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

March 17, 1976

30th Parliament, 3rd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

L014 - Wed 17 Mar 1976 / Mer 17 mar 1976

GREAT LAKES WATER QUALITY AGREEMENT

WELFARE PAYMENTS TO METRO TORONTO

HOSPITAL CLOSINGS

ANTI-INFLATION PROGRAMME

FIRE INSURANCE RATES

COTTAGE LEASES

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STEERING COMMITTEE

SCHOOL GRANTS

RENT REVIEW PROGRAMME

SEASONAL FARM WORKERS

GOVERNMENT SERVICES EXPENDITURES

POLICE CHASES

PICKERING LAND FREEZE

PORT ARTHUR CLINIC DISPUTE

ANTI-INFLATION PROGRAMME

SPECIAL PROGRAMME REVIEW

PEMBROKE CREAMERY

WATER QUALITY OF MILL STREAMS

AUTO LICENSING AGENCIES

SCARBOROUGH EXPRESS BUS EXPERIMENT

ELECTED OFFICIALS OF HOUSING AUTHORITIES

ACCESS TO OSHAWA MARSH

INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES

GO TRANSIT TERMINALS

HOSPITAL CUTBACKS

CERTIFICATION OF SKILLED WORKERS

CONTAMINATION OF FISH

REPORT ON DAY CARE

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

SUCCESSION DUTY AMENDMENT ACT

ONTARIO MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM AMENDMENT ACT

EDUCATION AMENDMENT ACT

ST. PATRICK’S DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE (CONTINUED)

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES, MINISTRY OF COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL SERVICES

The House met at 2 p.m.

Prayers.

Mr. Speaker: Statements by the ministry.

GREAT LAKES WATER QUALITY AGREEMENT

Hon. Mr. Kerr: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table copies of a new, five-year agreement that the province has signed with the federal government with respect to water quality in the Great Lakes. This new agreement, known as the Canada-Ontario Agreement for Great Lakes Water Quality, was signed last Friday in Ottawa by the Hon. Jean Marchand, Minister of the Environment, Canada, and by myself on behalf of the province.

The main purpose of this agreement, which is effective from Jan. 1, 1976, to March 31, 1980, is to ensure that Canada will be able to meet its continuing obligations under the Canada-US agreement on Great Lakes water quality. It extends the original agreement, which was undertaken with Ottawa in 1971 and expired last December.

The new agreement goes beyond our original agreement, which basically entailed research, capital construction for sewage works, and phosphorous controls. Now we are placing more emphasis on environmental assessment and protection as well as keeping watch for new pollutants, including toxic chemical substances.

As members are fully aware, the St. Lawrence Seaway has transformed the Great Lakes into an international transportation system serving the industrial heartland of North America as well as our grain elevators at the Lakehead. We therefore intend also to place stronger controls and stricter penalties on vessels using the lakes which discharge oil, sewage and other contaminants.

The new agreement will encourage cost savings through joint programmes. It stipulates that Canada will first consult with Ontario on all proposals for discussion between Canada and the United States.

Abatement measures to be undertaken in the agreement include maintenance performance requirements for waste treatment systems, a search for practical means to reduce pollution from combined storm and sanitary sewers, provisions to require prior approval of construction and operation of industrial waste treatment facilities, measures to eliminate industrial discharge of toxic heavy metals and toxic non-degradable organic contaminants as well as thermal and radioactive discharges, and measures to control the discharge of contaminants from vessels using the lakes, including contingency plans.

I am pleased to report that Ontario met its deadline last December, under our former agreement with Ottawa, for cleaning up phosphorous in the lower lakes. Permanent removal facilities are now either in operation or practically completed at all sewage treatment plants in the lower lakes basin. Clear proof of the effectiveness of our phosphorous control programme is apparent from the fact that by the end of 1975 there was a 40 per cent reduction in the amount of suspended algae in Lake Erie’s western basin, compared with data taken prior to 1970, when that lake showed signs of rapid eutrophication before the control programme began.

Ontario’s industrial waste control programme has advanced to the point where minimal national levels of control are generally in effect and improvements in waste treatment are now being made to meet local water quality needs. The one shortfall for Ontario continues to be the pulp and paper industry, and I’ve notified the industry that we will negotiate specific compliance dates in each case where programmes are lagging.

Early problems with funding and procedures on the US side have been recently overcome, and I am assured our neighbours are now giving high priority to Great Lakes projects. Work on the great backlog of sewage treatment programmes in major US centres will be mainly completed over the next two or three years, with one plant at Cleveland delayed until 1981.

In the past five years, up to last December, some $480 million has been spent on sewage treatment in Ontario municipalities. On the United States side, about $2.5 billion has now been committed and is being used for construction of sewage works in the basin.

Canada and Ontario will continue to share costs for sewage works under an existing separate agreement with Central Mortgage and Housing Corp., which commits, by the end of 1977, a further estimated expenditure of about $400 million, most of which pertains to Great Lakes cleanup.

Research begun but not completed under the 1971 agreement will continue to be shared equally between the two governments until March 31, 1978, at a total cost of $1 million.

Canada has agreed to pay half the cost of provincial surveillance of Great Lakes water from April 1, 1976, to March 31, 1977, the federal portion being a maximum of $762,500. Following March, 1977, a further sum for surveillance of the boundary waters will be determined by the two governments, based on information gathered at that date and on recommendation of the International Joint Commission.

Only last week, the IJC released its third annual report on Great Lakes water quality. It has recommended to all jurisdictions involved in the agreement that they marshal their environmental planning efforts and implement these across the entire system.

Finally, let me say that the people of Ontario have a great stake in the Great Lakes, since our province’s whole southern shore borders along some 1,300 miles of these fresh water resources, providing Ontario with the greatest supply of fresh water in the world.

Today, 90 per cent of Ontario’s population resides in the Great Lakes basin. This fresh water is one of our most vital resources, so it’s imperative that we clean up the lake and maintain them in a healthy condition, and we intend to do all in our power to achieve this objective.

Mr. Speaker: Oral questions.

WELFARE PAYMENTS TO METRO TORONTO

Mr. Lewis: First, Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Community and Social Services: In the budget that’s been passed by the department of social services, municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, there is an amount of $7,333,000 meant to apply to general welfare assistance over and above the 5.5 per cent to which the province has agreed. Can the minister explain how it is, under law, that the government has withdrawn its obligation to pay this additional amount of money, which is now assumed exclusively by the municipality?

Hon. Mr. Taylor: First of all, very simply, we haven’t withdrawn any legal obligation at all. As the member knows, the province pays 80 per cent of the total costs of welfare --

Mr. Lewis: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker -- my question has been answered; I really don’t thank the minister -- I take it that the province will pay 80 per cent of whatever obligation arises under general welfare assistance?

Hon. Mr. Taylor: May I say this, what we have done is set out the parameters of overall spending, which we think is reasonable. As a matter of fact, there have been some concerns of ever-escalating caseloads which, in fact, have not been true, because the percentage increase is dramatically down this year over a year ago rather than the other way.

Mr. Lewis: So the province won’t pay?

Hon. Mr. Taylor: So we’re convinced that they can live within the overall parameters that we’ve set out for their spending.

Mr. Lewis: By way of supplementary: Therefore, as I hear the minister, he is saying he is convinced that the 80 per cent to which he is normally committed can be met, and they need not budget in excess?

Hon. Mr. Taylor: I’m saying that our prediction is that the additional 5.5 per cent over what we funded last year will be adequate for them to meet their needs.

Mr. Lewis: If it is exceeded, will he pay it, as he is obliged by law?

Hon. Mr. Taylor: That’s a hypothetical question. In terms of --

Mr. Lewis: Thank you. He has answered my question. Mr. Speaker, I’ve another question, if I may --

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Lewis: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, this question period has lost a lot of time by excess answers. The minister has answered, sir, and thank you. I would like to ask his colleagues questions if I may.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Is this a supplementary question?

Mr. Lewis: I’m sorry.

Mr. Speaker: Does the member for St. George have a supplementary?

Mrs. Campbell: Yes, Mr. Speaker, if I may. Could the minister explain what his obligations are under the CAP arrangement with the federal government, and whether or not he will pay the 80 per cent required under CAP, whatever the cost may be, to the municipality for general welfare assistance?

Hon. Mr. Taylor: Of course, under the CAP agreement, which is a fairly broad and open agreement, we have to ensure that we qualify for various programmes in order to share in federal funding. Generally speaking, we obtain 50 per rent from the federal government in terms of cost-sharing; then, of course, the provincial contribution is an additional 30 per cent and the municipality picks up the 20 per cent. That is the arrangement that we have worked on under CAP and I don’t expect that to change.

Mrs. Campbell: The minister will honour it?

Hon. Mr. Taylor: I don’t expect that situation to change.

HOSPITAL CLOSINGS

Mr. Lewis: May I ask a question of the Chairman of the Cabinet: In view of the election that now seems both likely and imminent, probably before the end of May, would he be willing to raise at cabinet, at the earliest opportunity, in his role as chairman, the desirability of a moratorium on all the hospital and public lab closings, at least an extension in time on them all, until the public of Ontario has had an opportunity to render its judgement on the appropriateness of the government’s action?

[2:15]

Hon. Mr. Brunelle: Mr. Speaker, this would be a government decision. I will be pleased to bring it to the attention of cabinet.

Mr. Lewis: That’s good of the minister. Does it perhaps strike the Chairman of Cabinet that it makes sense, since the intended date of the closure will correspond so closely to the likely date of the election that these three closings should at least be held in abeyance until there has been a public decision as well as a political decision? Does it strike the minister as fair?

Hon. Mr. Brunelle: That will be taken into consideration.

ANTI-INFLATION PROGRAMME

Mr. Lewis: A question of the provincial Treasurer, if I may: If memory serves me, the Speech from the Throne made reference to the continued support of the government for the federal wage and price guidelines. Can he, just out of curiosity, indicate to us any single significant price alteration in any sector of Ontario’s economy since the Prime Minister of Canada made his speech announcing the guidelines?

Hon. Mr. McKeough: Mr. Speaker, the fact that the consumer price index has fallen for three months in a row is of some interest of all of us, I think.

Mr. Lewis: I agree. By way of supplementary, can the Treasurer indicate where the Anti-Inflation Board -- or can he recall any single instance in the field of prices where the Anti-Inflation Board has taken an initiative, either stabilization or rollback? He may know, where others wouldn’t.

Hon. Mr. McKeough: Mr. Speaker, no, not offhand, I can’t. We are aware of a number of price increases which have been put in front of the board -- and not all of them, as I understand, granted.

Mr. Lewis: But the Treasurer knows of no single instance that has been denied?

Hon. Mr. McKeough: That has been denied? I think I am aware of some which have been modified.

FIRE INSURANCE RATES

Mr. Lewis: May I ask the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations whether, if he had evidence, as I believe he has, that rate increases on fire insurance rates from Allstate on some houses -- I have here a letter for an individual home in Toronto -- have gone up 50 per cent for 1976, would he be prepared to intervene on behalf of the person making the complaint before the Anti-Inflation Board?

Hon. Mr. Handleman: I don’t know when the rate increase that the hon. Leader of the Opposition refers to was made.

Mr. Lewis: After Thanksgiving.

Hon. Mr. Handleman: It may have been imposed after, on the basis of the

schedule that was imposed before Thanksgiving Day, and whether or not it is subject to the AIB I really don’t know.

Mr. Cassidy: You are squirming.

Hon. Mr. Handleman: I would be prepared to look at that again and see if it is subject to AIB. I can tell the member this, that the insurance companies have been called to AIB, are negotiating their rates with them, and setting justifications before the AIB.

Mr. Cassidy: Negotiating?

COTTAGE LEASES

Mr. Lewis: A further question of the minister: Is he aware of the Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway case involving increases in rent on land leased to cottage owners of $150 a lot to $500 a lot? Is he prepared to go before the AIB on behalf of those cottage owners and protest the increase in the rental rates?

Hon. Mr. Handleman: Mr. Speaker, I don’t believe I caught the whole question; and I must apologize to the hon. member. I didn’t realize he was directing another question to me.

Mr. Lewis: I meant to ask the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations. I am bringing to his attention yet another very major increase in costs, this time in the area of rant of properties leased to cottage owners by the Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway that have jumped from $150 a lot to $500 a lot. Would he be prepared to intervene before the Anti-Inflation Board, since they do not appear to be willing to respond?

Hon. Mr. Handleman: Mr. Speaker, it is not the function of our ministry to intervene before the Anti-Inflation Board. I assume from what the hon. Leader of the Opposition says the property is not subject to rent review and, therefore, there would be no legal basis for our intervention?

Mr. Cassidy: What about price?

Mr. Lewis: Does the minister feel he has any obligation at all, of any kind politically, to intervene to protect the consumers in Ontario when the federal wage and price guidelines do not turn back illegitimate prices -- or does he wash his hands of it?

Hon. Mr. Handleman: No, Mr. Speaker, we don’t wash our hands of anything in this government. We use the legislative remedies that are available to us; and if there is a legislative remedy available to me, I’m prepared to look into it. But I do not intervene with the AIB, nor does this government.

Mr. Cassidy: And if there isn’t a remedy, you wash your hands.

Hon. Mr. Handleman: If there isn’t any remedy, what do you do?

Mr. Cassidy: You find one.

Hon. Mr. Handleman: You find one? Where?

Mr. Cassidy: You found one with the AIB. You had no problem there.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STEERING COMMITTEE

Mr. Breithaupt: I have a question of the Minister of the Environment with respect to the environmental assessment steering committee. Can the minister advise us what work has been done by that committee, which was to report progress on a weekly basis, and whether that work has been completed to the point that we can expect an expedition of the Environmental Assessment Act in its proclamation as soon as possible?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: Mr. Speaker, that committee has met regularly since last year and it is my understanding now that there is one more meeting to be held. I hope the regulations will be finalized so that they can be presented to cabinet by the end of this month.

Mr. Breithaupt: By way of supplementary, can the minister advise us, when the Act does become law, if the Ontario Municipal Board will have to withhold any decisions until the Environmental Assessment Board applications are heard in all cases that might come before that board?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: I doubt that very much. I think the Act and regulations in all probability will apply to any new applications by any government body or agency.

SCHOOL GRANTS

Mr. Breithaupt: A question of the Minister of Education: Can the minister advise us when we will know when the grant regulations for school boards will be produced, which were promised, as I recall, in mid-January but apparently have not come forward, so that the boards are having difficulty in planning for their budgets?

Hon. Mr. Wells: First, Mr. Speaker, let me say that the information that the school boards need in order to compute their grants is all in their hands and has been in their hands for three weeks. The printed grant regulations, which are sort of the final printing of the actual regulations that put the changes for this year into effect, will be in their hands next week. But I must point out to the hon. member that the school boards now have all the information they need, and have had it for three weeks, in order to fairly accurately compute what they are going to get in grants.

Mrs. Campbell: Fairly accurately?

Mr. Breithaupt: Supplementary: Is it correct that there will be certain school boards that can and will receive either the same or less funds because of the declining enrolment factor, and the shift in provincial support for education costs being a greater amount than the increase of eight per cent and the eight per cent plus $80 which is planned for this year?

Hon. Mr. Wells: In actual dollars, some of the boards will receive less in grants this year than they received last year. Yes, that is quite right; that will be due to a variety of circumstances. In some cases indeed it will be because they have fewer pupils. In other cases it will be because of changes in their assessment; if they become a richer board, in assessment terms, than they were last year, there could be a change.

RENT REVIEW PROGRAMME

Hon. Mrs. Scrivener: Mr. Speaker, in answer to a question directed to me by the member for Algoma (Mr. Wildman) on Monday of this week, concerning rent charged to employees in government-provided accommodation, I am pleased to advise as follows:

For a number of years the Ontario government has provided accommodation for some employees in certain northern areas of the province and in some relatively isolated situations, such as parks or very small communities, where it has been necessary to ensure effective programme delivery. The administration of government-provided employee accommodation has been and is currently administered by the Civil Service Commission.

In June, 1973, the Ministry of Government Services was asked to complete appraisals for these properties to provide a basis for fair market rental. The Ministry of Government Services completed the appraisals and the ministries involved were requested to commence payroll deductions on Oct. 1, 1975, based on the revised rental rates.

In most cases the revised rental rates necessitated an increase in rent. However, in no case was the rent increased by more than $25 per month on Oct. 1, 1975. Further increases, if necessary, were to be made at six-month intervals, with such increases not to exceed $25 per month, until fair market rental was reached. The full adjustment was planned for completion by Oct. 1, 1977.

When the Residential Premises Rent Review Act came into force, the plan to provide for fair market rental of these houses was inconsistent with the provisions under the rent control legislation. Although the government is not bound by the rent control legislation, we intend to be consistent with the provisions of the Act. Therefore, there will be a roll-back where indicated. From now on, all rental increases for employees in government-provided accommodation will be made in accordance with regulations under the Rent Review Act and any rental increases which have been implemented and which exceed the provisions of the legislation will be refunded to employees.

Mr. Lewis: First the member for Algoma saves Bruce Mines and now all of the workers who rent. Not bad for one day.

Mr. Cassidy: You are covered by rent review as well.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

SEASONAL FARM WORKERS

Mr. MacDonald: A question of the Minister of Agriculture and Food: What has happened to the election promise made by the Premier (Mr. Davis) in a speech in Ridgetown on Sept. 9 to the effect that there would be a full rebate of provincial income tax to anyone engaged in seasonal work on the farms and that the province would approach the federal government to extend the $1,000 exemption to any Canadian engaged in seasonal work on the farm?

Hon. W. Newman: That matter is under very active consideration in my ministry now. There are very active discussions on this particular point. We have had some discussions and we hope we will have an answer for the member very soon.

Mr. Moffatt: It is in the Throne debate.

Mr. Martel: Next year!

Mr. Makarchuk: It’s so good you are keeping it around for the next one.

Mr. Foulds: They are not going to have another chance.

Hon. W. Newman: There have been a lot of changes since the budget came in but let me say the whole matter is under active consideration.

Mr. Lewis: Since the budget came in? What budget?

Mr. Moffatt: What budget?

Mr. Speaker: A final supplementary, the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Lewis: What is the minister talking about?

Hon. W. Newman: I am sorry, I am talking about estimates. My apologies.

Mr. Lewis: Since the estimates came out?

Hon. W. Newman: We are pulling this whole thing together now and hopefully we will have an answer.

Mr. Lewis: I have his promise at this time.

Mr. MacDonald: Why wasn’t it in the supplementary estimates we had to consider yesterday?

Hon. W. Newman: Why wasn’t it in the supplementary estimates?

Mr. MacDonald: Right!

Hon. W. Newman: We will look at them when the time comes.

Mr. Lewis: Oh, will you?

Mr. Martel: What a bunch of windbags over there! They promise everything.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

GOVERNMENT SERVICES EXPENDITURES

Mr. Riddell: A question of the Minister of Government Services: In keeping with the budgetary restraint programme of this government, which we on this side agree is necessary, if applied in areas which do not present further hardships to the sick --

Interjections.

Mr. Lewis: Restraints if necessary but not necessarily restraints.

Mr. Riddell: -- the handicapped and the poor, would the minister not agree that the government expenditure of $30,000 plus to decorate the plush four-storey MTC office building on Highway 135 with green plants was completely unnecessary at this cost-cutting period of time and would she not agree that the expenditure of $67,500 to construct and furnish a more modern office and suite for the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor is surely a lower priority item than a public health lab, the closing of which is supposedly saving the government $12,000? Which is more important, green plants and modern suites or patients?

Hon. Mrs. Scrivener: The member is equating apples with oranges.

An hon. member: And some of the apples have gone rotten!

Mr. Peterson: That’s people.

Mr. Reid: There is a high degree of responsibility right there.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Singer: Quite an answer, that one!

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The member for Oshawa with his question.

Mr. Lewis: It is quite an effective reply.

POLICE CHASES

Mr. Breaugh: I would like to ask the Solicitor General if he is prepared to set a uniform policy for police chase procedures in Ontario.

[2:30]

Hon. Mr. MacBeth: Not to the point where we take away from the individual officer on the scene or at the site the final discretion of whether or not the police chase should take place. That must remain, in my opinion and in the opinion of those who are senior in the importance of law, with that individual officer.

As far as policy is concerned, the OPP have an extensive policy in regard to when and when not in their opinion -- that is, in the general guidelines as to when a chase should or not take place. It is similar to what the Metropolitan Toronto force has and, I believe, what most major forces have. I am asking the police commission to review all these policies and all guidelines and put them all together and make sure that every force in the province has those guidelines to follow. But, as I say, it must remain up to the individual officer to make the decision in any one case.

Mr. Breaugh: Supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: We will allow the supplementary.

Mr. Breaugh: Does the minister think it quite fair to put on to one individual police officer something that becomes, after the fact, a matter of great public scrutiny? I would quote for him the case of the incident in Acton recently where --

Mr. Speaker: The question has been placed. Thank you.

Mr. Breaugh: Is that really fair?

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. MacBeth: Yes, sir, that’s one of the responsibilities that goes with being a policeman.

PICKERING LAND FREEZE

Mr. Stong: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the provincial Treasurer: In the light of the announcement about six months ago by this government that services would not be provided for the Pickering airport site, thereby effectively stopping construction at that site, when does the Treasurer intend to lift the freeze around the lands in that area so that the people affected, such as those in the town of Markham, may enjoy relief from the continuing and oppressive losses to their home values?

Hon. Mr. McKeough: Mr. Speaker, that is a matter that is under consideration by the government.

PORT ARTHUR CLINIC DISPUTE

Mr. Foulds: Mr. Speaker, a question of the Minister of Labour, if I might: Does the minister have a report on the dispute at the Port Arthur Clinic? Has the ministry closed the file on that particular dispute, or is there a possibility that negotiations may still continue?

Hon. B. Stephenson: Mr. Speaker, we have not closed the file. We have been in communication by letter during the last 10 days, as a matter of fact, with bath parties to this dispute. We have had a response from one party. We have not had a response as yet from the other side; we are awaiting that.

Mr. Foulds: Supplementary, if I might, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: Supplementary.

Mr. Foulds: Does the decision by the Ontario Labour Relations Board concerning a recent case -- and I think it’s in Barrie with DeVilbiss (Canada) Ltd. and the electrical workers -- have any bearing on the clinic case, as I believe there is a first contract element in both?

Hon. B. Stephenson: I would suppose that any case heard by the Ontario Labour Relations Board regarding a first contract would have some bearing on this situation. I am not sure that one has any direct bearing at this time.

ANTI-INFLATION PROGRAMME

Mr. Bullbrook: Through you to the Treasurer, Mr. Speaker, with reference to the application being made to the Supreme Court of Canada as to the validity of the agreement that the Treasurer signed with the federal government, presuming that the Supreme Court of Canada might find it to be invalid and presuming that there wouldn’t be a Legislature extant in Ontario at the time, what does he intend to do?

Hon. Mr. McKeough: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think that’s a very hypothetical question.

Mr. Bullbrook: By way of supplementary, and most respectfully: In view of the mess the leader of the New Democratic Party is getting us into, surely it can’t be regarded as hypothetical at all.

Mr. Lewis: Have they been worrying overnight -- this crowd over here?

Mr. Speaker: The member for Beaches-Woodbine. Thank you.

Mr. Lewis: We are not backing off.

Mr. Speaker: The hon. Leader of the Opposition will please take his seat.

Mr. Foulds: Where is the Liberal leader today?

SPECIAL PROGRAMME REVIEW

Ms. Bryden: Mr. Speaker, I also have a question for the provincial Treasurer. I would like to ask him how he could sign the report of the special programme review, in which it is stated that the tax credit for mortgage interest is in effect in November, 1975, when in actual fact it was only an election promise which had not been implemented at that date, and which has now been rejected, according to the information we received yesterday?

Hon. Mr. McKeough: Mr. Speaker, I would want to check the wording, without doubting the veracity of my friend’s question or the implications in the question, but she might also want to check and she will find that my signature is not on the report.

Ms. Bryden: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker: I have the exact wording here if the minister would like me to read it to him.

Mr. Speaker: I think not.

PEMBROKE CREAMERY

Mr. Conway: Through you, Mr. Speaker, a question for the Minister of Agriculture and Food: Is the minister aware of the serious difficulties in which the Pembroke Creamery presently finds itself?

Hon. W. Newman: No.

Interjections.

Mr. Conway: By way of supplementary, Mr. Speaker, would the minister please -- in the light of the fact that the difficulties at that particular creamery are the direct result of an inexcusably bad loan arrangement made with the Eganville Creamery -- look into what is a serious problem at the Pembroke Creamery, because most of the Renfrew county cream producers are in serious jeopardy today?

Hon. W. Newman: I don’t know what the member means by being in difficulty, because if I remember last fall that was taken over, was it not, by Ault? Is that the one he is talking about?

Mr. Conway: The question would be that because of the fact that the Ault --

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I believe the hon. minister just wished clarification as to whether he was dealing with the right matter.

Mr. Conway: Perhaps the question would be better put if it was put this way: When Ault Foods, with the help of a $1 million ODC loan, took over the Eganville Creamery it took over all the area of sale in that particular Renfrew county zone. The Pembroke Creamery was approached by the government of Ontario --

Mr. Speaker: And the question?

Mr. Conway: -- and told to take over the cream production --

Mr. Speaker: And the question, thank you?

Mr. Conway: -- and now they can’t sell their product. What is the minister going to do about it?

Hon. W. Newman: If the member is talking about the market share quota situation, which I believe he is, about a surplus of market share quota -- that’s a surplus of powdered milk, plus a surplus of butter -- if that’s what he’s talking about, I am meeting with Mr. Whelan and with the other provincial ministers this coming week, as a result of a wire I received from him this morning, to try and sort out that whole situation across this province and across Canada.

WATER QUALITY OF MILL STREAMS

Mr. Angus: Mr. Speaker, I have a question of the Minister of the Environment. Now that the minister obviously has the results of the intensive analysis of the pulp and paper mill streams of the province -- I say obviously because of the cleanup orders that he is negotiating -- could the minister share those facts and figures with this Legislature, as he has promised to do twice in the past?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: I believe, Mr. Speaker, I have given the hon. member the figures on the improvements in water quality downstream from those particular mills as a result of a shutdown, if he doesn’t have that, that’s an oversight. I should have followed up, I’m sorry. I’d be happy to let the member have those figures. I gave this information in a speech in his home town just a month ago.

AUTO LICENSING AGENCIES

Mr. Reid: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Transportation and Communications. Is the minister prepared to tell the House how he is going to clean up the motor vehicle licensing branch in his ministry? Can he tell the House how much of public funds has not been turned in to the Treasury from these motor vehicle licensers across the province?

Hon. Mr. Snow: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has had a question on the order paper for the last few days, I believe it’s under his name, inquiring as to the amount of shortages of funds over the past five years. I expect I’ll have that report to table within the next day or two. In the meantime, I assure you, Mr. Speaker, the amounts involved are minimal.

The other part of the hon. member’s question or statement as to what I am going to do to clean up the branch, I believe is the way he put it; first, I don’t think I’m going to take any action to do any cleaning up of the branch.

Mr. Reid: What about the checking of receipts when they come in? Did the minister read the auditor’s report?

Hon. Mr. Snow: Certain comments were made to my ministry, through my deputy minister, by the Provincial Auditor some months ago concerning things that came to the auditor’s attention. Since that time considerable action has been taken by the ministry and considerable improvement has been made in the computer programme, which I’m the first to admit has given us some problems. I think as of this date the accounting part or the reporting

part is very well under control.

Mr. Reid: A supplementary, if I may. Is the minister satisfied with the way the ministry operates in appointing motor vehicle licence issuers across the province? Is he satisfied with the way that is done, the way it is handled, without any bonding? Apparently there are people who have charges against them and yet they are handling public funds.

Secondly, and more specifically, is the minister prepared to continue the practice of having Ontario Hydro have its trucks registered with a private vehicle licenser in the Province of Ontario, which apparently brings that person some $35,000 in vehicle licences when it could be done downtown?

Mr. Speaker: I believe the second part of that question is not supplementary to the main question. The answer to the first part, the hon. minister.

Hon. Mr. Snow: First of all, I would say I am satisfied that the present system of having private motor vehicle licence issuing offices is the most appropriate and the most economic system for --

Mr. Reid: It needs a little tightening up.

Hon. Mr. Snow: -- issuing these licence plates that is possible.

Mr. Lewis: You could do it through Drake Personnel.

Ms. Gigantes: That’s a good idea.

Hon. Mr. Snow: Obviously, a programme such as this we are reviewing continuously. There will no doubt, from time to time, be some changes made. On the comments regarding the bonding of the particular issuing agents, the hon. member may not be aware that the government is a self-insurer. We do not provide bonds in this case as we do not provide insurance on most capital --

Mr. Reid: There is a slight difference, though, don’t you think? You are dealing with public funds.

Hon. Mr. Snow: I would suggest that when I am able to table the --

Mr. Lewis: Why don’t you watch the issuers?

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Snow: When I am able to table the report --

Mr. Lewis: Why don’t you enforce the law?

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Snow: Mr. Speaker, do they want me to answer this question or not?

Mr. Singer: We are very concerned that you answer it.

Hon. Mr. Snow: Mr. Speaker, I am sure when I do table the figures the hon. member asked for he will be pleasantly surprised and it will be obvious that over the past years the operation of this system has been such as to indicate no need for all the agents to be bonded.

Hon. Mr. McKeough: It will make your spring vacation.

Hon. Mr. Snow: With regard to Ontario Hydro buying its licences through a private agency, I would suggest that perhaps the hon. member should take this matter up with the Minister of Energy (Mr. Timbrell) as I have no authorization or no way of telling a particular motor vehicle owner where he or she or that company should buy the licence. I have some concern regarding the member’s statement that there was $35,000 in commissions involved.

Mr. Reid: The total cost.

Hon. Mr. Snow: I believe he meant annually; $35,000 would be something like 50,000 vehicles.

Mr. Speaker: I think the balance of the answer should come in the written answer.

SCARBOROUGH EXPRESS BUS EXPERIMENT

Mr. Warner: A question for the Minister of Transportation and Communications: Is it a lack of government concern for public transit or is there some other reason for not providing the supplement needed to continue the Scarborough express bus experiment?

Hon. Mr. Snow: Mr. Speaker, there is no lack of government concern for transit. A great many million dollars of funds are being made available to the municipality of Metropolitan Toronto which, in turn, makes that money available to the operating authority, the Toronto Transit Commission, which, in turn, sets its priorities for the operation of the transit system. The decisions as to the operation of that system are basically with the local authority.

[2:45]

Mr. Warner: Supplementary: Is the minister not aware that representation has been made to the government that if a supplementary grant is not received from the province by May 1, it will result in that experiment being curtailed?

Hon. Mr. Snow: First of all, that is not an experiment of my ministry. If it’s an experiment at all, it must be an experiment of the TTC. I am not aware of an application for a special grant. I have received no communication regarding that. And, although I’ll naturally review any request that I receive, I would have to say that the possibility of any special grant for the municipality of Metropolitan Toronto for a specific bus service is almost nil.

ELECTED OFFICIALS OF HOUSING AUTHORITIES

Mr. Eakins: Mr. Speaker, a question for the Minister of Housing. Are there any elected officials serving on housing authorities, has the minister received any requests for such, and is he planning to change legislation to accommodate elected officials?

Hon. Mr. Rhodes: To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Speaker, I don’t believe there are elected officials serving on housing authorities. I trust the hon. member is familiar with how appointments to the housing authorities are made. I don’t intend to change the legislation. From the sound, Mr. Speaker, I note there may be others in the House who don’t know how they’re made either.

Mr. Bullbrook: I’m one of them. Lorne does mine all the time.

Mr. Cassidy: Supplementary: Apart from the three tenants now on housing authority boards, does the ministry have any further plans to include more tenants on these public housing authority boards?

Hon. Mr. Rhodes: No, I don’t have any plans to specifically include tenants on the board. Perhaps I’ll take the time to remind the hon. member, as I think he is aware, that appointments to the housing authority are made on an alternating basis as the positions become vacant, from the federal government, from the municipal government and from the provincial government; and although these appointments are all confirmed by an order in council, they are never rejected when they come in from the federal or municipal governments. The hon. member should talk to the rest of his colleagues in the various levels of government.

Mr. Cassidy: How about you?

Hon. Mr. Rhodes: You’ve already spoken to me and I’ve taken care of your problems.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

ACCESS TO OSHAWA MARSH

Mr. Moffatt: Mr. Speaker, a question to the Minister of the Environment. I would like to know if the members of this minister’s staff are still being denied access to the marshland known as the Oshawa Second Marsh, which is presently under control of the Oshawa Harbour Commission.

Hon. Mr. Kerr: Mr. Speaker, I’m not aware that they are prohibited from inspecting that site. I’ll get the information and give it to the hon. member.

INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES

Mr. Sweeney: A question of the Minister of Colleges and Universities, Mr. Speaker. Is the minister aware of the fact that Seneca College, through his ministry’s funding mechanism, has been able to build up an investment portfolio of $2 million? If so, does he approve of this procedure?

Hon. Mr. Parrott: I am aware of the dollars that each institution has. We think that there should be every reason for those fund to be used appropriately for the purposes for which they were designated; and I’m sure, given the present financial restraint that all of the areas have to cope with, that’s precisely what will happen to those funds.

Mr. Sweeney: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: Supplementary, the member for Scarborough-Ellesmere.

Mr. Warner: Supplementary: Will the minister be instructing the colleges to use their reserves and that, in future, only a percentage of the budget will be allowed for reserves and nothing beyond that percentage?

Hon. Mr. Parrott: I’m sure that the hon. member is aware that reserves are not a usual problem; if I read the press correctly, it is usually to the contrary. Usually the colleges are complaining about the deficits that they have faced -- particularly when we announce the amount of money. We hear a great deal about the deficits that they expect to have; the deficits don’t usually materialize to that degree. I’m not contemplating legislative controls in that instance.

Mr. Warner: Supplementary.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Did the hon. member for Kitchener-Wilmot have a supplementary?

Mr. Sweeney: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: I’m sorry, I didn’t notice you earlier.

Mr. Sweeney: Supplementary: Given the very point that the minister has just made, that so many of the colleges are in difficulty, how is it possible for them to build up those kinds of surplus reserves?

Hon. Mr. Parrott: I would like to correct the

interpretation that the hon. member has placed on my answer. I did not suggest that they were in difficulty. I suggested that the press would report, when the colleges were given their original allocations, that they suggested they would be in difficulty.

I also noted that usually that deficit didn’t materialize but, indeed, a balanced budget was struck. In some instances, with good efficiency and good management on the part of the administration, there was a surplus -- not usually very large -- but, indeed, there should be. I want to encourage a surplus position if it is created by good management within the administration. I would not want to criticize a community college for building a surplus if it could be done through good management. I think there is an occasion here and there where that does occur. But, certainly, there is very little evidence in the original press release that they expect that surplus to become a fact of life.

GO TRANSIT TERMINALS

Hon. Mr. Snow: Mr. Speaker, I believe it was on Monday that the hon. member for Oriole (Mr. Williams) asked me a question regarding transit terminals. Due to the fact that the answer is somewhat lengthy, perhaps I could table it with the Clerk.

HOSPITAL CUTBACKS

Mr. Swart: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Health and the Premier, perhaps I can direct this question to the Chairman of Cabinet. Is he aware that the House leader made an announcement yesterday morning that the matter of the bed closings and the cutbacks of the hospitals in the St. Catharines area is now being referred to the hospital council in that area for its review and a report with recommendations to the Minister of Health (Mr. F. S. Miller)? Is this a change in policy whereby the government is now going to consult with the health councils and other concerned people in all of the areas where there are cutbacks in closings?

Hon. Mr. Brunelle: No, I was not aware of that statement.

CERTIFICATION OF SKILLED WORKERS

Mr. Mancini: I have a question of the Minister of Colleges and Universities. In view of the fact that the meat cutters of Ontario serve an apprenticeship of nearly 4,000 hours, why is it they are not issued certificates which would classify them as skilled workers?

Hon. Mr. Parrott: I can’t give the member a detailed answer on that question. I’ll be prepared to get it for him. I think that if the information he supplies in his question is correct, it probably illustrates a prime reason for the Industrial Training Council we recently established -- and one of their duties would be to look into the apprenticeship programme. We have already identified that as one of their prime responsibilities.

Given that the information is correct in the question, we’ll certainly refer that item to them. In the meantime, if I can give the member some more information, I will do so in due course.

CONTAMINATION OF FISH

Mr. Foulds: I have a question of the Minister of the Environment. Is the minister aware of the report that was released some two weeks ago by the Great Lakes Environmental Contaminant Survey Board of the high levels of contaminants in fish, particularly trout, in the western part of Lake Superior -- those contaminants being PCBs, mercury and DDT? Is the ministry taking action to warn people not to eat those fish more than once a week, as that report recommended?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I’m aware of the report; the report pretty well confirms our statistics. As a matter of fact, the report has some information from my ministry and the Ministry of Natural Resources. It confirms the figure that we’ve had for about six months, specifically in relation to the trout in Lake Superior.

Mr. Foulds: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker, if I might. Has the minister had discussions with the Ministry of Natural Resources as to the effect that this will have, up to this point, on recovering the lake trout fishing industry in Lake Superior?

Hon. Mr. Kerr: Yes, Mr. Speaker; and also when we had the original information regarding PCB’s in trout, and also information on Lake Erie and Ontario, that information was publicized quite widely and people were warned as far as the contents in those species were concerned, and to be careful as far as eating them was concerned.

Mr. Speaker: The member for St. George has a final question.

REPORT ON DAY CARE

Mrs. Campbell: A question of the Minister of Community and Social Services: In view of the fact that the Citizens Advisory Committee report on day care was presented to the minister on Friday, Jan. 30, could the minister advise when that report, paid for at public expense, is to be brought to this House and submitted for consideration by the people of this province?

Hon. Mr. Taylor: Might I remind the member that the committee was specifically set up to advise the Minister of Community and Social Services in connection with the field of day care. That report has now been submitted to me as the member has indicated. I am reviewing that report and in due course I will determine the distribution of it.

Mr. Speaker: The question period has expired.

Petitions.

Presenting reports.

Mr. Edighoffer from the standing miscellaneous estimates committee reported the following resolution:

Resolved: That supply in the following supplementary amounts and to defray the expenses of the following ministries be granted to Her Majesty for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1976:

Ministry of Revenue

Guaranteed income and tax credit programme $9,100,000.

Ministry of Agriculture and Food

Agricultural production programme $9,000,000.

Mr. Speaker: Motions.

Introduction of bills.

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT

Hon. Mr. Snow moved first reading of bill intituled,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act.

Motion agreed to; first reading of the bill.

Hon. Mr. Snow: This bill contains a number of amendments directed toward highway safety. Some of the changes include amendments which will allow for better noticeability of motorcycles on the highway; the regulation and control of oversize farm vehicles on the highway; the use of paved shoulders for passing movements in limited circumstances when slow-moving or stopped vehicles impede other traffic; and the rule of the road respecting school crossing guards.

Other amendments respecting the suspension of drivers’ licences are in response to amendments to the Criminal Code and provide for court-ordered extensions of suspensions and suspensions following absolute or conditional discharges.

Finally, a shipper who knowingly causes a vehicle to be overloaded, intending it to be operated on a highway, will be subject to the same penalty as the operator of the vehicle.

SUCCESSION DUTY AMENDMENT ACT

Hon. Mr. Meen moved first reading of bill intituled,

An Act to amend the Succession Duty Act.

Motion agreed to; first reading of the bill.

Hon. Mr. Meen: Mr. Speaker, amendments to this bill are intended to minimize the effectiveness of certain methods of tax avoidance; to remove anomalies in the payment of forgivable duty on farming assets; to increase significantly the amount that can be paid out to the family of a deceased person, without ministry consent, by insurance companies, banks and pension funds; and to promote loans of artistic and cultural property to Ontario institutions by non-residents of Ontario.

[3:00]

ONTARIO MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM AMENDMENT ACT

Hon. Mr. McKeough moved first reading of bill intituled,

An Act to amend the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System Act.

Motion agreed to; first reading of the bill.

Hon. Mr. McKeough: The amendments in this bill extend the benefits to permanent staff members of a municipal employees association or union who hitherto were prevented from participating in the system.

The second provision expands the type of service which municipalities may include when crediting employees for service for supplementary benefits. This would include service with other municipalities or other government employers and military service.

The third provision permits the Lieutenant Governor in Council to grant retroactive application of regulation changes when a benefit provision is changed.

EDUCATION AMENDMENT ACT

Mr. Grande moved first reading of bill intituled,

An Act to amend the Education Act, 1974.

Motion agreed to; first reading of the bill.

Mr. Mancini: You are dreaming.

Mr. Speaker: Before the orders of the day I’ll recognize the member for St. Andrew-St. Patrick.

ST. PATRICK’S DAY

Mr. Grossman: Mr. Speaker, in the tradition of this House, although I’m not wearing green today, I thought I would rise, particularly in the absence of the member for Wentworth (Mr. Deans) I suppose, to acknowledge this day. I would ordinarily be wearing green in honour of St. Patrick’s Day but the colour of the faces in the Liberal Party today will suffice.

Mr. Riddell: Look in the mirror.

Mr. Peterson: Since when did you represent the Irish?

Mr. Grossman: I can’t even comment on St. Patrick Day without being controversial.

Mr. Singer: Compare apples and oranges, will you?

Mr. Peterson: You would be more appropriate on Groundhog Day.

Mr. Grossman: Suffice it to say that in honour of one of the patron saints of my riding, when there was some suggestion a few weeks ago that some members may want to recommend name changes for their ridings, in spite of the fact that I would have considered changing the name of my riding to, say, Muskoka, Brampton or Riverdale, I decided to stick with St. Andrew-St. Patrick. I might also note that of the, I believe, seven hospitals which are in that portion of either St. George or the now St. Andrew-St. Patrick riding, that were formerly in the riding known as St. Patrick, none were closed. Therefore, the luck of the Irish must still prevail.

Mr. Bullbrook: I have come here to listen to the Premier (Mr. Davis) today, not this fellow.

Mr. Peterson: How appropriate your remarks!

Hon. Mr. Welch: Before calling the orders of the day, the order paper today doesn’t indicate the meeting of the miscellaneous estimates committee. Immediately following the Premier’s contribution to the Throne Speech debate, the miscellaneous estimates committee will meet to consider the supplementary estimate requirements of the Ministry of the Environment and the office of the Assembly.

Clerk of the House: The first order, resuming the adjourned debate on the amendment to the amendment to the motion for an address in reply to the speech of the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor at the opening of the session.

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE (CONTINUED)

Mr. Cassidy: This may be the Premier’s last time, you know.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I will say to the hon. member, Mr. Speaker, that I wouldn’t count on that. I wouldn’t even make book on it.

Mr. Kennedy: Beware the ides of March.

Hon. Mr. Davis: However, it is not my intention to be at all provocative or controversial today.

Mr. Mancini: That is what he said the last time.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Not much it isn’t. However, at the outset, Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by congratulating the mover and seconder of Her Honour’s most excellent address.

I was deeply touched by the words and commitments expressed by my good friend, the member for Stormont-Dundas-Glengarry (Mr. Villeneuve), who has served in this House and his constituency so well for so many years. I know I speak for all members in this House when I say how pleased we all are that he has made such an excellent recovery and that he is able to continue in the service of this province and in the service of the people who have sent him to Queen’s Park with such great consistency and commitment for many years, and I would hope for many years yet to come.

I also express my congratulations to the seconder of Her Honour’s address, the member for St. Andrew-St. Patrick (Mr. Grossman) who carried on a tradition here this afternoon as he serves in a very non-controversial way, an example that has been set for him by his very distinguished predecessor in that particular constituency.

I think it is very important in this day and age, and above all important for our democratic institutions, that a member has an opportunity to cite his concerns with respect to a local matter without limiting his support for the government.

I think, in the view of any thoughtful observer, it reflects well in the strength and vitality of a government when one of its members can be allowed to present differing views within the context of the Throne Speech debate.

Clearly there will be differing views expressed today from those expressed on Monday by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Lewis), and those which appear to have been expressed by the leader of the Liberal Party.

Hon. Mr. Handleman: It was pretty hard to understand what he was saying.

Hon. J. R. Smith: Where is he?

Hon. Mr. Davis: I want to say this at the outset and I hope the hon. House leader will understand when I ask him to convey to his leader the very constructive suggestions I have to offer to his new leader here in the non-provocative sense that I suggested at the outset -- I did receive a note from the new leader of the Liberal Party --

Mr. Breithaupt: I will even take notes.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- in spite of the fact that we had arranged these debates for about 10 days that he did have a commitment elsewhere. I regret, and I don’t say this critically, that in the light of his observations yesterday and the serious way in which all members of this House take them, that one would think --

Mr. Lewis: He would think!

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- that he might have been here this afternoon.

There are amendments to Her Honour’s address before the House, which, let’s not fool anyone, constitute direct expressions of non-confidence in the government which it is my privilege to lead.

I don’t really see any reason to express either shock at the decision of both parties to make amendments or sub-amendments to the address. It is rather a time, and I say this sincerely, to express disappointment.

I want at the outset, however, to lay before this House and the province some of the fundamental choices and issues which we face as a province and which are suggested by the Throne Speech itself.

I start with the premise, which was unfortunately underlined once again by the posture in this House taken by the Leader of the Opposition and his Liberal colleague, that there are some in this House who are prepared to make those choices and some who insist on running away from them.

There are some in this House who are prepared to put those choices honestly and deliberately before the people and there are some who refuse to face up to the fundamental economic reality of our time and the fundamental public responsibility we all share in this House to serve the economic wellbeing of future generations of Ontarians.

It is interesting to sit back, as we did, and assess the thrust of the speech made so eloquently and intermittently passionately by the Leader of the Opposition. You know, there is clearly a new angle emerging to the traditional NDP approach of claiming a monopoly on public interest, a monopoly on concern for people and a monopoly on social and economic equality.

My good friend, the Leader of the Opposition, and those whom it is his pleasure to lead, now stand before this House and want to debate the issue of economic management and fiscal responsibility. I will return to that discussion very shortly. But, of course, the Leader of the Opposition took every opportunity, during the initial part of his remarks, to make passing reference to the new leader of the Liberal Party in Ontario.

And while it would be inappropriate for me to suggest that his remarks were not totally complimentary, I would point out with respect to the leader of the Liberal Party, who, as I said, I had hoped would be here, that he can probably do without that sort of praise from his colleague on his right, the Leader of the Opposition. I have had some experience with praise from the Leader of the Opposition --

Mr. Lewis: You ain’t seen nothing yet.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Oh! I am delighted. I am delighted.

Hon. Mr. Handleman: It is going to be a love-in.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I have had some experience and I have come, not to take it with a grain of salt, because that would be unfair, but to consider it carefully in my mind and to seek the advice of others before truly accepting it as praise. I have to analyse these things very carefully these days. There is no question that he is well known for his tremendous intellectual and debating capacities, backed up by a researcher or two or three or four or five -- how many does he have now on staff?

Mr. Lewis: Nine.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Nine?

Hon. Mr. Handleman: How many have you got on our staff?

Mr. Cassidy: We’ve got 50 on your side.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I offer this not as a comment but merely as advice to the leader of the Liberal Party: The Leader of the Opposition lacks no instant answer to any long-term problem. That is indeed refreshing at a time when more and more people wonder whether government is considering all the right options; at a time when we wonder whether those who have in the past claimed to have all the answers have indeed succeeded in doing anything more than creating more problems in the process.

It is reassuring for both the leader of the Liberal Party and myself to know that, notwithstanding the problems the province may wish to have carefully considered -- and notwithstanding the complexity of the issues facing the people of Ontario today, whenever there is doubt or the need for review or for second thoughts, there will continue to be in this Legislature a single repository of instant answers and instant responses to all of our problems.

Mr. MacDonald: That’s a cheap shot.

Hon. Mr. Davis: It’s a statement of fact.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I am sure that our democratic system and politics generally in Ontario are made better, as I am sure the Liberal Party would agree, by the presence of an individual who has no doubts, no fears --

Mr. Lewis: Enormous doubts.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- but simply simplistic and one-dimensional answers. Of course, what we face in reality today, and it is one of the problems we have in this province and one of the realities touched upon very directly by the Throne Speech is that government in real life in an open and free democracy is simply not that easy.

[3:15]

Clearly, for example, the Leader of the Opposition, if he were Premier of this province -- and rye got to tell you, Mr. Speaker, we’re going to make every effort to see it doesn’t happen -- would like to see the Minister of Health and the Ministry of Health operate in a one dimensional, simple-minded fashion.

To follow the logic, and I listened carefully to his observations on Monday, which is not totally unrepresentative of previous positions he has taken, the Ministry of Health would sit down and decide that because there were certain individuals who may be involved in overbilling with respect to laboratories, because certain doctors and laboratories may be involved in misusing the OHIP system, because there may be meaningful losses which may be resulting in this sort of activity, and before every last possible misuse of funds was rooted out of the system, the ministry should stop all streamlining activities it had embarked upon in order to preserve the integrity of the system.

Mr. Lewis: I never said that.

Hon. Mr. Davis: The Leader of the Opposition may not like to hear it said that way, but really if one follows the line of his logic on Monday that is precisely what he is saying.

Mr. Cassidy: That’s not the way he said it.

Mr. Lewis: You guys should resign, is that what you’re saying?

Hon. Mr. McKeough: He asked a question today to the same effect.

Hon. Mr. Davis: That’s right.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Rhodes: Where’s that caucus discipline over there?

Hon. Mr. Davis: I just want to interject this observation, and I confess my personal bias, but I think we’re lucky in this province of ours that our Minister of Health and our Ministry of Health is not receptive to that type of simplistic and distorted view of government.

Mr. Moffatt: He’s not here.

Mr. Lewis: That’s a wrong supposition.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I was impressed by the degree to which the Leader of the Opposition sought to engage this government on the matter of consultation.

Mr. Lewis: Yes.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I’ve heard this observation from him even before he became Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Lewis: That’s entirely possible.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I heard the questions on consultation with the art college, with various other post-secondary institutions --

Mr. Lewis: Going back to the old days.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Yes, and one should never forget the old days, I would say to the hon. Leader of the Opposition, because we have a very good memory and we may be reminding the people of some of those observations.

Mr. Lewis: When you used to exhort the students.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Lewis: You went down to the art college to inflame the students to riot.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Yes, I certainly did. I’m interested in consultation.

Mr. Cassidy: You’re really grasping for straws.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I sometimes think we do it seven days a week; never to the satisfaction, of course, of those who are directly affected. But I really ask the Leader of the Opposition, if he were to try to look at it objectively, if that’s possible? In what community in this province, with what city council or town council, with what board of hospital administrators will any government find agreement with respect to closing an institution or limiting its size? I’ve met with some of these people and I’m going to meet with some more this afternoon.

There isn’t a mayor, there’s not a hospital board chairman or an administrator who isn’t going to make a case for his community and for his hospital; and I totally understand that.

Mr. Lewis: Does that mean you don’t give them that opportunity?

Hon. Mr. Davis: To say you’re going to solve these problems through the straight process of consultation only; I wish it were possible, Mr. Speaker, but I’ve got to tell the Leader of the Opposition he has to be somewhat realistic.

Mr. Cassidy: They used to do that in Spain.

Hon. Mr. Davis: This government has the capacity and it has the courage to face that type of difficulty --

Mr. Martel: Who created it then?

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- and to make the type of decisions which are in the long-term interest of a health system that is providing -- and this is something that you sometimes forget over there --

Mr. Lewis: We agree.

Hon. Mr. Davis: You don’t state to the public, and I can understand this, that it happens to be the best system of medical services anywhere in this country. And I’ll be more expansive today --

Mr. Lewis: I’m sure you will.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- anywhere in North America!

You know, there has been a lot of emotion in the last couple of months. But let’s not forget one thing: Whatever restraint is being imposed, whatever alterations are being made in the system, the system in this province will still be the finest that can be had anywhere in this country; the hon. members across the House know it and it’s time the public had a greater awareness of it.

I have got to tell the hon. members opposite that this government, which they say is insensitive and has no feeling of humanity, this government helped create that system -- and they shouldn’t forget that in the process either.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Certainly we did -- and it’s the best.

Mr. Cassidy: You were dragged into it kicking and screaming. Remember John Robarts? What about John Robarts and Medicare?

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: People aren’t flocking to Manitoba or Saskatchewan; they may start moving to British Columbia now a little bit, but they sure weren’t for a while.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, to get back to the more relevant parts of my --

Mr. Cassidy: You’ve been studying the speeches of John Robarts, haven’t you?

Mr. Lewis: So far, so good.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Listen, don’t become too relaxed; I wouldn’t want that.

Mr. MacDonald: It’s a pretty imaginative approach.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Well, I know the member for York South, with his years of experience, likes imagination.

Mr. MacDonald: Look around this enlarged caucus and you can see the results of my imaginings.

Hon. Mr. Davis: He has been imagining things for the last X years in this House.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I can even go back to what the hon. member imagined some of his colleagues were trying to do to him at one point in time. I can remember that so well.

Mr. Lewis: Leave him alone. He imagines; you hallucinate!

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, I would say my hallucinations probably have greater relevance than anything the Leader of the Opposition has to contribute.

Mr. Moffatt: He imagines you were Minister of Education.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Well, I was. Those were the simple days.

An hon. member: Oh, yeah!

Hon. Mr. Davis: I don’t want the member for St. George (Mrs. Campbell) to take offence; when I said they were simple days. I meant they were uncomplicated days. She is gone; she is not here to listen to me. I am disappointed.

Mr. Sweeney: She has heard it before.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I say this respectfully to the member for St. George, if her colleague would convey this impression to her: She may have heard some of this before, but anything more that she can gain from these relevant passages this afternoon will stand her in totally good stead. I say that very kindly, very objectively. I will get around to the third group here shortly.

Mr. Cassidy: Now you see them, now you don’t.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Oh no, it’s worse than that, it’s worse than that.

Mr. Lewis: We could have a good campaign if they could be excluded.

Hon. Mr. Davis: And I know who would win -- even with them included!

Mr. Bullbrook: Do you know why Stuart Smith isn’t here to hear you today?

Hon. Mr. Davis: Because he is in Windsor.

Mr. Bullbrook: He has heard you before.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: He is in Windsor. Listen. I know the member for Sarnia is a very loyal party supporter; I sat and watched him yesterday during his leader’s observations, and there is no question he was totally embarrassed at what was going on.

Mr. Bullbrook: Very prideful I was.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I was just glad the member for Sarnia wasn’t giving the speech yesterday afternoon.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, I want to get back to these important passages.

Mr. Moffatt: Before somebody misses them.

Mr. Foulds: Because they have already been released to the press.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, what the Leader of the Opposition implied -- and I tried to analyse what he said -- what he implied, perhaps indirectly but nevertheless very clearly on Monday, is not only a lack of faith in this government, for that’s what he is paid to say --

Mr. Cassidy: He didn’t imply that; he said that.

Hon. Mr. Davis: That’s what he’s paid to do; that’s part of his responsibility -- and that shouldn’t be revolutionary or surprising to anyone in the gallery or anywhere else.

Mr. Cassidy: Not even to you.

Hon. Mr. Davis: But it’s his lack of faith in the people of this province and in their capacity --

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: His lack of faith in the people of this province --

Mr. Lewis: Come on.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- to separate their wants from their needs and to separate inconvenience from lack of service. I guess this is one of --

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The hon. Premier has the floor.

Hon. Mr. Davis: This is one of the fundamental differences between the Leader of the Opposition and those whom he leads and the party it is my privilege to lead. I want to return for a moment to the question of economic management.

Mr. Bullbrook: Yes, you should.

Hon. Mr. Davis: It is clear that the -- I heard that; I’ll get around to your capacity to manage. Not his personally, I would say to the member for Sarnia; I think it is tremendous.

Mr. Bullbrook: You are the author of this deficit situation we have had to endure since you became Premier.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Be very careful.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Bullbrook: You are the fellow who built the hospitals you are now closing. Tell us about that.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, I want to return to the --

Mr. Cassidy: Do you want a razor blade?

Hon. Mr. Davis: Listen, we’ve been here for 30 years and this province, in terms of health, education, transportation, social services, any field you can mention, is the leader in this country and hon. members very well know it.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: That’s right; that’s true.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: The only thing we haven’t got are the Olympics. We haven’t got the Olympics.

Interjections.

Mr. Bullbrook: You are the champion spendthrift of all time.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Bullbrook: You built the hospitals that you are now closing up.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I will say to the member for Sarnia that what his people promised to spend from 1967 onwards would curl his hair.

Mr. Shore: How is the German mark?

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Well, it would.

Mr. Speaker, I want to get back. It is becoming pretty obvious that the Leader of the Opposition is somewhat stealthy and quietly seeking to reach into the Liberal quiver of arrows and stones to sort of steal away the financial manager’s role as he gets ready for the next campaign, whenever that may be.

I have lunches with the Rotary Clubs -- which I know he is enjoying as well -- and the real estate boards across this province. They’re getting to the Leader of the Opposition; they really are, and I’m not referring to any caloric intake. The fiery radical, the champion of the little people, the man for whom no injustice could be tolerated, has now discovered fiscal responsibility. What a revelation! Where did he get it from?

Mr. Lewis: It is time.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Certainly it is.

Interjections.

An hon. member: You’re not getting at anybody.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: In his attack on the Throne Speech, he moved a non-confidence motion which, I say with respect, it is his traditional responsibility to do. No one questions that. I assume we’ll be voting on it on April 5 and I want all members to understand that the first plank in my friend’s campaign for sound economic management is to deny the people of Ontario a budget on April 6.

Mr. Renwick: He gave us the budget on Dec. 11.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I can see the billboards now: Vote for us because we don’t want a budget. That’s plank No. 1.

Mr. Nixon: Your last one put us in debt by $2 million. We cannot afford another.

Hon. Mr. Davis: That’s what I describe as a good beginning. It is a good start on fiscal responsibility.

Mr. Reid: You are out.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I want the House leader to remind the leader of the Liberal Party that that is precisely the approach to economic management he would be supporting by joining with his friend, the Leader of the Opposition, on April 5. Don’t let him think he can weasel his way out of the responsibility for what may happen.

Mr. Lewis: Offer your budget.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: He’s not going to be here on the night of April 5? I don’t believe it.

Mr. Shore: Red herring.

Mr. Kerrio: Salvation of Ontario.

Mr. Nixon: Your last budget gave us a deficit.

Mr. Lewis: He couldn’t be here; he has a barbecue.

Mr. Eaton: A pool party.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I want to remind both my friends across the House that if it is their wish that Ontario should be plunged into an unnecessary election at this time, an election that will cost the taxpayers millions of dollars; if it is their wish that this government be denied its opportunity to present its budget simply because the leader of the Liberal Party wants to get to know the people, or someone over there has taken a poll, then I would say --

[3:30]

Mr. Shore: It cost $500 million the last time.

Mr. Lewis: He’s missing.

Mr. Mancini: We know where he is, he is in Chatham.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Chatham; Windsor -- he’s in western Ontario.

Mr. Lewis: He’s missing this for Chatham?

Hon. Mr. Davis: Listen, you don’t get this kind of entertainment anywhere.

Mr. Lewis: Who would believe it?

Mr. Nixon: It’s the most repetitious show in town.

Mr. Lewis: He’s propping up the member for Windsor-Walkerville (Mr. B. Newman).

Hon. Mr. Rhodes: He can’t go to the Soo either.

Hon. Mr. Davis: What I want the members of the House and the public to know, Mr. Speaker, is that the calling of any election will be on their heads across the House, and it will be a critical issue they will have to answer for in any campaign.

Mr. Nixon: Do you know Eddie Goodman almost got into the wrong meeting last night?

Hon. Mr. Davis: Listen, ask your friends in London North. I intend to be done by 4 o’clock, I hope. I’ll give you a little quote later on.

Mr. Yakabuski: What has happened to you fellows?

Mr. Eaton: What’s gone wrong?

Mr. MacDonald: The Premier is interrupting himself.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Yes, I am, far too much. I would acknowledge that from the member for York South. I’m interrupting myself far too often.

The leader of the Liberal Party, Mr. Speaker -- and I was very sincere at the opening of the House in extending my congratulations to him; I’m not going to repeat them except to say that I understand some of the difficulties of being a leader of a political party --

Mr. Lewis: But!

Hon. Mr. Davis: No, there is no “but.” I do wish him well; not too well. But I would say because I’ve said it before, that in spite of differences, the member for Brant-Haldimand-Norfolk --

Mr. Nixon: How soon you forget.

Hon. Mr. Davis: When he was the member for Brant I had no problem at all; it’s when he became the member for --

Mr. Nixon: You used to go out of your way to call me that, as I recall.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I do express my best wishes to him as well; most sincerely, in spite of the -- .

Mr. Nixon: Not on my retirement, I hope.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I was wondering if that might take place. But whether that takes place or not, I do express to him by best wishes.

Mr. Lewis: Why?

Hon. Mr. Davis: I’ve got some advice, now, for the leader of the Liberal Party. He really shouldn’t give in so easily when his colleague, the Leader of the Opposition, seeks to steal the financial management issue from him. Please convey this to him. For while the NDP may handle it more effectively than it was handled in the last campaign, the record in government should also be kept in mind. I offer this only as assistance to the leader of the Liberal Party in his battle for retention of this issue. I think there’s a lot to be learned elsewhere.

Mr. Lewis: Don’t be silly; there is nothing to be learned elsewhere.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Oh yes there is, and you know it.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, he might take a look at what was the pride and joy of the New Democratic Party of this country, the great Province of British Columbia.

Mr. Lewis: Stick to Ontario, for heaven’s sake; that was in the past.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Of course, I apologize to the Leader of the Opposition for mentioning British Columbia.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I really apologize for mentioning it. I struck a sensitive nerve.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I did indeed. On Dec. 12, the day after the NDP experiment was rejected out there -- and really, I should not be so hard on my friends in the New Democratic Party; they are, after all, so fair and reasonable in their criticisms of the government here, always fair and reasonable -- I could mention what happened to the ICBC; but that would be unfair, I don’t want to do it.

I could discuss BC Hydro; but I won’t. Or the transit bureau of that province; but I don’t think it really is that relevant.

Mr. MacDonald: How about Krauss-Maffei?

Hon. Mr. Davis: The people will know. Indeed, when one looks at it, especially if you get into deficits, it’s really something else.

Interjections by hon. members.

Mr. Speaker: Order please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: But with an NDP average growth rate in spending of 28.5 per cent and a forecast record of 30.4 per cent in this past year, economic management in the terms of the New Democratic Party very simply means economic disaster.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I am saying this as constructively as I can.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: But it’s true and they know it’s true. This is the type of performance, this is the kind of direction and the policy that the leader of the Liberal Party would be supporting if he joined the New Democrats to prevent us from continuing to govern. He is supporting that type of approach to government.

Mr. Reid: I think the Premier is stretching it a little bit.

Hon. Mr. Davis: The Liberal leader certainly is.

Mr. Reid: We are not supporting you, that’s who we are not supporting.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I don’t care what he says in this House, that’s what he is doing.

Mr. Reid: We are not supporting you and your phoney programmes.

Mr. Eaton: They didn’t do anything for you up north, eh?

Mr. Sargent: Just fed up with you, that’s all.

Hon. Mr. Davis: It has occurred to me that there may be some other motivation behind the Liberal Party’s rekindled desire to obstruct the work of this House and force an election.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I know that all of us make observations from time to time and we wonder why we made them.

Mr. Reid: Yours always happens during elections, though.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I know that Feb. 20 was quite a while ago, but you know, the leader of the Liberal Party is quoted in the St. Catharines Standard -- and that is a very reputable paper --

Mr. Good: What happened to the member for St. Catharines (Mr. Johnston)?

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- where he told a meeting of politicians in Metropolitan Toronto --

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- the Grits would not vote with the NDP in the Legislature to bring down the minority government.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: That wasn’t long ago, but that is while there was still some degree of leadership. But what was worse -- and I think it’s a tremendous quotation; this is really quite incredible -- and this is directly a quote of the new leader of the Liberal Party of Ontario, not too many days ago: “I suspect if we bring down the government on this issue they may win the subsequent election with a thumping majority and be in power for another four years.”

Mr. Lewis: My, oh my.

Mr. Reid: That’s as close as you will come to thumping, I’ll tell you. The last time some of you will thump your desks.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I’ll tell you this much, the member for Brant-Haldimand-Norfolk, even if he thought we would, would never have said so in public.

Mr. Nixon: I never thought you would and I don’t think you will.

Hon. Mr. Davis: He never would have said so. But you know, Mr. Speaker, I am a little suspicious --

Mr. Sweeney: It took him a month to learn.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- the motivation behind the amendment yesterday may be something else. They may be afraid of the April 6 budget. It may be that they are a little concerned --

Mr. Reid: Tell us about the supplementary estimates you bring in in the fall.

Mr. Sweeney: One billion dollars, two billion, three billion.

Hon. Mr. Davis: They may be a little concerned that their $2 billion projection of the deficit will not be borne out. They may be a little concerned about that.

Mr. Reid: What is the deficit going to be?

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Shore: Give us a little preview.

Hon. Mr. Davis: They may be afraid that their prophecy of gloom and doom will be destroyed by the facts; something that party has always had difficulty in coming to grips with.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: They may even find facts that will discredit their approach and they may find facts that they don’t want us to put to the people. I don’t want to exaggerate these things --

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Of course not. Of course I don’t. But the budget planned for April 6 would have constituted a similar expression of faith in the capacity of our people, and it’s up to my friends opposite --

Mr. Sweeney: We have faith in the people. It is you we don’t trust.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- it’s as simple as this, to decide whether or not that expression of faith is to be allowed to proceed.

Mr. Lewis: If you want to bring it in now, bring it in now; do it.

Hon. Mr. Davis: It is up to the gentlemen and ladies opposite that we will be allowed to continue and allow this government to continue its battle against inflation and its battle to ensure an economically stable future for this province. From the very beginning, our party has stood alone in this province in supporting total co-operation with the national anti-inflation programme.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: You people have not supported it. You make no bones about it.

Mr. Cassidy: You mean the anti-wage programme.

Hon. Mr. Davis: We also stood alone in saying there would be no special cases, no inequities, no last-minute interventions by any hastily concocted provincial board.

Mr. Cassidy: You mean that anti-wage programme.

Mr. Lewis: Rough justice is what you call it.

Hon. Mr. Davis: We stood alone in this country for governmental spending restraints and reducing the drain on the gross national product by too much spending.

Mr. Good: What a distortion of the facts!

Mr. Cassidy: Show me what restraint you are exercising.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: On April 5 we may stand alone in this House in our defence of a bright and economically viable future.

Mr. Singer: When the argument gets hot you rant and rage at Ottawa.

Hon. Mr. Davis: We may stand alone in wanting to provide people with secure and comprehensive medical care by streamlining the system.

Mr. Singer: That is what it is?

Hon. Mr. Davis: We may stand alone -- read the whole Throne Speech -- in our commitment to reduce welfare spending and encourage more people to seek work.

Mr. Cassidy: Which is not available.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I want the people in the Liberal Party to hear this because I really know that the NDP have gone beyond any hope in this area.

Mr. Shore: Tell the Minister of Community and Social Services (Mr. Taylor) to hear it.

Hon. Mr. Davis: We may stand alone in our commitment not to squander Ontario’s resources or destroy free enterprise in the north. We may stand alone on all of these issues on the evening of April 5. I’ve got to tell the members opposite something: We may stand alone here in this Legislature, and if we do, I tell you we will be standing with the people in this province and if we are forced by the other parties --

Mr. Lewis: Yes, but out there in the great public we will have hordes.

Mr. MacDonald: What about the 64 per cent who voted against you?

Hon. Mr. Davis: We will take our case to the people and we’ll let them know where we stand and we will sure as heck let them know where you people stand in the process.

Mr. Makarchuk: They have insomnia on the back benches there.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I am not really impressed by the Leader of the Opposition’s sort of sense of helplessness about the situation the Legislature now finds itself in.

Mr. Lewis: I don’t feel helpless.

Hon. Mr. Davis: A little bit helpless yesterday.

Mr. Moffatt: At least he is not beside himself.

Hon. Mr. Davis: He appears to have taken the view that he’s been trapped by events and is a victim of some obscure Liberal plot.

Mr. Lewis: We invited events, my friend. We are not trapped by them. I’m quite happy with them.

Mr. Warner: Are you talking down?

Mr. MacDonald: It is that group down there that is upset.

Mr. Lewis: We moved the amendment.

Hon. Mr. Davis: There is no question but that that amendment threatens the stability of this Parliament. So he thinks he will shift part of the blame that the fat may now be in the fire, as would the leader of the Liberal Party yesterday. But his cavalier action indicates he simply cannot. His amendment, and I say this to the leader of the Liberal Party, is as profound as his party’s 1975 election platform. It really is profound. I don’t know who drafted it for him, whether it was the member for Wilson Heights (Mr. Singer) or who did it.

Mr. Good: You lost the 23 seats, we didn’t.

Hon. Mr. Davis: For example, he would force an election on the people because some would say they would have hospitals stay open -- and who would not -- and would say that this government is insensitive. He would say that municipalities and school boards who are being asked to share with Ontario the job of cutting priorities and protecting our economic future --

Mr. Nixon: Carry the load.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Certainly they are.

Mr. Cassidy: You are passing the buck.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I’ve got some news for you -- I think the municipalities and the school boards are going to be able to do it, in spite of the observations you people across from us make.

Mr. Singer: Not much longer. That’s your fault.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Ceilings on growth in social services are being provided to ensure that this province can always afford the social services it needs for its people. This appears to be, in his mind, a cause for an election and the Liberal leader appears to have decided to use these levers of obstruction and instability. The Liberal leader apologized for any comments he made --

[3:45]

Mr. Singer: Anyone who disagrees with you obstructs or is unstable.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- which were misinterpreted with respect to Marx and the NDP. I thought that was a great observation.

Mr. Singer: The Liberal leader expressed it before.

Hon. Mr. Davis: As well he should have. The Leader of the Opposition wondered why Adam Smith or Sun Yat-sen were not cited as philosophical antecedents for certain forms of Ontario political thoughts. I have to say that Marx, Sun Yat-sen and Adam Smith are far too thoughtful ancients for the Liberal Party in Ontario and its new leader to relate to. Far too ancient.

Mr. Peterson: For you, include King Farouk.

Mr. Lewis: I also said Henry VIII.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I am usually a charitable person. I really am.

Mr. Peterson: Come on; let’s hear some desk thumping.

Hon. Mr. Davis: If it had been the Liberal leader’s maiden speech, if this was going to continue, I might not make some of these observations but I have to.

Mr. Nixon: Go ahead.

Hon. Mr. Davis: It is a very serious matter and we are taking it seriously. Yesterday’s nonchalant speech -- it is the only way I can describe it -- the negativism in it and the almost --

Mr. Lewis: Studied.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- casually drafted innocuous motion -- I used to play a little football -- they are reminiscent of the halfback who has suffered one too many tackles --

Mr. Shore: What position did you play?

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- and sort of seems incapable of understanding the play, let alone carrying the ball.

Mr. Riddell: You were a lot better last fall.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I believe that this Legislature has the right to know precisely --

Mr. Gaunt: Are you an Argo fan?

Hon. Mr. Davis: Yes, I used to play a little. This Legislature has the right to know precisely what initiatives and measures the success of a non-confidence motion on April 5 will affect. Let us look at what a defeat on the Throne Speech would affect:

The steady progression toward consolidation of financial resources and the services which these resources provide --

Mr. Cassidy: What on earth does that mean?

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- in the protection of the ultimate interests of the citizens of this province is something my friends are prepared to unite against.

Mr. Singer: Another $2 billion deficit? Or maybe $2.5 billion?

Mr. Lewis: What does that mean?

Hon. Mr. Davis: The continued reduction of government spending at all levels is something the Liberals and New Democrats appear to be uniting against.

Mr. MacDonald: Your budget will be bigger this year.

Hon. Mr. Davis: The maintenance of a healthy climate for the growth of the private sector and the generation of greater wealth for all our citizens is what the Liberals and the New Democrats are prepared to unite against.

Mr. Lewis: You make it sound like the anti-Christ.

Hon. Mr. Davis: That, my friends, is only part of the story. A programme by the Ministry of Labour to reduce labour unrest in this province through greater analysis and study and initiatives. This, too, my Liberal friends and NDP friends appear to be uniting against.

Mr. Singer: The teachers will certainly attest to that.

Hon. Mr. Davis: The return to the taxpayer -- the Metro members should think of this one -- of unused funds due to the strikes of employees of school boards. My friends are prepared to bring this House down so that the taxpayers in Metro will not get relief from this legislation. They are opposing it. Sure they are.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: They are prepared to deprive the farmers of an income stabilization programme. That, too, they are prepared to unite against. Oh, yes, they are.

Mr. Cassidy: You have no credibility at all.

Hon. Mr. Davis: They might as well know discredit is their name.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, they are quite obviously against the home warranty programme as well. How are they going to explain that on the hustings to all the new home-buyers? They are opposed to it. They don’t want to see it go through.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Lewis: I’d be willing to pay for this performance.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Despite yesterday’s motion and the posturing by the opposition members of this Legislature, Mr. Speaker, do you know what they haven’t done? They haven’t told the people of Ontario what they stand for.

Mr. Lewis: Yes, we have. We’ll tell them more in the campaign.

Mr. Sweeney: The Premier didn’t even keep his election promises.

Hon. Mr. Davis: They sure know what they stand against.

Mr. Lewis: We have told them

chapter and verse.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Obviously, my friends opposite don’t want to hear the development goals which the Throne Speech clearly indicated this Legislature was going to be asked to consider and support.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Clearly, they would wish this province with no goals, no development strategy and no capacity to protect its future.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, of course this would not be too surprising for those who have watched the vacillation and contradiction of the Liberal leader, on this issue, for example, since his recent election to that post. Let me offer one example in a kindly fashion to him. In my good friend’s speech at the convention -- I watched a portion of it --

Mr. Nixon: Excellent.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- which chose him as leader. I thought the member for London Centre (Mr. Peterson) made a very good speech.

Mr. Nixon: Excellent -- very good.

Mr. Moffatt: Tomorrow starts Monday.

An hon. member: Chose the wrong guy again.

Hon. Mr. Davis: He lamented the disappearance of farm land. He underlined the need to do something about it and then --

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- later on in that same speech. You see, Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is wrong in believing the leader of the Liberal Party vacillates between lunch and dinner. He can move more quickly than that. It can be in the same speech. Later on in that same speech, he called for the dismantling of those levels of government and for the limiting of this province’s very real capacity to exercise any influence, to slow down the paving or the asphalt, or the reduction or the over-development of farm land.

He raises the issues and then some of the vehicles that we can use to come to grips with the problems -- and he then suggests in the same speech that they should be totally eliminated. Mr. Speaker, he gladly offers an umbrella when the sun shines but wants it taken away when it rains.

Mr. Speaker, I would be delighted and I will be looking forward to debating his approach to this issue in this House and perhaps across Ontario, if need be. I say to the member from the Soo --

Mr. Sargent: Why are you running scared?

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- I might even ask him to join me in Sault Ste. Marie, if he isn’t too frightened to go back there.

An hon. member: You mean he is prepared to go into the north again?

Mr. Nixon: I hear your member there is in trouble.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Don’t put Sault Ste. Marie on his itinerary; not on his itinerary.

Hon. Mr. Rhodes: They don’t like it there.

An hon. member: You don’t want to go north.

Hon. Mr. Davis: But there are development goals; and these are some of the elements, along with greater assistance to the mining industry, that my friends opposite are clearly against. I am not surprised. They are consistent. The NDP has taken its stand against assisting the mining industry -- the party of nationalizing potash; the party of nationalizing the resource industries --

Mr. Renwick: That’s right.

Hon. Mr. Davis: If they can’t nationalize them, they tax them out of business --

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Davis: The pulp and paper industry -- I can recall the member for Welland (Mr. Swart) asking when we were going to nationalize it. I didn’t even mention it when I was in his riding the other night. Temptation was great, but I behaved myself. I didn’t mention it.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: At least, Mr. Speaker, they are being consistent. They still believe in nationalization of the basic industries in the Province of Ontario. But what I am disappointed in, Mr. Speaker, is the Liberal Party. By taking the same stand on this vote, they will be voting against the Throne Speech -- and they are saying some pretty basic things about their commitment to free enterprise in the north and throughout Ontario.

I say to the member for London North (Mr. Shore), who professes to be a great free enterpriser, along with the member for London Centre (Mr. Peterson) -- well, he’s the most. Does he want to know what he is doing? That is the most. He can construe that any way he wants. Does he want to know what he is doing? In supporting that amendment he is voting against the expressed direction that this government wishes to take in assisting the development of the mining industry within the free enterprise system of the province. And they are going to have to take the consequences. We are not going to let them forget about it.

An hon. member: It will be hard to get out of.

Hon. Mr. McKeough: You are as red as they are. You are red over there.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: And you know, Mr. Speaker --

Hon. Mr. McKeough: Join together!

Hon. Mr. Davis: I’ve got to say this, it’s not red tape; no question.

Hon. Mr. McKeough: That’s right.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Of course, any leader who is capable of calling the reduction of welfare costs with respect to able-bodied people, pandering to some right-wing sentiments, I think, is --

Mr. Lewis: That’s not what he said when it was announced. When it was announced he congratulated you. It became right-wing after.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Certainly he did. I just find it totally amazing. I think he used the term “red neck sentiment”; anybody who expresses that, I think, is capable of expressing anything.

Mr. Lewis: That’s true. He is in the Liberal tradition.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I make this promise to the House: To no longer express surprise at the meanderings of a party which lacks any philosophy, which understands very few urban and critical issues and offers no direction for the people of this province. I express no surprise anymore. Yesterday’s exhibition was a clear example of the nonchalant and casual way they would choose to deal with Ontario’s vital interests.

Mr. Lewis: Kind of “Trudeauesque,” you might say. Come on, he’s their Prime Minister; let them come with us.

Interjections.

Mr. Lewis: Bill Stewart is out phoning the judges.

Hon. Mr. McKeough: Well, they’re not in Chatham, I’ll tell you that.

Hon. Mr. Davis: There is more that could be said, of a partisan nature, but I’m going to resist. I’m going to add only one final thought to this part of my observations --

Mr. Singer: How are you going to vote?

Hon. Mr. Davis: Anyone who believes that yesterday was a total accident and that one of my colleagues opposite found himself unwillingly trapped in some chain of events, is naive and simply mistaken. Ontario is faced with an effort to force an unnecessary election on the people of this province by two opposition parties jockeying for position. Insofar as the government I lead is concerned, I offer to this Legislature and to the people of this province one fundamental pledge: We will continue to govern, to lay before the people and the Legislature the elements of our programmes.

Mr. MacDonald: Including your budget?

Hon. Mr. Davis: If you allow us.

An hon. member: Bring it in tomorrow.

Mr. Cassidy: Go ahead.

Hon. Mr. Davis: We will continue with our legislative plans and programmes. We will not alter the ongoing commitment to govern this province which was sought in the last election campaign. The Progressive Conservative government of Ontario shall continue to govern until it is defeated by the opposition in this Legislature. It is as simple as that.

Mr. Singer: It won’t be long.

Hon. Mr. Davis: The people shall continue to be served and we’re not going to move precipitously with respect to a campaign until there is a combined no-confidence vote, such as the one that apparently is scheduled to transpire on April 5. When the opposition parties decide they will force an election, there will be an election in this province. Until that time, the people of this province have the right to know that government continues to serve and problems continue to be dealt with. The initial goals of this government --

Mr. Nixon: That’s what you’re being paid for.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Listen, ask one of your members; we’re going to try and deal with one this afternoon. I’ll see you there in about an hour.

Mr. Warner: It is 4 o’clock.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I was going to try to be done by 4 o’clock but we were pretty tolerant on Monday last. We were pretty tolerant.

An hon. member: We don’t mind; carry on.

Hon. Mr. Davis: The initial goals of this government, established in the Throne Speeches last fall md this spring with respect to guiding Ontario through -- let’s not kid one another -- tough economic times which are international in scope, will continue to dominate government policies; the continued commitment to underline the need for an affordable society in all government actions will continue to dominate government spending and activity. Our continued participation in the national programme to fight inflation will also persist, you might as well know it.

[4:00]

The security and freedom of the individual from oversized government, economic breakdown at the institutional and personal level from inequity and disadvantage -- these remain the guiding principles and directions of this government.

A firm position with respect to Ontario’s interest within Confederation and Canada, with respect to energy, with respect to trade, and with respect to tax sharing -- these will also continue to determine our posture as part of this country.

A firm position with the public sector with respect to strikes and withdrawal of services will typify the discipline that we seek to provide as an example.

Encouragement for moderate growth across this province in the interests of the economic viability of all regions will dominate our government’s overall strategies and attitudes.

A belief in the need for government to provide greater safety for the consumer, for the motorist, through more effective safety regulations, continues to typify this government’s concern with respect to the personal well-being of the citizens of this province. If the opposition parties persist, and if we are unable to effect the improved changes in the administration of justice, the rights of people, the blind or the homeowner with a meaningful warranty, if this is their decision --

Mr. Singer: Start by giving the Attorney General (Mr. McMurtry) more money.

Mr. Lewis: You have had 30 years to do that.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: But, Mr. Speaker --

Mr. Speaker: Order. Order, please. Order.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- this will not prevent us from continuing to fight for these things with every means at our disposal.

Mr. Lewis: You are going to have to.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, it may very well be that things have been set in motion here that preclude this government from continuing to govern. That is something ultimately for my friends across the House to determine. You know there was --

Mr. Lewis: Have faith in the public.

Mr. Renwick: They will decide.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Oh no, let’s not kid one another.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Davis: You people will be making this determination.

Mr. Lewis: Have faith in your great public.

Hon. Mr. Davis: There was a belief, Mr. Speaker --

An hon. member: They don’t want to know. They don’t want an election.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- that a minority Legislature could have worked in this province; I think there was a belief.

Mr. Lewis: Not the way you have behaved.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order. Order, please.

Hon Mr. Davis: I think there was a belief that political parties would be responsible enough to give it a chance to work --

Mr. Lewis: You don’t even have a Legislature.

Interjections.

Mr. Martel: We gave it a chance.

Mr. Cassidy: We made it work.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- and obviously, Mr. Speaker, on April 5 --

Hon. Mr. Wells: They want you to work here.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- it will be the date for broad public judgements of the sincerity of that effort.

Mr. Martel: Balls.

Hon. Mr. Rhodes: That was the member for Sudbury East.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order.

Interjections

Hon. Mr. Davis: A great contribution, Elie. A great contribution.

Hon. Mr. Wells: You just get down to work here.

Hon. Mr. Davis: You are a great contribution.

Mr. Lewis: Come on, that is political patois around here.

Hon. Mr. Davis: As Premier, Mr. Speaker, and as leader of our party, I know that there is nothing in the present obstructed state of, affairs that is the doing of our government. And I can live with my conscience, knowing that we have given minority government, and are still prepared to give it, our very best. And we will be encouraged by one thought, Mr. Speaker --

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- and I just want you to listen to this because I think this may be, relevant.

Mr. Sargent: Get off your knees. Quit begging!

Hon. Mr. Davis: We will be encouraged by one thought as we face the difficult days ahead in trying to preserve stability in government for this province --

Mr. Lewis: Come on now.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- and quality in governmental activity on behalf of its people.

Mr. Lewis: By repeating it, it doesn’t happen, my friend.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: There is no battle of ideology that burdens this Legislature.

Mr. Lewis: Oh, yes there is.

Hon. Mr. Davis: There is no battle over ideas or principles. Who is kidding one another?

Mr. Lewis: Not at all.

Hon. Mr. Davis: This is a battle purely and simply over responsibility -- those who possess it and those who do not. And you know what category you are in. There is a battle over those who would provide monolithic government and insensitive bureaucracy, massive tax-gobbling programmes as answers to all of the problems, even those outside the purview of government --

Interjections.

Mr. Cassidy: That is your record. That is what you’ve been doing for the last five years.

Mr. Lewis: That is what people think of you now.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- and those who are trying to hold the line and provide greater economic security and stability for Ontario and enhancing the real freedom, in an economic sense, of our citizens.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: And you know, in playing a game with our system, and that commenced again yesterday, neither on the left nor on the right, was there a statement of conviction or principle in the total address made yesterday, but purely a whim. It’s a party that showed more clearly than ever before that it is a branch plant of a national party with no direction, no dependability and no policy, none whatsoever.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: It is a party not only incapable of governing but clearly not even competent in opposition.

Interjections.

Mr. Reid: You must be in worse shape than we thought.

Mr. Lewis: He shouldn’t be allowed to.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: If we are forced into this unnecessary election, it will be time for the people of Ontario not only to consider the economic choices that are critical to their future but the political choices that would gravely threaten their future. There is one party that is prepared to seek a means of protecting this future, its long-term interest and the freedom of self-respect of its people and do so in this Legislature.

Mr. Lewis: You are more self-righteous than we are.

Mr. Shore: You sound like the Leader of the Opposition more and more.

Hon. Mr. Davis: It is a pleasure for me, Mr. Speaker, in speaking in support of that very excellent address delivered by Her Honour, to lead that party in serving the people of Ontario at a most critical time in our province’s history. We are a party and a government --

Mr. Lewis: Good grief!

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- that sees an Ontario where self-respect, economic security and social stability are the heritage and birthright of all, an Ontario where health care, social service and good government are given within a context that is ever-broadening and ever-changing --

Mr. Warner: Look at all the debt.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- an Ontario where the rural life is a life of quality and satisfaction, a reward and satisfaction --

Interjections.

Mr. Cassidy: No jobs too.

Mr. Eaton: You know a lot about rural Ontario. It’s pretty obvious over there.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Eaton: And what are you over there?

An hon. member: Take you out of your hundred acre farm.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- an Ontario where government knows its place and where the average citizen can aspire --

Mr. McNeil: Old MacDonald had a farm.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Mr. Davis: -- to any level of success and achievement, an Ontario undeterred by temporary international economic difficulties and one that is strengthened by our resolve as a society to preserve a bright future for all by making the choices that must be made now.

Mr. Lewis: This is as close to a soap opera as you have come. Good grief, get another speech writer, for heaven’s sake.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I don’t have eight researchers.

Mr. Cassidy: Just one lyricist.

Hon. Mr. Davis: It is my obligation to urge all members across the House, in spite of those amendments, to support the Speech from the Throne and to reject the amendments offered.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Davis: It is a privilege for me to reflect the broad scope of public opinion in this province and urge my fellow members of this House on all sides to support the vote when it takes place on April 5.

Mr. Lewis: That was a most enjoyable speech. Tamer than I expected.

Mr. Renwick moved the adjournment of the debate.

Motion agreed to.

Clerk of the House: The 22nd order, House in committee of supply.

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES, MINISTRY OF COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL SERVICES

Mr. Chairman: Does the hon. minister have an opening statement?

Hon. Mr. Taylor: Mr. Chairman, before moving to the first vote, 2602, I would like to point out that in these supplementary estimates this ministry is seeking nearly 36 million additional dollars to the 1975-1976 estimates of $855,064,000.

Just over $27 million or three-quarters of that increase is required in support of our income-maintenance programme. The remainder is for the support of our social and institutional services programmes; some $7 million additional for services to children; and $1.3 million additional services for adults.

The additional funds requested in the income-maintenance area are largely to cover increases in benefits to recipients affected since tie 1975-1976 estimates. An additional $4.8 million is required to cover the budgets of the Children’s Aid Societies -- which, after lengthy discussions, were approved at higher levels than were allowed for in the estimates.

The extra $2.3 million required in day nursery operating fundi is due to a greater number of children being subsidized at a higher than anticipated cost. A further $1.3 million is necessary for homes for the aged, due to higher per diem costs.

I’ll ask that we consider vote 2602, item 1.

Mr. McClellan: Mr. Chairman, because of the seriousness with which our party views the events that have been taking place, the actions of this ministry during the recess between sessions, I want to perhaps spend a little bit longer than one normally does on the overview.

Let one begin with the overall reduction in expenditures -- the level of the restraint programme for this particular ministry, which has been set at eight per cent.

Let me remind the House, Mr. Chairman, that on Dec. 11 the Treasurer of Ontario (Mr. McKeough) said to the Legislature, and I quote: “Welfare spending will be held to the rate of inflation, plus projected growth in caseloads.” In fact, while other ministries have been held to a level of 10 per cent, the Ministry of Community and Social Services has been held to an overall level of eight per cent. In fact, for the majority of social service programming, and for a substantial part of income maintenance programming, the actual level of increase over 1975 is 5.5 per cent.

The explanation offered is that prior capital commitments by this ministry necessitate the lowering of service and income maintenance and transfer payments to 5.5 per cent in order to achieve an eight per cent overall. I really have to question that rationale; these capital commitments. I really seriously wonder, Mr. Chairman, how much of that is, in fact, new money and how much of that money for capital construction is, in fact, recycled from old Tory budgets. I suspect a major portion of the $18 million committed to capital construction next year is, in fact, recycled from previous budgets.

What you are doing is promising the same thing each year -- year after year -- with the same money, and never do you get around to doing what you said you would do in the budget.

[4:15]

In fact, your budget resembles nothing so much as your campaign promises. You promised in campaigns to do this and do that and you promised in your budgets to do this and to do that and you do nothing. For example, in day care you are spending next year $6 million in day care capital. The fact is this $6 million comes out of moneys allocated in 1972 -- $10 million then -- and moneys allocated in 1974 -- $15 million then. You still haven’t spent it. It has been in three budgets and it will be carried over to four.

I would ask if I can conclude my remarks; the minister may want to respond but I would like to proceed because of the length of my remarks. Could I just move through and then perhaps the minister could respond? Is that acceptable?

Hon. Mr. Taylor: May I say that my friend, the member for Bellwoods is really dealing with the projections for the next budget rather than the current supplementary estimates. When he talks in terms of the additional allotment in the next fiscal year in terms of the eight per cent and how that reflects in terms of the 5% per cent and the reasons for that, I feel it is more relevant to next year’s estimates that the supplementary estimates we are considering today.

I would be delighted, if the Chair wishes, to get into the explanation of the additional moneys my ministry will have in terms of the various social services and the agencies for next year but I hardly think it is relevant in light of the matters for determination today.

Mr. Lewis: I would like to speak to the point of order. If that position were to obtain, the entire pattern of the debate that surrounded the Health estimates should have been ruled out of order. As a matter of fact, we spent the Health estimates discussing hospital closings for which not a penny was budgeted in the supplementary estimates.

The reality is that particularly the leadoffs for an estimate -- supplementary estimates or major estimates -- are always seen as vehicles for major statements which flow naturally from them. I think that that is perfectly consistent with the kind of thing which this Legislature has permitted.

Mr. Chairman: It has been traditional, from my observations, that when you bring in a set of estimates the two lead-offs and the minister in his opening remarks can sort of given an overview, having regard for income maintenance, services to children, services to adults. After that is completed you go into an item-by-item consideration of the money to be spent, at which time those speaking can address themselves to those particular items. Unless I get some other direction from the committee, that’s how we will continue.

Hon. Mr. Taylor: Mr. Chairman, at your pleasure, I am not objecting to what my friend says; if the Chair rules that it is appropriate and in order, of course, by all means. If you wish, and if my friend has made his overview or general remarks, I would be prepared to respond to them. If he wishes to continue, of course, I will defer until he finishes his remarks.

Mr. Chairman: I would like to caution the member for Bellwoods that we don’t want a full-flowing debate as though we were dealing with a whole --

Mr. Lewis: You would never get a debate with that minister.

Mr. Chairman: It has been the practice in the past to allow the lead-off speakers of the two opposition parties an overview in keeping with the amount of money and the nature of the expenditure. The minister will have an opportunity to reply. When we get into an item-by-item consideration of the money being expended, you will have to address yourself to that specific item. Is that agreed?

Mr. Foulds: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, there is no quorum.

Mr. Chairman ordered that the bells be rung for four minutes.

Mr. Chairman: The member for Bellwoods may continue, having regard for our understanding earlier.

Mr. McClellan: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to continue by looking at the reality of the minister’s assertion that it has been necessary to restrain social service expenditures more severely than the restraints imposed on other ministries because of the growth in his ministry over the last five-year period. While it’s true there has been growth, it has not been that substantial in relation to gross provincial product or in relation to gross provincial expenditures. A good chunk of your impressive annual growth rate can be accounted for by the transfer of the mental retardation services from the Ministry of Health to your ministry.

I want to point out to the House that our research team, which causes our opposition so much teeth-gnashing, has prepared some interesting material. Using the Statistics Canada definition of social welfare expenditure, which includes items such as workmen’s compensation and tax credits as well as income maintenance and child welfare, the five-year average expended as a percentage of total expenditures was computed by us for the 10 provinces. Do you know what place Ontario is in, Mr. Minister? You might guess; I doubt that you would. It’s in eighth place, behind New Brunswick, behind Prince Edward Island, behind Newfoundland --

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: Look at the unemployment they have there. Of course their expenditures are higher. How ridiculous!

Mr. McClellan: The minister had asserted that it was his tremendous growth rate that was the basis for more severe restraints.

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: Just look at the other factors.

Mr. Foulds: You keep managing the economy your way and we will have employment rates that high.

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: I beg your pardon?

Mr. Foulds: You heard me.

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: No, I didn’t. It is probably just as well, it probably was totally irrelevant.

Mr. McClellan: The fact is, Mr. Chairman, that community and social service expenditures, as a percentage of the total provincial budget, have remained reasonably constant over the past five-year period and I suspect any increase that has taken place is accounted for, again by the addition of the large mental retardation services expenditures from health to your ministry.

I want to deal as well with the problem of the restrain