that, but that's a problem the previous government created that has had the effect of limiting development in eastern

Ontario. COMRIF is going to help them. Costs were passed on to municipalities because of public health units, and we're seeing our government take it back.

Eastern Ontario has many attributes to attract industry. We have an extremely skilled and highly motivated workforce. We have a high quality of life -- I

believe, an extremely high quality of life. The markets that exist within 500 miles of eastern Ontario, which is a criterion for industry, are abundant. But I believe that the best advocate for my

community is someone who lives in my community. I see my municipalities working together. I see Quinte West and Belleville sharing so many initiatives, saying that what's good for one is good for

the other.

I see this initiative in this bill as more centralization. I support anything we can do to help eastern Ontario local communities thrive, but not this

bill.

The Deputy Speaker: Mr. Sterling, you have two minutes to reply.

Mr. Sterling: I recommend to the previous speaker that he read the bill and understand how the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Act functions,

because one of the attractions of this bill is that all the directors are taken from eastern Ontario. For the first time, the fund actually has local input, local control, and who better to decide

the priorities for eastern Ontario than people from eastern Ontario themselves?

We can talk about the past -- if the government wants to upload former provincial highways, let them do it -- but let's talk about the present. Let's talk

about higher energy costs. Let's talk about recent events with regard to the closure of Rideau Regional, as my colleague said; 800 jobs lost out of Smiths Falls and the Lanark-Leeds area. Let's

talk about Domtar in Cornwall. Let's talk about the continuing decline of population in these areas.

We need to give hope to this part of our province. We need to give hope to eastern Ontario, where the young people are leaving our communities and going to the

larger urban centres. We need to give our younger people some chance of opportunity in these areas.

Over the last 28 years, I've had two occasions when I've represented people both inside the boundaries of the now city of Ottawa and outside. There is a marked

difference in the financial ability of people who live within and without those particular boundaries. This bill is designed to give those people who live outside those boundaries and who have not

benefited from the past two or three decades of growth, wealth, opportunity -- to give those people in those small communities some indicia of hope.

Lastly, the Eastern Ontario Development Corp. is nothing like this particular institution; therefore, let's not go through that particular debate.

Thank you all for your support.

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(SCHOOL CROSSING GUARDS), 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LE CODE

DE LA ROUTE (PASSEURS SCOLAIRES)

Mr. Brown moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 142,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act with respect to school crossing guards / Projet de loi 142, Loi modifiant le Code de la route en ce qui

a trait aux passeurs scolaires.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Pursuant to standing order 96, Mr. Brown has up to 10 minutes.

Mr. Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): I'm delighted to have the opportunity this morning to discuss Bill 142. Bill 142 is an extremely

simple and straightforward bill, but before I start to speak about it, I would like to acknowledge those folks at Spanish Public School in Mr. Solomon's class, who I understand are watching this

proceeding this morning. They should be most proud of their council in the township of Shedden and their councillor, Debbie Solomon, who brought this issue to my attention. As a matter of fact, Ms.

Solomon at AMO, which took place in Ottawa last year, came and made representations to us with regard to providing the safe passage of individuals across Highway 17 during the time that the school

crossing guards would be there. I'm going to use Spanish as an example because it could apply to many of the municipalities I represent and perhaps -- well, I'm sure -- to municipalities across the

province.

Spanish is a small community of about 800 people, maybe 900. The schools are on one side. Highway 17 more or less goes directly through the village. The speed

limit in the village is 60 kilometres per hour. It has all the truck traffic of Highway 17, which is, as we know, the Trans-Canada Highway -- a very busy highway and at times a very dangerous

highway -- and it bisects the village. There is no stoplight in Spanish. We do have a flashing light at the main intersection, but there is no stoplight. What happens in this community and,

frankly, in many others, even in larger cities and towns -- I'm thinking of Elliot Lake, for example. They tell me they have the same difficulty, where people with disabilities, where people who

may be a little slower than others in getting across the street, have great difficulty getting across. The school crossing guards, by legislation, are not permitted to help anyone but children

across the street.

When I was canvassing the members of the Legislature about this bill, people were absolutely astounded that this was the case. Everybody said, "I thought they

could help anyone. If Mike Brown was out there and needed assistance crossing the street, and the school crossing guard was there, I thought the school crossing guard could help him." Well, that

apparently isn't the case. The act, which was first made in 1976, just speaks to children; only a child can be helped by a school crossing guard. I think we can understand how that may incur some

liability.

One of the things that we need to know about school crossing guards, I think, is that they're employed by municipalities; their employers are municipalities.

It may be that the municipality, in some cases, contracts it to a corporation to provide the school crossing guards, but their employers in essence are the municipalities. I've had some people

believe that it's the school boards, but it's not; it's the municipalities. Some of the municipalities, particularly the ones in Shedden and Spanish, expressed the concern that there are some

liability issues around this, as we might expect. So it's good to make it clear in the legislation that persons can be helped to cross the Trans-Canada Highway.

I think I'd be remiss if I didn't show the Legislature some appreciation for the hard work and dedication of school crossing guards. This is obviously a

part-time job for people, and they take it very seriously across the province. They work very hard in ensuring the safety of our children, and now hopefully others when the Legislature gives my

bill third reading and royal assent. They work very hard. They come out in all kinds of weather to help our young people get safely across the street to school.

The main street in a large part of my constituency is Highway 17, the Trans-Canada Highway. It goes through Webbwood. It goes through Massey, Walford, Spanish,

Serpent River and Blind River through to Thessalon, Bruce Mines etc. We have crossing guards in many of those communities who have experienced the same problems.

What we're asking here -- I think this is a rather simple amendment, obviously; it's a relatively brief bill -- is that we afford the opportunity for school

crossing guards to help more than the children who are crossing the road. I presume that you don't have to be a student, the way the act is written; at the moment, you just have to be a child. The

idea that this is only for students is not the case even today.

As we well know, the government has some amendments in Bill 169 with regard to school crossing guards. It's presently before this Legislature. We have started

the debate, I believe. It does some things already that will assist, and one of the things that I think is most important here is that it adds a penalty for contravening the Highway Traffic Act. It

says, "Every person who contravenes subsection ... (3) is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not less than $150 and not more than $500." It's the first time there has

actually been a fine, I understand, associated with not obeying a school crossing guard. I think that would be helpful.

I think of a gentleman I know in Bruce Mines who worked for some time trying to make sure that children crossed Highway 17 safely. He had quite a time trying

to slow traffic down. As people who would know Bruce Mines, the school is pretty much at the western boundary of Bruce Mines, which means traffic coming in was supposed to reduce its speed from 90

kilometres an hour to 60 kilometres an hour. Some of them chose not to slow down as quickly as they should, and that was a real problem for the school crossing guard as he tried to get a little bit

more enforcement to get the speed of the traffic down as the children tried to cross from one side of Highway 17 to their school on the other side.

I don't think that this is the most difficult issue the Legislature will face. However, it is an important issue, it's a significant issue and it will have

real benefits for people in our society who need to cross busy highways or busy municipal streets during times when there are school crossing guards available to us. I urge members to help me help

people, perhaps people with disabilities and perhaps seniors, to have better access to their communities. I would ask for their support.

I just wanted to point out, in case people didn't understand how busy Highway 17 through this area really is -- we often hear around here about Highway 69 and

how busy Highway 69 is. In truth, it is far more dangerous to be on Highway 17 between Sault Ste. Marie and Sudbury than it is between Sudbury and Parry Sound. I think that would surprise a lot of

people, but the truth is that there are unfortunately more collisions. There are more fatalities. There is a growing and higher percentage of truck traffic moving through the area as we increase

the amount of goods that move from western Canada and the western part of our province through to the eastern part and vice versa. The forest industry is very active in the area. That necessitates

a lot of chip trucks -- I don't mean french fries -- and a lot of major transportation, cross-Canada carriers.

With all of that, I think it behooves members to make a relatively simple change to the Highway Traffic Act to allow all people to avail themselves of the

services of school crossing guards, who are employed, I would remind members, by the municipalities. The Legislature has recognized their importance in that way. I'm just asking to do something

that many people thought was always possible.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate?

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): I'm pleased to participate in this debate this morning on this bill brought forward by our colleague Mr. Brown

from Algoma-Manitoulin. I want to commend the member for taking this initiative. To those who encouraged him, who are watching in a classroom, as Mr. Brown indicated, I want to thank them for the

initiative.

Isn't it interesting how, when someone becomes engaged and becomes involved in the political process, this place can actually work? This is how laws are made.

This is the place where laws can be changed. We have a good example here of average citizens -- in this case, a teacher -- as was indicated by the member, his class very interested, bringing

forward an issue of concern. Their member of the Legislature took the initiative, brought it forward, and so we have here before us in the Legislature a bill that calls for a very specific

amendment. It's interesting. Not often do we have a bill before the House that effectively makes only one change. In this particular case, I again commend the member from Algoma-Manitoulin for, in

its very simplicity, making what can be a very significant impact on the lives of people in this province.

As a former Minister of Transportation, this issue is particularly close to my heart. Having been involved in the entire time that I was Minister of

Transportation, dealing with public safety and dealing with safety on our roads and highways was the absolute priority for me. I recall on a number of occasions working with the member on very

similar issues. In fact, one particular case the member brought to my attention on this very busy highway was the fact that there was a need for some additional signage coming into the town. I

worked with the member to ensure that that was done.

Once again, when the member brought this forward, I too had to take a second look to say, "What is this all about?" Surely there must be legislation already in

place that deals with this, that a crossing guard, if that crossing guard happened to see a senior or someone who is physically challenged and required some assistance, would be able to do that. Of

course, that is the civil thing to do.

As a child growing up, I was taught by my parents that if you see someone who needs help, particularly if it's a senior or someone who is challenged, you go

out of your way to help. Unfortunately, in today's society, if you do that, often there's a liability. If something goes wrong, by being just a good Samaritan you end up actually risking a monetary

liability. How sad that is; nevertheless, that's a reality of our time.

There was, as you know, a piece of legislation that was passed in this House just a few short years ago that was, in fact, called the Good Samaritan Act. It

was brought forward initially by my colleague Steve Gilchrist. His purpose was to ensure that if there was an accident, that if there was an emergency, whether it was someone who was in the medical

profession who happened to be in the area or anyone else who came to assist that individual, by doing so there wouldn't be liability for that person, and they should feel free to provide that

assistance. To the credit of this House, that bill was passed; in fact, it received royal assent.

What we have before us here is something of a very similar nature. I'm certainly going to support this bill. I will be voting for it today. I would like the

member and all members here in the House to consider doing this. As was indicated, the government has brought forward Bill 169, which deals with a number of safety issues related to the Highway

Traffic Act. There are two things that we can do here. It's unfortunate that this provision wasn't included in Bill 169. By passing this legislation today, the House is sending a very strong signal

to the government that this should be done. So I would expect, at the very least, that this amendment would be incorporated into that bill before it's passed so that we have it in law.

The other option available to us here today in this House is that after we pass this for second reading, the normal course of events would be that it would be

referred to committee and then, after it's dealt with in committee, referred back to the House for third reading and then await royal assent. I would be fully supportive if, following a vote here

on second reading, the member stood in his place and called for unanimous consent to have third reading on this bill without further delay and that it then be brought forward by the government for

royal assent. I would be supportive of that.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I'm going to do you one better, Frank.

Mr. Klees: I'm sure that I would then get support from Mr. Kormos, who has already indicated that he'll do one better.

Mr. Kormos: I'm going to see you and raise you five.

Mr. Klees: OK. That's good.

The bottom line is that we're in support of this. It's an appropriate piece of legislation. It's the right thing to do. I commend my colleague for doing

it.

As the member for Algoma-Manitoulin indicated, we take these people for granted. I drive from Aurora to the Legislature every day. I always take the same

route. I come along Wellesley from Parliament, and I always pass the same crossing guard. I have no idea of the person's name. I just know that they are there consistently, rain or shine. They

obviously take their responsibilities very seriously. To those people right across the province who serve us every day this way, I say thank you. Thank you on behalf of the community, thank you on

behalf of the government, thank you on behalf of those children who take for granted -- I'm sure kids don't really think about the fact that someone is going out of their way to provide this kind

of protection and help. I'm sure these people very seldom hear a thank you. On behalf of the Legislature, I want to say thank you to them.

I also want to take this opportunity -- I just happened to come across this on the town of Richmond Hill Web site. The town of Richmond Hill is in my riding.

I'm very proud of my riding of Oak Ridges, which includes the town of Richmond Hill, the northern part of Markham and the town of Whitchurch-Stouffville. For those who are interested, here is a

posting today on the town of Richmond Hill Web site. It reads as follows:

"School Crossing Guards

"The engineering and public works department is now hiring qualified individuals for the following part-time position:

"School crossing guards -- various locations

"Do you want to play an important role in your community?

"Do you want to help keep children safe?"

Following the passage of this, do you want to help not only children, but do you want to help keep our communities safe?

"Then the town of Richmond Hill has an opportunity for you!

"Keeping children safe is a priority for the town of Richmond Hill. School crossing guards are a vital part of our community. They ensure the safe crossing of

children as they travel to and from school. These highly dedicated men and women are working on the street every school day assisting children."

The posting goes on to say that the rate of pay is "$11.50 per hour, increasing to $12. 25 after one year.

"Daily travel allowance of $2.50 per day if crossing location is greater than 1.5 kilometres from your residence," and "up to 15 hours" of work. So I encourage

people, whoever is watching this, to go to the Richmond Hill Web site and make an application. It's an important job, and we commend those who do it.

I want to take this opportunity as well to make one other comment about this issue of helping seniors and helping those who are physically challenged in our

community. When I was Minister of Transportation, we attempted to bring forward some initiatives but we ran out of time to do so. But I implore the government to give serious consideration to this.

We have legislation that we're discussing now in terms of how to help people in our community who are seniors or physically challenged.

There are some ways we can do this without it costing government any money. Let me give you just one example. The taxi industry has a very real opportunity,

simply by training its people, to provide a level of service that is a step above and yet appropriate for seniors and for the physically challenged. I don't know if you've observed this -- I have

-- where a taxi will pull up in front of a store or a particular location and an elderly person is struggling to get out of that car, particularly if the weather is inclement. A very simple

requirement would be a standard of practice that respects the elderly and respects those with physical challenges. That is, if you want to be a taxicab driver, then you treat your customer with

respect. If it's a senior, if it's someone who needs help, you get out of the car and you help that person get from the car to where they're going. That just seems like common decency to me. These

are the kinds of things that I feel, unfortunately, often are left unsaid and undone in our society.

This bill brought forward by the member from Algoma-Manitoulin fits into the "common decency" parameter that I speak to. For that reason again I commend him

for bringing it forward, and we will be supporting it. I look forward to my colleague's comments, which I'm sure will assist us in ensuring that we give this bill rapid passage.

Mr. Kormos: I'm pleased to speak to Mr. Brown's bill, a modest proposal, one that carries with it eminent good sense and has the capacity to

save lives. It seems to me peculiar that if a municipality is employing security guards -- and I'm an advocate of that -- municipalities should be assisted in ensuring public safety, especially

when you're talking about smaller-town Ontario, where the community is accessed not by a secondary road, by a feeder road, but where the highway is the main street. It poses unique circumstances,

and again, it's like so many of the communities down where I come from.

This is straightforward, clear as a bell and eminently commonsensical. For the life of me, we're talking about changing children to persons. The debate around

adequacy of financing for crossing guards and the need for them to be a properly trained and backed-up resource is a different argument, a different debate, one which may well flow from literally

enhancing the responsibilities.

I seek unanimous consent for this bill to be immediately put to second reading vote and to then be immediately called for third reading, with no further

debate, and put to a third reading vote.

The Deputy Speaker: I've been advised that the standing orders dictate that the vote can only take place at 12 o'clock because of a

division.

Mr. Kormos: A division? Thank you, Speaker.

The Deputy Speaker: Well, let's do this right.

Let me clarify that. Under the standing orders, the Speaker can only put the question at 12 o'clock at the latest. It is a matter of when the question is put,

and that it should be at that time.

Mr. Kormos: Thank you, Speaker. I appreciate that. I ducked as that monkey wrench flew in my direction.

Let me put this to you, sir: I seek unanimous consent to set aside the standing orders for the balance of this member's private members' public business hour

and then to immediately proceed to second reading vote, voice vote only, and to then call the bill, if passed, for third reading immediately, with no further debate, voice vote only.

The Deputy Speaker: This is obviously a bit unique. When the House is composed for private members' business, there really are not pardons,

and it is composed for the purpose of all private members. So it isn't appropriate to dispense with the standing orders under those circumstances. Again, that should be dealt with when the time

allowed for private members' public business has expired.

Mr. Kormos: Thank you very much, Speaker. That monkey wrench was followed by a spanner of mammoth proportions, but those things happen.

The Speaker has ruled. Look, it is pretty obvious where most people, if not everybody in this chamber, stands. I, for the life of me, can't see anybody voting

against this eminently commonsensical proposal.

There are some issues. All of us remember with affection from our own childhoods -- and, yes, all of us did have childhoods -- the school crossing guard. When

we were little kids, that school crossing guard seemed so much older, and they were probably no older than we are now, assisting us, and they acquired that incredible supervisory -- this is what

we've talked about in education, for instance, for a long time. It's not just the teachers; it's that whole educational community: secretarial staff, teachers' assistants, the housekeeping staff

and the role they play, and that school crossing guard too, in that broader educational community in terms of providing security, creating a safer environment and being there in so many other roles

as well.

I am not aware of any argument that could be made by people engaged in the role of school crossing guard. They are probably eager. I know these folks. They

don't do it for the money. There are modest stipends for the people who do this. They're out there in cold weather, in rainy weather, in mucky, unpleasant weather. They're out there whether they

feel like being there or not, whether they're ill or not; they know that there is a heavy responsibility attached to this, sadly, very low-paying job, but to the final one they perform their role

with an enthusiasm and a vigour and a zeal that's all about public safety.

I regret to draw the inference that there could well be some municipalities which, because of the legislation as it now stands, feel compelled to tell their

school crossing guards, "Don't escort adults, but restrict your role to children." I'm only presuming that that's regrettably the case and that those arguments are probably made by hyper-cautious

municipal lawyers about liability and so on.

This bill has been in the hopper long enough, since November of last year, that if the insurance industry had any concern about it, we would have heard from

those scoundrels already. Think about it. They're ready to try to manipulate and control legislation. Look what they've done in terms of auto insurance over the course of my lifetime here at

Queen's Park, and certainly even over the course of the last couple of years: increased deductibles and reduced payouts in terms of new limits on payouts. It's the insurance companies' game right

now.

As Mr. Bradley raises his eyebrows in concern, he and I both know that a public auto insurance system like we have in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British

Columbia is the way to provide fair automobile insurance, fair premiums and fair benefits. Heck, you've got British Columbia with consistently lower premiums than Ontario, full tort -- in other

words, the innocent accident victim is entitled to receive all of their economic loss -- plus a healthy no-fault plan. How can you top that? It's just irresistible logic that the public auto

insurance system is the way to go.

Again, had the insurance industry had any concerns about this, they would have been bouncing off the walls by now. There would have been high-priced lobbyists

telling the Premier to shut down Brown. There would have been; you know it. Clearly it isn't of concern. It has been around since November. The bill has had some publicity. Mr. Brown has made sure

of that, because that's obviously one of the things you want to try to guarantee when you're introducing private members' public business. It's hard to conclude that the insurance industry isn't

aware of it. So that argument is revealed in an anticipatory way as somewhat specious and not one that should be given any weight whatsoever. There's just no reason not to do this.

I suppose the other concern is that you've only got school crossing guards, and their workday is determined by the school schedule. In other words, you don't

have a school crossing guard there during daylight hours. However, I put to you that persons who might be legitimately concerned about their safety when they cross the street -- especially the kind

of highway Mr. Brown is talking about where you're far more likely to see a school crossing guard. You're going to see him there because it's a high traffic area and because there are other

peculiarities, idiosyncrasies around the environment that put that pedestrian at risk in that crossing zone.

Let's say I'm a person using an assistive device to get around, to generate my mobility. What I'm going to say is, "I hate crossing." You know how you were

talking about Highway --

Mr. Brown: Highway 17.

Mr. Kormos: Highway 17. I've driven it many times.

If I've got to go to the supermarket and the pharmacy and I really feel uncomfortable crossing that highway, I'm going to go at 12 noon because I know that's

when there's going to be a school crossing guard. I don't think that's an unfair assumption to make in response to the argument that this legislation tells the school crossing guard to assist all

persons crossing the road but doesn't compel him or her to be there during daylight hours.

This is what happens. I've got places down in Welland -- Fitch Street, for instance -- where you know where the hotspots are. The seniors will call you and let

you know. They're the ones who, even if you were a former city councillor or mayor but you're in the provincial Legislature now, still call you, telling you where that crosswalk or that stoplight

should be for a pedestrian crossing. You don't need high-priced consultants. The people know where these hotspots are. They know they're vulnerable because it scares the daylights out of them

because they've got to scramble across before some guy, inevitably in an imported car -- I'm a big fan of buying North American-made cars, as you well know, Mr. Brown. It sort of gets them just as

they're halfway across and you've got to pull your behind in to avoid getting clipped by somebody racing through an intersection. So folks know where these are. I'm sure they would obtain a level

of comfort knowing that there are times during the day when there is assistance at that crossing, and that's when they're going to use that crossing to get to where they're going.

I hope this bill passes on second reading. I hope Mr. Brown refers it to committee rather than committee of the whole. I certainly will not be utilizing any

single member's role in determining the outcome of the bill after it receives second reading vote. That's up to Mr. Brown entirely. I'll respect his views in that regard. But I suggest to him that

there may well be in the offing a scenario where House leaders will be meeting to agree upon a list of bills that are to be prioritized for committee hearings and therefore to be reported back to

the House with the stamp of approval or disapproval of a committee. Mr. Brown -- far be it from me to tell you how to conduct your private member's public business today -- short of a quick

consultation with the minions, the high-priced help in House leader Dwight Duncan's office, might refer this to a committee so he can then twist his House leader's arm to make sure this bill, in

view of the unanimity of support for it, gets addressed in committee.

So far be it from me -- it's Mr. Brown's bill. It's between him and his God -- which are the clerks, of course, and his House leader. All I'm saying is that

New Democrats support the proposition. We're pleased to support it and pleased to see it progress through this Legislature, and look forward to the enhanced safety of all people, kids and non-kids

alike, crossing dangerous thoroughfares.

Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): It is a pleasure for me to support my colleague the member from Algoma-Manitoulin on Bill 142. As a former city

councillor, it's interesting that some of the most sought-after jobs are often advertisements for school crossing guards. Individuals who retire around age 55 take on these jobs. They provide a

real degree of safety for children, because often they have these jobs over a long period of time and they get to know the kids and they know when kids are missing. It's almost like an additional

safety factor that these adult crossing guards provide for a community. As a former mayor of Essex, Mr. Speaker, you would know that one of the things you often get petitions from residents about

is to introduce adult crossing guards at a particularly busy crossing.

I think this bill is important because over the last decade in Ontario we've introduced software packages that control our signal lights, and often, through

the introduction of these software packages, the cycles have been shortened considerably so that people often have some difficulty on the crosswalk in getting across. Having had the opportunity to

be on committee to review Bill 118, which is the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, little things crop up. This is an issue that was highlighted by a number of individuals from the disabled

community: the opportunity to get across a busy street. When you think of a disabled person who may get dropped off through disabled transit with their children in the morning, it's an opportunity

to get across the street.

This is one of those obvious things. I was really surprised to learn, when I had a conversation with my colleague the member from Algoma-Manitoulin, that

indeed crossing guards in Ontario couldn't assist anybody else across the street except children. I'm pleased he has brought forward this bill because it will really enhance the safety of many of

our citizens -- I've highlighted the disabled community and seniors -- who, because of the shortening of signal light cycles, often have difficulty getting across, particularly at busy

intersections. As a former municipal councillor, I would often get, as I indicated, petitions from local residents wanting the introduction of an adult crossing guard, particularly in a school zone

where there were high volumes of traffic. Perhaps it's just an observation, but people seem to be moving faster and faster all the time in their vehicles. Often they're on cell phones. I have

actually witnessed women putting on makeup and trying to drive at the same time. We're often not aware of our driving habits, and we're not going as slowly and being as observant as we should. I

have also witnessed males with portable razors shaving as they're driving in their cars, and doing all these other things that tend to distract us. So anything we can do to enhance the amount of

safety we can provide -- I think this bill needs to be supported and moved forward as quickly as possible.

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I too am pleased to rise in support of this bill, and I commend the member from Algoma-Manitoulin for bringing it

forward. It's not so much what the bill does but the fact that it is being brought up, as the member from Oak Ridges explained in his presentation. It's the type of thing that governments never

tend to get around to doing, and it becomes very obvious.

I'm quite sure that when the Highway Traffic Act was written to deal with the issue of school crossing guards and they used the word "children" in two places

in the introduction to the function, they didn't intend that to mean that crossing guards would not be able to help a handicapped person or any person to cross the street while they were there. I

want to commend the crossing guards in my community for not having realized the consequences -- what could happen to them -- and their liability if they did that, because I've seen many cases where

crossing guards in my community are already doing that. For those of us present who have spoken this morning, I think we all thought that was an appropriate approach to dealing with this matter. I

commend the member opposite for bringing this forward to cover the liability that municipalities now realize is there: that if crossing guards help someone across the street, indeed they could get

in trouble for doing that.

As we speak this morning, I think it's more important to talk about bringing this forward than what it actually does. I just want to point out to my

constituents at home and to those others who are watching that this bill really just changes the word "children" to "persons" in two places in the Highway Traffic Act, so that crossing guards in my

communities and in communities across the province can, in fact, do what they have signed on to do, which is to help people across the street where traffic could be a barrier to that happening.

I want to point out that school crossing guards, although they use the word "school," are not part of the education system but are part of the municipal

transportation infrastructure. In fact, it's the municipalities that have decided we need to help children cross in school crossing areas. I don't think there's a municipality in the province that

would deem it inappropriate to help other citizens to cross at the same time.

Again, I commend him for bringing this legislation forward.

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): First of all, I would like to commend the member from Algoma-Manitoulin for bringing

forward Bill 142,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act with respect to school crossing guards.

When I received the information from the member from Algoma-Manitoulin, it was just another opportunity for me, as a former municipal politician, to reflect on

what my municipality had done in the past with regard to providing school crossing guards at strategic locations in my township of South Stormont and an opportunity to drive into the city of

Cornwall to see the numerous school crossing guards at strategic locations in the city. It never crossed my mind that there are restrictions with regard to what's permitted to a school crossing

guard assisting those crossing the street. The liability issue never crossed my mind with regard to assisting perhaps the frail and the elderly, perhaps those with disabilities and what not. It

never crossed my mind.

It was about two years ago that I was in the city of Cornwall, heading to a school to make a presentation. I had retired and had been invited back. It was

toward the end of the day, and I was speaking to a student council class after school. I was heading over, and a school crossing guard was standing at the corner, with no one else around, and she

stepped off the curb, held up her stop sign and assisted me across the street. I thought to myself that I really didn't need that assistance, but after it was over I thought what an opportunity she

had to show to her community that there's more to her work, that in all kinds of weather conditions there's more than just children who may need that assistance. I remember I turned around and said

thank you to her.

I look in my own community of South Stormont, where we have a high school, an elementary school and a Catholic school all located within close proximity. For a

school crossing guard at a strategic corner, at the corner of Dickinson Drive and College Street in that community, the community is assisted by a senior high school student. After I retired, I had

an opportunity of going to the high school and to spend a little bit of time doing some volunteer work there and saw the school crossing guard, this young fellow, out there doing his work every

morning and right after school, certainly in good weather -- but they had smiles on their faces too even in sleet, snow and rain.

I think this is an issue that certainly the member from Algoma-Manitoulin was provided information on. I understand that it was brought to his attention by

councillor Debbie Solomon from the township of Shedden. This is one more opportunity of making the Highway Traffic Act better, and I commend the member for what he's done. I certainly think that,

with all-party support, we can get it through this Legislature and it can very quickly become part of an amended Highway Traffic Act. I thank the member from Algoma-Manitoulin for his work for his

community.

Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield (Etobicoke Centre): It's my pleasure as well to support my colleague from Algoma-Manitoulin. As the member from Oak

Ridges identified, one just assumed this was part of the act to begin with, the fact that the good Samaritan law would provide for an individual having the capacity to help another individual

across the street and not have any kind of liability or penalty that would be applied.

It's fascinating to read in the piece of legislation that school crossing guards only apply to children, and yet, as someone who was involved with the school

sector for a long period of time, I couldn't tell you how many times I've seen parents with children being escorted across the street by school crossing guards, or any number of people, as a matter

of fact, as at that busy corner around my area they automatically did, knowing that they had actually contravened the law, because they were only supposed to help those with children.

It makes eminent sense to be able to say that it should be applied to all persons, and that there should be the restriction of Ontario's Good Samaritan Act

that limits any possibility of liability. It is a civil action to be able to help someone cross the street, whether they have a disability or simply have two bags of groceries and need some support

to get across. It just makes sense, and, as someone indicated, it's just basic good manners as well.

I'd like to say to the councillor out of Shedden that one of the things I thought was most important was that she had worked together with her provincial

member to bring forward something that was important to the community. It's a really good example of people working together to make a difference on behalf of the community they serve. It's another

example, in private members' time, where something that makes such good sense across the province is welcomed and supported by all members in the House, and this is a good example today.

As people recognize, this simple change -- and it isn't a difficult change -- in a piece of legislation could make a difference in virtually every community on

behalf of the safety of the children as well as that of other individuals. Again, it just makes eminent sense to do it.

Although there are speed limits of 60 kilometres an hour in many areas right across the province and that I've been through in the far north, the truck traffic

that has increased so significantly makes it a barrier to people who are trying to cross the road at any given time. That's not to say that they necessarily deal with the same speed limit when they

do cross. Any time we can provide additional safety just makes good sense within those communities.

When you look at the issue of weather conditions, it's not just about when things are perfectly sunny and the sky is blue; we're also looking at the winter or

snow or fog or any other kinds of weather conditions and putting into legislation what many people have been doing for a long period of time anyway: enable somebody to help someone else across the

highway or across the street.

I would like to say to the member, thank you very much for bringing this forward. It makes eminent sense. Thank you for working with your colleague and the

children in the north to identify an area that makes some difference.

I also wanted to comment that this morning I had a taxi driver who opened the door for me as I got in and opened the door for me as I got out, and helped me

with a piece of luggage. Maybe it is my grey hair and the fact that I look a little more like a senior, but I have to say that there are a lot of taxi drivers I've had the pleasure to travel with

who have been very cordial in working with me, certainly as I have entered and exited. It is a civil action that I just expect. It's no more than saying "good morning" or "please" and "thank you."

These are just parts of our everyday nature.

To the member from Algoma-Manitoulin, thank you for bringing this forward. I agree; I hope that there is speedy passage of this. It just makes common sense.

It's a very small change to a piece of legislation which could have a significant impact on a lot of people across this province.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate? If no other members wish to speak, Mr. Brown, you have two minutes to reply.

Mr. Brown: I was looking forward to the intervention from the member for St. Catharines. Nevertheless, I want to thank the members from Oak

Ridges, Niagara Centre, Peterborough, Oxford, Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh and Etobicoke Centre.

This is one of those issues -- I think someone on the other side said it -- that make good sense that somehow governments just never seem to get around to.

That's one of the things we can do in private members' hour: make sure that some issues that don't get addressed by big governments doing big things -- because sometimes these common sense,

reasonable proposals get put forward by private members working with their community. I think this is about democracy; this is about a relatively small municipality with a council that saw a

problem and saw a solution. Debbie Solomon came to me and brought this to my attention, and I'm pleased to be here on my constituents' behalf, making this change.

I was happy with the opposition being anxious to get this piece of legislation passed very quickly. I am hopeful that the government will see to that. We

obviously have some rules around here about how these things happen, and that is a good thing.

I think there are two opportunities here. I will be asking for this bill to be ordered for third reading, and hopefully we will get the unanimous consent of

the House for that to happen. But in the meantime I'll let the Minister of Transportation know that I would be hoping that when Bill 169 goes to committee, it might be amended to carry this

section

anyway. So there are two opportunities in the next little while to make this a reality.

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you to all the members and to the table; this has been an interesting morning. As a matter of fact, the time allowed

for private members' business has not yet expired. I'm going to give you a little explanation of some of what went on.

There are the standing orders and there is precedent, of course. But private members' public business is a little different from the rest of the operation of

the House. There are no parties, as I mentioned earlier; there are no whips. So members are entitled to know that the vote will not be taken before the time allowed for private members' business

has expired. So what we're going to do is suspend the proceedings for -- well, it depends on which clock you look at -- about three or four minutes. So just enjoy conversation.

The House recessed from 1156 to 1200.

EASTERN ONTARIO ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT FUND ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR LE FONDS DE

DÉVELOPPEMENT ÉCONOMIQUE DE

L'EST DE L'ONTARIO

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Thank you for your patience. If the members will take their seats, we'll deal with ballot item number

63, standing in the name of Mr. Sterling.

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

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): I seek consent to have this bill referred for third reading.

The Deputy Speaker: Mr. Sterling has asked unanimous consent that the bill be ordered for third reading. Agreed? Agreed.

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

(SCHOOL CROSSING GUARDS), 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LE CODE

DE LA ROUTE (PASSEURS SCOLAIRES)

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): We shall now deal with ballot item number 64, standing in the name of Mr. Brown.

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

Mr. Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): I would ask unanimous consent of the House for this bill to be ordered for third reading.

The Speaker: Mr. Brown has asked unanimous consent that the bill be ordered for third reading. Agreed? Agreed.

It has been an interesting morning. All matters relating to private members' public business having been dealt with, I do now leave the chair. This House is

adjourned until 1:30 of the clock.

The House recessed from 1201 to 1330.

WEARING OF RIBBONS

Hon. Christopher Bentley (Minister of Labour): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Might I ask for unanimous consent and permission to wear the

black and yellow ribbon in honour of the fallen on Day of Mourning?

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): The Minister of Labour has asked for unanimous consent. Do we have unanimous consent? Agreed.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

CANADA-ONTARIO MUNICIPAL RURAL

INFRASTRUCTURE FUND

Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): Earlier this week through COMRIF -- the Canada-Ontario municipal rural infrastructure fund -- some

transportation projects in and around Waterloo-Wellington will be receiving funding. I'm sure that these funds will be put to good use in communities like the county of Wellington, the township of

Centre Wellington, the town of Erin, the township of Guelph/Eramosa, Wellesley township, Wilmot township and the city of Kitchener.

While federal-provincial money for bridge and road projects is always welcome, there are some other projects that cannot be forgotten by this provincial

government. These projects are contained in the Waterloo-Wellington transportation action plan, which has been before this government since the day after it was elected. The action plan was made in

partnership with our local governments, and it represents their top transportation priorities.

Their key priorities include Highways 7 and 8 between Kitchener and Stratford, a new four-lane Highway 7 from Guelph to Kitchener, assistance to Wellington

county to rebuild Highway 24 from Guelph to Cambridge, a repaired and upgraded Highway 6 from Fergus to Mount Forest, Waterloo region's light rail transit initiative, and OSTAR-like funding for

other transportation-related projects.

As it stands now, Highway 7 is becoming a parking lot -- congestion is stifling mobility and prosperity -- while Highway 6 from Fergus to Mount Forest has

deteriorated badly and needs an upgrade for safe travel now.

This brings me to the question: Why hasn't the government announced funding for priority projects like Highway 6 and Highway 7? Is it because the federal and

provincial Liberals have misallocated millions of rural dollars on city projects as a federal election looms? I ask the government to cut the partisan pandering, unclog the bureaucratic congestion

and finish the jobs on Highways 6 and 7.

EARTH DAY

Ms. Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): I rise in the House today to commend our government for having the courage to close the Lakeview coal

generating plant. I also want to commend the 150 volunteers who joined me in the cold spring rain last Saturday in honour of Mother Earth. This past weekend, Hamilton celebrated Earth Day by

planting over 950 trees along Hamilton West's picturesque Princess Point, a valuable and delicate marshland ecosystem stemming from the shores of Lake Ontario.

Mr. Speaker, you should have seen these volunteers. We were dripping wet. The trees were planted alongside the shoreline of the marsh in order to develop the

fragile nursery for the many different types of fish that inhabit the shallow waters. The frigid, wet weather would have frightened away many less devoted volunteers, but those who appeared through

the torrents of rain that morning showed a real dedication to our environment.

Among the volunteers involved were Jed Goldberg, the head of Earth Day Canada, who said it was a perfect day for planting trees, and Marilyn Baxter, the

executive director of the Bay Area Restoration Council. The sponsors included the Royal Botanical Gardens, Earth Day Hamilton, Suncor Energy Foundation, and Sunoco, who donated over $12,000 for

this worthy event.

I would like to thank everyone involved with our tree planting endeavour and applaud the commitment they showed on a cold, damp April morning, and also to let

everyone know that our government cares about the environment.

UKRAINIAN EASTER

Mr. Cameron Jackson (Burlington): I rise to inform all members of the House that Easter will be observed this weekend under the Julian

calendar. On Sunday, May 1, many Eastern Orthodox and Catholics around the world, beginning in Jerusalem, will mark the original Easter date, including Greeks, Ukrainians, Russians, Belarussians,

Romanians, Ethiopians, Egyptian Copts, Syrians, Bulgarians, Serbians, Arabs, Asian Christians and others.

As a proud Canadian of Ukrainian ancestry, I grew up in a home that observed the rich traditions associated with what is our most important religious holiday

of the year.

The service that leads up to Easter Sunday begins tonight with the reading of the 12 Passion gospels. This is followed on what is called by the Christian East

"Great Friday" rather than "Good Friday," with the veneration of the shroud that is carried around the church three times before being placed amid flowers before the altar.

Early Sunday morning, the first song of Pascha, which means Passover, is intoned in unison by the entire church parish, beginning with the words "Christ is

risen." Everyone then shares the original paschal candles, and soon the entire church is bathed in the light of Easter.

One of the most famous of Ukrainian Easter traditions is the beautiful decorating of the pysanka, or Ukrainian Easter egg, which represents Christ breaking the

bonds of death through his resurrection.

On behalf of my leader, John Tory, and the Ontario Progressive Conservative caucus, I extend my warmest best wishes to the many Ontarians who will experience

the joy of Easter this weekend. Khrystos voskres.

MICHELLE AND BRETT QUANCE

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): People in this Legislature will remember Michelle and Brett Quance, familiar faces in my community who

have been here so many times. The members of my community are once again coming together to hold a fundraiser for Brett and Michelle's four-and-a-half-year-old autistic daughter, Tennyson. The

fundraiser will be held on the evening of Thursday, May 31. It will be an evening, we hope, of comic relief at De La Salle College, with some really excellent entertainment. Tickets are only $40,

with all of the proceeds going to the family's cost of providing IBI treatment for their young child.

Last year, the Beach community held a fundraiser for them as well, and it raised $45,000, which to some people might seem a lot of money, but at $6,600 a

month, the need for even more funds is never-ending.

Last week in the Legislature, we were told that Tennyson's wait for provincially funded IBI treatment would now be longer than ever as a result of the Ontario

Superior Court's ruling that Ontario must provide IBI therapy for children over the age of six. We were told that that court ruling now complicated the waiting list for children under six. Parents

of under-six and over-six children will not, however, be divided as a result.

While this family and countless others wait, communities and friends will spring to action to give autistic children the help they must have now. While I

encourage all of you to support this worthy endeavour, I have to say that I hope it's the last fundraiser that Tennyson and her family will have to have.

COMMUNITY LIVING OAKVILLE

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): I rise today to recognize Community Living Oakville, which is a great agency in my riding of Oakville.

Community Living Oakville, through families, paid employees and volunteers, provides services to people who have an intellectual disability, to allow them to live in and be a part of all the best

aspects of my wonderful town.

I also rise to acknowledge and pay tribute to the Community Living agencies across our province, in many of your own ridings as well. As a province and as a

country, we can be proud of the work that is being done by these agencies in promoting the inclusion of our most vulnerable citizens in our communities. Many of these agencies were started by

ordinary families who had a vision that their son or daughter who had an intellectual disability should be included in all aspects of our societies.

May is Community Living month, a time when we can reflect on and celebrate this important ideal, which is to include our constituents who would otherwise be

excluded from many of the simplest aspects of our society.

There is a saying that a nation should be judged by how well it treats its most vulnerable citizens. As we know in this House, sometimes that can be an onerous

task, but in Canada we have the assistance of Community Living to help us make that ideal a reality in all of our ridings. Today, I think we owe them a debt of gratitude.

KINGSTON ART DISPLAY

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): Today's National Post contains a very disturbing

article informing us of so-called art drawn by a

man convicted of killing a police officer being publicly displayed in the city of Kingston.

What makes this story so disturbing is the nature of the drawings and the background of the individual who drew them. They portray police officers as racists

wearing Ku Klux Klan masks. The man who drew them is in prison for the cold-blooded murder of a 38-year-old Ottawa area policeman with two children, David Upton.

I would argue that the public display of anti-cop art by a cop killer is deeply offensive at best, and at worst may constitute hate propaganda. The Criminal

Code,

section 319, speaks to public communications that incite hatred against an identifiable group. I believe these cartoons do attempt to incite hatred against police generally and that police,

with a broad

interpretation of the definition of identifiable groups, can qualify for protection from this type of attack.

I encourage the Kingston police to investigate, guided by hate crime legislation, and I would further encourage the good people of Kingston to withdraw their

business from the commercial enterprise that promotes and displays this deeply offensive material.

EASTERN ONTARIO

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): As a proud representative of the riding of Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh in eastern

Ontario, I was pleased to participate in the debate this morning concerning the development of an Eastern Ontario Economic Development Fund Corp.

The obstacles facing eastern Ontario are unique and enduring. Creative dialogue and useful policy will do much to assist communities in eastern Ontario to

overcome these hurdles. Unfortunately, statements that are contrary to fact presented during question period are not constructive. For a member who has committed himself to, and I quote, "a higher

standard of legislative decorum," it was unfortunate to hear the leader of the official opposition present inaccurate information on the new Ontario municipal partnership fund.

I want to inform the honourable member that this government is committed to eastern Ontario, and, contrary to the member's numbers, the municipalities in my

riding will receive an overall increase of 11% in OMPF funding this fiscal year. I would like to add that the United Counties of Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry are getting more money per household

than any other upper-tier municipality in Ontario, at a rate of $387 per household. Combine this with COMRIF announcements of this past Monday which will help three townships in my riding refurbish

crumbling infrastructure, and we have a pattern of support from this government. Eastern Ontario is not overlooked.

I remain fully supportive of constructive dialogue, but I cannot support statements that are contrary to fact.

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I want to point out to you that the member who just gave his statement made an

unparliamentary statement about the leader of the official opposition having presented inaccurate information. I ask you to draw that to the member's attention and ask him to withdraw that

statement.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Order. I would like to draw to the attention of the members that when a member stands on a point of order, I

would like to hear it first.

If the member has used any unparliamentary language, I'm sorry; I did not hear it. But if it is so, I would ask him to withdraw.

Mr. Brownell: Mr. Speaker, I did not make such a statement.

Interjections.

Mr. Klees: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I would, with respect, ask you to check the Hansard record and make a ruling on this.

The Speaker: The member has withdrawn.

Interjection: He did not withdraw.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I'm going to ask him one more time. I did not hear it, but if the member has made an unparliamentary comment, I'd ask him

to withdraw it.

Mr. Brownell: Mr. Speaker, I did not make an unparliamentary statement, and I do not withdraw.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Members' statements.

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): On April 11, the Niagara Falls Chamber of Commerce wrote to the Prime Minister in support of Premier

arrangement by stating that under the $600-million border infrastructure fund, Ontario will receive only $305 million in federal funding over five years.

Sounds good, but it isn't, because they continue to say that this only amounts to 51% of the total fund. For the House's information, Ontario accounts for 75%

of all Canadian truck crossings into the United States. This is not good economics, and, I will tell you, it's not good news. The net result is a $145-million shortfall in border infrastructure

improvements that would further fuel Canada's main economic engine.

What is significant about the Niagara Falls Chamber of Commerce letter is that it was totally unsolicited and it comes from a completely unbiased perspective

that gives validation to the Premier's position. Let me conclude by directly quoting from the president, Carolyn Bones, to the Prime Minister:

"Ontario is Canada's economic engine.

"As such, our chamber is concerned about the funding levels the federal government provides to Ontario.

"We urge you to invest in Ontario's future by increasing the level of federal government funding to this province.

"Help Ontario continue to move forward. We urge you to address the $23-billion" gap.

"In doing so you will help ensure Ontario continues to drive the economy of our country. That helps everyone."

This House owes a vote of thanks to the Niagara Falls Chamber of Commerce for their leadership in support of this debate.

STUDENT LEADERS

Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): I'm very pleased to welcome the student health ambassadors from Ottawa to the Legislature today.

I would like to introduce these community leaders from Ottawa schools in my riding: Alex Beaudoin, Erin McConnell, Nathan Juhasz, Alexandre Lanctot, Karine

Jolic_ur, Camille Juzwik, Emilie Miller, Catherine Laska, Rowena Rodriguez, and Michel Nungisa. They are student leaders, part of the Exposé Team, who have mobilized classmates across the city

of Ottawa and have reduced smoking by their peers by at least 5% in Ottawa schools. Together, they work with public health nurses and their peers to help save their friends and classmates from

cigarette addiction.

Our federal government spends $27 million to get people off cigarettes. Big tobacco, on the other hand, spends $77 million a year to get people hooked, to get

these young people addicted. They rely on the dependence of youth for their future tobacco sales. Did you know that there is a 50% greater likelihood for you to smoke because of "power walls," the

enormous behind-the-counter advertisements in retail outlets?

I thank you for being here today to lend your support to this important legislation. Some 23,000 signatures petitioning us to have a smoke-free Ontario have

been delivered to us today. No more power walls. Out of sight, out of mind. We must support these students, who have done their job to improve the lifestyle and life expectancy of youth who have

never smoked or who have quit this addictive habit.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Introduction of bills. Member for Toronto-Danforth.

Ms. Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): One of your favourite members, and you almost missed me.

BREAST IMPLANT REGISTRY ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR LE REGISTRE

DES IMPLANTS MAMMAIRES

Ms. Churley moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 192,

An Act to establish and maintain a provincial Breast Implant Registry / Projet de loi 192, Loi prévoyant l'établissement et la tenue d'un

registre provincial des implants mammaires.

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

Ms. Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): This is long overdue. The purpose of the bill is as a measure to protect women's health. Cancer

survivors -- and more and more, unfortunately, young women -- are choosing to have breast implants. Little is known -- or, in fact, there's a great deal known about some of the dangers associated

with them. Given the potential comeback of silicone gel implants now, this is a critical bill.

What it does is create a breast implant registry, whose registrar is appointed by the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. The registry contains specified

information from health care practitioners regarding each breast implant surgery performed, from manufacturers, importers and distributors of breast implants on any relevant health risks they

identify, and from researchers regarding findings they make public if they accessed the registry in order to conduct their research. The registrar may contact users of breast implants and the

health care practitioners who perform breast implant surgery on them in specified circumstances in order to provide them with information the registrar considers necessary to assist in assessing

the risk to the user's health.

The bill amends the Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004, to make the registrar a health information custodian under that act with respect to

personal health information and to make a related consequential amendment. The bill provides that information contained in the registry that is not personal health information may be disclosed by

the registrar as prescribed by regulation.

PAYDAY LOANS ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR LES PRÊTS

SUR SALAIRE

Mr. Kormos moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 193,

An Act respecting payday loans / Projet de loi 193, Loi traitant des prêts sur salaire.

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

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): The bill enacts a new act entitled the Payday Loans Act, 2005. The act governs payday loans, which are

defined as loans in an amount of $3,000 or less that are made for a term of two months or less. The act imposes licensing requirements on persons who make payday loans and establishes procedures

for revoking and suspending licences, subject to appeal provisions. Offences and regulatory requirements are provided for, as is a process for dealing with complaints.

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I believe we have unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice

or further debate with regard to private members' public business.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Do we have unanimous consent? Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Duncan: I move that, notwithstanding standing order 96(g), the requirements for notice be waived with respect to ballot item 67.

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

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): Today I'm proud to report that the McGuinty government has closed the first

of five coal-fired power plants in Ontario. This morning, we closed the Lakeview generating station for good. We have taken the necessary steps to close the greater Toronto area's single biggest

source of air pollution.

We're also the first jurisdiction in North America to say no to coal. Ontario is setting an example -- an example that I expect will not go unnoticed across

the continent. Ontario's coal commitment shows the world where Ontario stands when it comes to cleaner air, healthy Ontarians and a robust economy. We're not just talking about replacing coal;

we're actually doing it.

We've been working with Hydro One to make sure transmission facilities in the GTA are upgraded so that we can continue delivering electricity safely and

reliably without Lakeview.

By closing Lakeview, we're reducing harmful emissions. We're eliminating 26% of sulphur dioxides from our air, 8% of nitrous oxide, and millions of tonnes of

carbon dioxide emissions from the GTA. Closing Lakeview removes the equivalent of 500,000 cars from our roads. What this means for our citizens is cleaner air and better health.

Our commitment to coal closure is also a big contribution to Canada's Kyoto plan. Ontario is doing its part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and changing

the way we generate electricity is a big part of that.

We're replacing coal because the cost to our health and to our environment is just too high. A report I released yesterday found a relationship between

increased air pollution due to coal-fired station emissions and up to 668 premature deaths, 928 hospital admissions and 1,100 emergency room visits in Ontario every year. The true cost of using

coal to create electricity is unacceptably high. Burning coal increases air pollution that contributes to the incidence of premature death, increased asthma symptoms, smog and adds large quantities

of greenhouse gases to our atmosphere.

In sum, continuing to use coal when you consider the health and environmental impacts is just not responsible. What is responsible is that we are moving to

create a culture of conservation and we're moving to the next generation of cleaner energy in Ontario.

Unlike previous two governments, the McGuinty government has made conservation our first priority. We are dedicated to transforming the way Ontarians think

about and use electricity. We have an ambitious plan to install a smart electricity meter in each and every Ontario home and business by 2010. Last week, I announced that Peter Love will be the new

chief energy conservation officer, who will develop province-wide conservation programs. We directed local distribution companies to invest $160 million in new conservation and demand management

initiatives. More will come later this spring when we introduce new legislation on conservation.

We have also been acting aggressively on new supply. On renewables, we successfully procured enough power for more than 100,000 homes last November. Last week,

we kicked off another renewables RFP for enough power for more than 200,000 homes. Two weeks ago, we announced the first four winners of the clean energy RFP, which will be able to produce power to

power more than 650,000 homes.

We directed OPG to refurbish Pickering A unit 1, enough to power 350,000 homes. We also directed OPG to proceed with the Niagara tunnel project. As well, we

appointed a negotiator to deal with Bruce Power and we are now reviewing a tentative agreement that will see enough power for more than one million homes come back into service.

This amounts to the creation of enough power for more than two million homes, or more than 5,000 megawatts, since we came to office.

As you can see, the McGuinty government is taking all the necessary steps to ensure the citizens of Ontario get what they deserve: a cleaner, greener Ontario.

Closing Lakeview is an historic step in achieving our commitment.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Responses.

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): Minister, yet another announcement. I'd just like the members of the House to stop --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Let me get your time. I'll call it again. Responses.

Mr. O'Toole: I'd just like the members to stop and take a moment to pay tribute to Elizabeth Witmer and our leader, John Tory. On March 26,

2001, it was Elizabeth Witmer who committed to the closing of the Lakeview plant on behalf of our government.

No one disagrees about the impact of dirty coal plants. What we disagree with is your reckless election promise to close all five coal plants, almost one third

of Ontario's generating capacity, by 2007. Naturally Jack Gibbons will agree with you. I understand that. Our PC position was, and still is, to close the existing dirty coal plants by 2015. We are

honest with the people of Ontario. We care about the environment and the economy.

Minister, your problem is that you have no plan and you fail to keep your promises. The people of Ontario have no regard for your commitments. You have raised

false expectations and the price of electricity -- at great risk, I might say, to both the reliability of the system itself and our environment. Will you just simply, for once, tell the people of

Ontario what your secret plan on the closing of the coal plants really is?

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism and Recreation): We closed it today.

Mr. O'Toole: Yes. As Mr. Bradley has just pointed out, that's their plan: to follow through on what was our plan and remains our plan. What's

different is that we were straightforward with the people of Ontario.

Clearly the issue here now becomes one of management and integrity. Quite honestly, it reminds me of most of the 231 promises, of which this is just one. It's

another broken promise. Why I say that is that in fact you have failed on many occasions to be quite straightforward with the people of Ontario, especially as it applies to the Nanticoke plant.

Will you tell those communities today that your plan is on track to close Nanticoke by 2007? If so, tell us part B of the plan: What is the replacement power for the 4,000 megawatts? You're putting

the economy of Ontario at risk. You aren't being straightforward with the people of Ontario.

I was at a presentation this morning by the Ontario Energy Association. These are a group of experts, and I went there to listen and to learn. I didn't see you

in attendance and I suggest you should have been, if you weren't. Leonard Crook said this morning, after looking at the situation across the world of the importance of energy, that the plan on coal

wasn't achievable