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

May 15, 2001

37th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2001-May-15 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 15 May 2001 Mardi 15 mai 2001

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

SUMMER ACTIVE CAMPAIGN

AGRICULTURAL HALL OF FAME

ONTARIO ASSOCIATION

FOR COMMUNITY LIVING

SCIENCE FAIR

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

POLICE WEEK

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

BRAMPTON BATTALION

VISITORS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

NIAGARA CENTRAL AIRPORT COMMISSION ACT, 2001

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

COMMUNITY LIVING WEEK

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

EDUCATION FUNDING

PLEA BARGAINING

HOSPITAL FUNDING

YOUNG ENTREPRENEUR PROGRAM

EDUCATION FUNDING

TRANSIT SERVICES

INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM FINANCING

ELECTRONIC MONITORING

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

VICTIMS OF CRIME

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

CLINICAL RESEARCH

VISITOR

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

VISITOR

PETITIONS

NORTHERN HEALTH TRAVEL GRANT

PROTECTION OF MINORS

AIR QUALITY

ELECTRICITY GENERATING STATION

SALE OF SCHOOLS

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

FRAIS DE TRANSPORT

AUX FINS MÉDICALES

HORSE RIDING SAFETY

SERVICES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

PROTECTION OF MINORS

PROSTATE CANCER

ORDERS OF THE DAY

2001 ONTARIO BUDGET

ADJOURNMENT DEBATE

IMMIGRANTS' SKILLS

Tuesday 15 May 2001 Mardi 15 mai 2001

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Mr David Caplan (Don Valley East): Ontario's affordable housing crisis deepens, yet page 15 of Ontario's 2001 budget proclaims, "Housing Outlook

Healthy." What unmitigated gall.

Here are the facts:

Ontario's vacancy rate is 1.6%, with the city of Ottawa having the dubious distinction of being the tightest rental market in the country, at 0.2%.

Rents are rising at double the rate of inflation while Ontario's three-million-plus tenants are seeing their household incomes drop. On average, three families

per hour are applying for scarce social housing units in the city of Toronto.

Where is the provincial leadership to even acknowledge Ontario's affordable housing crisis, let alone to provide solutions? I can tell you one thing: it's not

found in the 2001 Ontario budget. Clearly, the Harris government has once again failed Ontario's working families.

I have introduced Bill 37, the Affordable Housing Incentives Act. This bill would provide an exemption to

section 111 of the Municipal Act and it would give

Ontario's municipalities the ability and flexibility to find local solutions in partnership with interested parties to build affordable housing. I acknowledge that this measure is not a complete

solution. However, it's an example that once again Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberal Party are presenting positive ideas on behalf of Ontario's working families.

I'm calling on the government to do the right thing: to finally show some leadership and pass the Affordable Housing Incentives Act.

SUMMER ACTIVE CAMPAIGN

Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): I'm sure we all have a concern for the health and physical well-being of Ontario's residents.

Physical activity helps to reduce health care costs as well as stress, anxiety and depression. That is why I'm encouraging everyone here today to just "Try it."

May 11 was National Try It Day and marked the kickoff to this year's Summer Active campaign. Summer Active is a seasonal campaign designed to get Canadians

active. Parks and Recreation Ontario, along with recreation, health, sport, workplace and other physical activity leaders across the province, invites you to join in on this year's Summer Active

campaign.

Summer Active 2001 runs until June 22. This year's "Try It" theme encourages those Ontarians who want to become active to take the first step toward adding

physical activity into their daily lives.

Summer Active is part of Active Ontario, a joint initiative between the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

As part of the campaign, physical activity leaders from across the province will be hosting special events in their communities. It is estimated that 61% of

Ontarians are not active enough to achieve optimal health benefits. According to the Canadian Fitness and Lifestyle Research Institute, physical inactivity levels have declined since the 1980s,

going from 80% in 1981 to 61% in 1999.

The benefits that can be achieved through physical activity are endless. Physical activity has been shown to reduce the risk of obesity, depression, heart

disease, high blood pressure, osteoporosis, stroke and colon cancer, to name a few. Physical activity provides energy and strengthens muscles and bones.

I encourage everyone to look for and participate in their local Summer Active events. Let's all get summer active.

AGRICULTURAL HALL OF FAME

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): It is an honour to have the opportunity to congratulate the 2001 inductees to the Ontario Agricultural Hall of

Fame: Alexander Connell, Eugene Whelan, Martin A. Drew, William Thomas Ewen, Ernest Andrew Kerr and Kenneth Lantz.

I would like to pay special tribute to the following two individuals from Essex and Chatham-Kent. Eugene Whelan needs no introduction. He is an officer of the

Order of Canada, former member of the Senate of Canada, former Minister of Agriculture for Canada and former ambassador to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. He remains one of

Canada's most outstanding agriculture ministers and spokespersons for his industry.

Martin Drew provided extraordinary leadership and vision during turbulent, depressed times in Ontario's agricultural history. He was involved in every

agricultural organization in Kent county. Martin Drew encouraged producers to establish innovative new marketing schemes and is recognized as one of the province's influential pioneer

agriculturists. I am proud to say that he was my aunt's father-in-law.

Unfortunately, there isn't enough time to acknowledge all the inductees. The achievements of these unselfish individuals are too numerous to mention. Through

their dedication and commitment, they have made tremendous contributions to the betterment of agriculture and to our rural community.

ONTARIO ASSOCIATION

FOR COMMUNITY LIVING

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): I am happy today to say hello to my friends in the gallery from the Ontario Association for Community

Living. I'd like to express our government's support for people with developmental disabilities. We're proud to invest in the success of organizations like the Ontario Association for Community

Living. I am delighted to play a small

part in promoting a very admirable goal, a goal that the Ontario Association for Community Living has battled tirelessly for, which is to ensure that every

person in this province lives with dignity.

This association has helped our communities for over 50 years. From their modest beginning, they have grown to over 12,000 members with 100 locations across

Ontario. Their volunteers have touched the lives of many people in each of our ridings. They deserve all the praise of the government of Ontario, and more.

The Mike Harris team has a genuine respect for the hard-working staff and volunteers who dedicate their lives to helping the disabled. Our investment of an

additional $197 million to the Ontario Association for Community Living only supplements the already strong and vibrant spirit of this organization.

I was honoured to attend their day at the races on Saturday, only one example of the events, conferences and poster campaigns that the Ontario Association for

Community Living uses to promote the awareness of enhanced services for vulnerable people.

We must also remember the families of those that the association benefits. These families show a tremendous and uncompromising love for their children. They

compel the Ontario Association for Community Living and the government of Ontario to promote dignity and respect for our province's children.

SCIENCE FAIR

Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands): Over 450 of our country's brightest and most innovative young scientific minds have gathered at

Queen's University in Kingston this week for the annual Canada-Wide Science Fair: A Science Odyssey Through the Thousand Islands.

Students ranging in age from 12 to 19, representing 110 regions from all across Canada, are displaying more than 400 of the best science and technology projects

completed by students in grades 7 to OAC. They represent more than 500,000 science and technology projects completed by students across the country.

The opportunity to display their imaginative and innovative skills, and the ability to exchange ideas and information in such a historic setting as Queen's and

Kingston, will undoubtedly be a life-changing experience for many of the young people involved.

From personally viewing some of the projects yesterday after the opening ceremony, I can say without reservation that the calibre of the exhibits is simply

outstanding and top-notch. Some of the projects have been compared to the equivalent of master's and PhD material.

Over 230 judges, many recruited from our two world-renowned universities, Queen's University and the Royal Military College, will examine the projects and award

medals in six categories: life, biotechnology, earth and environment, engineering, physical and mathematical, and computing.

Our hats are off to the three co-chairs, Sandra Davison, Heather Highet of the Limestone District School Board, and Sue Blake of Queen's University, and the more

than 200 volunteers who have made this annual event of the Youth Science Foundation Canada such an overwhelming and outstanding success.

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): On Thursday, May 10, I was named by the Speaker and was asked to withdraw remarks directed to the member

for Scarborough East. I refused to withdraw those remarks and was kicked out of the Legislature for the day. I want to say to this Legislature that that decision was not taken lightly.

I came into the House that morning to speak in support of a bill put forward to protect the Oak Ridges moraine. Although it was watered down from the bill Mr

Gilchrist had introduced in the last session, it still went in the right direction in terms of protecting the Oak Ridges moraine. I brought as many members from my caucus as I could to come and

support the member in terms of getting this bill sent to a legislative committee for debate.

We came in good faith under the impression that that bill would be sent by the member -- at least he would attempt to send it -- to a legislative committee.

However, to our shock and surprise, when the time came and the Speaker stood up and suggested it go to the committee of the whole House, the member for Scarborough East just sat in his seat and

didn't stand up to ask that it be sent to a committee.

Mr Speaker, I felt betrayed, and the whole community who are working and have been working for years to protect the Oak Ridges moraine, who were looking forward

to this bill going out to the committee, feel betrayed. I would say shame on the member for Scarborough East. He should be ashamed of himself.

POLICE WEEK

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): Yesterday, my honourable colleague Solicitor General David Turnbull informed the House that May 13 to 19 is

Police Week throughout Canada and the United States. Today I would like to ask the House to once again recognize all our police officers throughout Ontario on this International Peace Officers

Memorial Day.

Members of our law enforcement agencies play an essential role in safeguarding the rights and freedom of all citizens. I would ask that everyone join in

commemorating police officers past and present who, by their faithful and loyal devotion to their responsibilities, render a dedicated service to the communities they serve.

Recently, the second annual remembrance ceremony took place at the Ontario Police Memorial just outside this building. The Lieutenant Governor, the Premier and

the Solicitor General joined with families and police to pay tribute to the 211 officers who have made the supreme sacrifice. These officers gave their lives while protecting the people of

Ontario.

This week we celebrate the accomplishments of the thousands of police officers who protect us daily. It is also appropriate to pause and remember those who have

died while on duty. They are gone but not forgotten.

I encourage each of the honourable members to acknowledge the police officers in their communities. It is because of them that Ontario continues to be one of the

safest places in the world to live, work and raise a family.

ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): Last week I attended a party with the Ontarians with Disabilities Act committee -- Windsor-Essex. It was the sixth

anniversary recognition of the Ontario government's doing absolutely nothing about an Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

They asked me to bring six gifts to Premier Harris. One is a fact sheet outlining the demographic needs of Ontarians with disabilities; two, Ontarians with

disabilities buttons, a reminder to the Premier that four out of five Ontarians support an effective Ontarians with Disabilities Act; three, a copy of the Ontario Human Rights Commission report

that promotes and clarifies the rights of persons with disabilities. Another gift is a blueprint for a strong and effective Ontarians with Disabilities Act -- this was previously given to the

Premier. Another gift is a symbolic $100 bill, a reminder that money is not a barrier to the implementation of an effective Ontarians with Disabilities Act; and six, a ballot that's a reminder that

1.5 million Ontarians with disabilities vote.

Ontarians with disabilities are not different. They just do things differently. They do things well and with dignity. Premier, give Ontarians with disabilities

dignity. Give them an effective Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

I am pleased to welcome as well people from the Association for Community Living in my community and those from across Ontario who are with us today.

BRAMPTON BATTALION

Mr Joseph Spina (Brampton Centre): I take this opportunity to talk about one of Ontario's most successful Ontario Hockey League teams, the

Brampton Battalion.

The Battalion, in only their third season since joining the OHL, made the playoffs for the second straight year. This followed a strong fifth-place finish in

their conference.

In the first round, the Battalion made short work of the fourth-place Guelph Storm, eliminating them in four straight games. The Battalion then faced the

first-place Erie Otters in the next round, to lose a very close series in five games.

Congratulations to team owner Scott Abbot; president Mike Griffin; and especially director of hockey operations and head coach Stan Butler. On the ice, the team

was led by NHL future stars such as Rostislav Klesla, Columbus' fourth overall draft pick last year, and Raffi Torres, fifth overall pick of the New York Islanders.

A major highlight included the first time ever that a junior team has sent five representatives to the World Junior Championships. Stan Butler was a coach of

Team Canada and brought teammates Raffi Torres and Jay Harrison with him, while Klesla and Lukas Havel played for the world champion Czech Republic. Further, Klesla was also voted runner-up for the

OHL's best defenceman and made first OHL all-star.

The future looks bright in Brampton, with exciting young players making their way through the ranks. On behalf of my constituents, thank you, Brampton Battalion,

for an exciting season. Beat the Slush Puppies.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I thank the member for his statement.

Interjection.

The Speaker: I actually won a Memorial Cup. I have the ring, but I ended up in the Ontario Legislature. For those who don't make it, there is

always another profession that you can end up with.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Today we have with us in the Speaker's gallery Mr Bob Speller, member of the House of Commons for the riding of

Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant. Please join me in welcoming our federal colleague.

We also have in the Speaker's gallery today and I am also pleased to welcome Mr Jesse Flis, a former member of Parliament for Parkdale-High Park, who is here

with members of the Association for Community Living.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

NIAGARA CENTRAL AIRPORT COMMISSION ACT, 2001

Mr Kormos moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr11,

An Act to amend The Welland-Port Colborne Airport Act, 1976.

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

Pursuant to standing order 84, this bill stands referred to the standing committee on regulations and private bills.

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): Mr Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion regarding

private members' public business.

The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent? Agreed.

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): I move that, notwithstanding standing order 96(d), the following changes be

made to the ballot list for private members' public business: Mrs McLeod and Mr Phillips exchange places in order of precedence such that Mrs McLeod assumes ballot item number 74 and Mr Phillips

assumes ballot item number 13.

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

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): I move that pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet tonight

from 6:45 pm to 9:30 pm for the purpose of considering government business.

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

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

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1350 to 1355.

The Speaker: Would the members kindly take their seats.

All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Agostino, Dominic

Arnott, Ted

Bartolucci, Rick

Bountrogianni, Marie

Boyer, Claudette

Brown, Michael A.

Clark, Brad

Cleary, John C.

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Crozier, Bruce

Cunningham, Dianne

Curling, Alvin

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Gerretsen, John

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hodgson, Chris

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Klees, Frank

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

McLeod, Lyn

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Runciman, Robert W.

Ruprecht, Tony

Sampson, Rob

Smitherman, George

Snobelen, John

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tilson, David

Tsubouchi, David H.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

Young, David

The Speaker: All those opposed will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Churley, Marilyn

Kormos, Peter

Lankin, Frances

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martin, Tony

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 64; the nays are 6.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Hon Dianne Cunningham (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, minister responsible for women's issues): I'm proud to stand here

today to provide parents and students across Ontario with details of our plan to ensure that every qualified and willing student will find a place in a college or university.

Our plan is comprehensive. The first phase of our plan involved increased support for research so that our institutions could attract and keep the best and

brightest faculty and researchers needed to ensure high-quality education for our students.

We, with our partners, then invested $1.8 billion to create 73,000 new student spaces across the province. This is the single largest capital expansion in

post-secondary campuses in the last 30 years.

To help our students and parents better plan to manage the cost of their education, we have strengthened our student assistance programs, including

establishing trust funds at each of our institutions, introducing the Aiming for the Top student scholarships and requiring colleges and universities to set aside a portion of tuition fee revenue

for student aid. We have also introduced a five-year cap on tuition that will limit increases in most programs to 2% per year.

Last week in the Ontario budget, my colleague the Minister of Finance announced the final component of our plan: an increase in operating support for colleges

and universities by a projected $293 million by 2003-04.

When we decided to implement a new four-year high school program, we made a promise that we would provide the funds needed to ensure our colleges and

universities were prepared to meet the increased enrolment demands created, in part, by the double cohort. We knew these students would provide a tremendous opportunity as we prepared Ontario for

the changing economy of the 21st century. They just needed to have the high-quality and relevant education and training programs that would prepare them to compete and succeed with the best the

world has to offer.

We have kept the promise we made to our parents and our students. Our colleges and universities now have a stable, multi-year period in which they can manage

the expansion of their campuses. Our SuperBuild projects are being built, and we have committed more than $297 million to colleges and universities since 1999 to modernize our existing

buildings.

Our commitment to increased operating grants ensures that they have the money and the time needed to hire high-quality professors to staff those buildings, and

our new $10-million commitment over three years for the Premier's Platinum Awards for research excellence will strengthen our ability to attract and retain world-class senior researchers.

I want to thank my colleagues, including our student leaders, at our Ontario colleges and universities for their co-operation in developing and implementing

our plans over the past years. With their support and their good advice, we have developed five-year enrolment forecasts and capital plans.

We also recognize that not all high school students choose to go on to post-secondary education. Some will move directly into the workforce; others will make

other choices. We are expanding the apprenticeship and training system to ensure that these students have the full range of opportunities to find and keep high-paying jobs. The Ontario budget made

a commitment to provide $50 million over five years to update equipment and facilities at our colleges for apprenticeship programs, and a further $33 million by 2004-05 to double the number of

entrants to apprenticeship programs in the skilled trades.

I said our plan is comprehensive. It ensures that students will be prepared to reach their full potential whether they choose to go to college, university or

into the skilled trades.

But we've done more than that. We are constantly taking action to ensure our students receive the relevant education and training that prepares them for the

changing needs of the workforce. In last week's budget, we announced an investment of $60 million to establish a new Ontario Institute of Technology at Durham College in Oshawa. The new institute

will provide university- and college-level programs and link post-secondary education and skills training with the needs of the marketplace.

The institute will be located on the Durham campus and will provide one-stop shopping for students looking for a mix of academic and hands-on experience. The

institute will offer a wide range of career-oriented programs. Students will be able to earn an applied degree, diploma or other credential, depending on their program.

Through initiatives such as the ones I have outlined today, we are ensuring that future generations of students will be ready to seize the opportunities of a

changing economy. We are also ensuring that Ontario has the educated, skilled and flexible workforce it needs for a strong, vibrant economy.

We are helping to create the conditions that provide Ontarians, no matter where they live in the province, with opportunities to take more responsibility for

their personal and professional development so they can find and keep high-quality jobs that help them lead full and rewarding lives.

To echo the budget speech, we have provided a landmark response to the challenge of the 21st century, and in doing so we will fulfill the Premier's commitment

that within 10 years, Ontario will enjoy the best-performing economy and highest quality of life in North America.

Mrs Marie Bountrogianni (Hamilton Mountain): This isn't a landmark response or statement; this is a land mine.

Your own task force has said we need $500 million by 2005 to deal with the double cohort. You have promised $293 million by 2004. Are you going to double this

in a year, Minister, as your own task force recommends? The college sector will need $291 million by 2004 to meet the double cohort demand, according to ACAATO. Ontario universities will require

$500 million to meet increasing enrolment demands by 2005, according to the Council of Ontario Universities. This will just keep us at the status quo, which is in the basement: 10th out of 10

provinces, 59th out of 60 jurisdictions, just ahead of Texas.

This new envelope of funding is expected to break down to $223 million to universities and $70 million for colleges. However, this funding increase is really

only a percentage change of 1.8%, while inflation is increasing by 3.2% and the application rate for spaces in post-secondary has increased by 7.3%. In 1995, in one year, you cut the operating

budgets by 15%. What is 1.8% going to do? Do you really think this is a substantial and significant increase in funding? Whom do you think you're fooling?

We are looking at thousands of students seeking spots in our post-secondary system. This is not a blip on the radar screen; this is a full-force tidal wave

heading toward our underfunded and demoralized public post-secondary institutions.

Ontario now spends 38% less per capita than the province of Newfoundland on university operating grants, and 18% below the national average. This budget will

place us even lower. Our provincial expenditure on post-secondary declined by 30% between 1992 and 1999, the most significant decrease in the country.

Although this government continues to point to its SuperBuild fund as a source of capital dollars, we have actually got less than in any year in the last 20

years on infrastructure in this province. The measly $100 million committed for maintenance costs is only a drop in the bucket. Your own task force says we need $900 million for universities. Your

task force says that. We need $300 million for colleges: your task force says that.

There is no money for hiring professors. Read your own government document, Portals and Pathways. There's no money for the hiring of new professors. What will

we do with the empty SuperBuild buildings if you do not allocate the necessary funds to begin the arduous process of hiring new professors? They are now being recruited by US schools with much

healthier salaries.

Even our ability to buy books for our students has slipped. We used to have six out of the top 100 libraries in North America; we have one now, and that's at

the University of Toronto.

Our college graduates will earn an average of 8% to 16% more than someone with a high school diploma; a university graduate, 9% to 15% more. They will pay an

additional $85,000 in taxes over their lifetimes as a result of post-secondary. Isn't this more than enough to offset the cost of subsidizing higher education in this province?

Isn't it interesting that Ontario is the only province in the country that doesn't have a training agreement with the federal government? We are losing nearly

half a billion dollars a year because of this lack of an agreement.

The people of Ontario are concerned about the lack of security they experience in their jobs, education and access to post-secondary. A recent poll showed that

64% of individuals expressed finding it increasingly hard to afford college and university, and 62% of individuals recognize that tax cuts are not enough; we need a long-term plan to protect our

prosperity. Some 79% of your own voters who were concerned were concerned that they wouldn't have the money to send their children to college and university.

This isn't a landmark; it's a land mine. Shame on you for letting Ontario's families down.

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): I want to respond to this statement by referring to a fact sheet that's been prepared by the Ontario

Confederation of University Faculty Associations, because, good citizens, this government doesn't listen to us and I think you want to know what the Ontario Confederation of University Faculty

Associations has said in response to a number of the problems that have been witnessed by the public. You citizens are right there and I'm going to talk to you directly. Here's what they say in

response to the minister's saying the government will ensure a place for every willing and qualified student. The concern I have, and the concern parents have, is that it will not guarantee a place

for every student in this province. Here are the facts:

"Fact: According to the government's own estimates, an additional 88,000 qualified students will seek access to Ontario's universities and colleges over the

next four years. That means creating new spaces equal to the enrolments of Ottawa, Laurentian, Western, McMaster, Queen's, Ryerson and Waterloo combined.

"Ontario government record: Universities and colleges have lost $2 billion in cumulative public funding since 1996-97. No new public money has been made

available to handle the projected enrolment increases.

"Fact: One of the reasons for the big increase in demand is the elimination of the OAC year creating the `double cohort.'

"Ontario government record: The government eliminated the OAC year without making sure that qualified students have the chance to continue on to university or

college.

"Fact: The government has acknowledged that Ontario universities and colleges will have to hire tens of thousands of professors, librarians and support

staff.

"Ontario government record: To date no new public money has been allocated to hire needed faculty, librarians and support staff. Workload, burnout and injuries

are increasing and the people of Ontario know that working conditions directly affect learning conditions.

" Fact: Statistics Canada has reported that a smaller percentage of students from lower and middle-income homes are seeking post-secondary

education, compared to those from affluent backgrounds. The gap is growing. The student body at Ontario universities and colleges should reflect the diversity of Ontario residents and not be

limited to a wealthy few.

"Ontario government record: The government has increased tuition fees by over 60% in the last five years for regulated programs. Graduate, professional and

some college program fees have been deregulated, resulting in increases as high as 521%.

"Fact: It would cost $1.06 billion to repair all of the deferred maintenance at Ontario universities. That's over $4,200 per student.

" Ontario government record: The government of Ontario has not provided the public funds needed to make college and university campuses safe

and productive."

They conclude by saying, "The time to reinvest in post-secondary education is now. If the government is serious about providing a place for every willing and

qualified student, then it needs to make a commitment to public education. This is the only way we can keep pace with growing enrolments; hire new faculty, librarians and staff; provide

high-quality services; make our buildings safe; keep tuition fees affordable; and provide better student assistance."

The Conservative government has all the evidence it needs that the public rejects their college and university underfunding policies. On May 7, OPSEU, the

Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations, CUPE and the Canadian Federation of Students jointly released an Ipsos-Reid poll showing that two thirds of Ontarians are concerned about

access to post-secondary education. Of the parents who are fearful their kids won't go to college or university, 80% said they won't be able to pay the higher fees charged under a Conservative

government.

I say to you that if this government is not listening to you, the taxpayers and good citizens of Ontario, you have an opportunity in the very near future to

send a message to this government that they will not be able to forget.

COMMUNITY LIVING WEEK

Mrs Tina R. Molinari (Thornhill): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: This week is dedicated in Ontario as Community Living Week. I believe we

have unanimous consent for all parties to make a brief statement to recognize the hard work and dedication of those providing in the community living sector.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? Agreed.

Mrs Molinari: I rise today to acknowledge Community Living Week in Ontario. The purpose of this week is to raise awareness about people with

developmental disabilities and the importance of including all people in the day-to-day life of our communities. It's also an excellent time to acknowledge the many dedicated people who work in the

field of developmental services, including parents and volunteers, for their hard work and commitment to improving the lives of people with developmental disabilities in this province.

I know we have guests from the Ontario Association for Community Living, including Keith Powell, executive director, Lee Holling, past president, and several

others from various community living groups from around the province with us today. I would like to take this opportunity to welcome them and thank them for their important contribution to

community living.

My colleagues are aware of this government's commitment to support vulnerable people in Ontario, including adults and children with developmental disabilities.

We consider it an important responsibility and a priority for the government to help people with developmental disabilities become as independent as possible while living at home on their own in

their communities.

This commitment was reinforced by the budget announcement last week that the government will provide $55 million this year, growing to nearly $200 million by

2006-07, to enhance services for people with developmental disabilities and attract more quality caregivers. In addition, the government will invest $67 million over five years to create new places

to live for adults with developmental disabilities.

This is a remarkable demonstration of the government's desire to improve the lives of people with developmental disabilities and to support the agencies and

people working in this sector. The Honourable John Baird, Minister of Community and Social Services, will be announcing the details of this new funding initiative in the near future.

I'd like to stress that these are the latest in a series of initiatives the government has taken to help integrate people with developmental disabilities into

the community. Since 1995 the government has invested more than $100 million in additional funding for people with developmental disabilities. In fact, the government's total spending in the

developmental sector last year exceeded $965 million, more than has ever been spent before in this area.

Prior to last week's announcement, the largest investment in developmental services in a decade was made last May when the government announced it would

provide an additional $50 million to support people with developmental disabilities and their families to live in the community.

This included $18 million for new accommodation in the community for more than 300 individuals, including adults living at home with aging parents and young

adults leaving the child welfare system; $6 million for the special services at home program to provide support for approximately 2,000 families caring for children and adults with developmental

disabilities at home; and $6 million for the creation of the innovative foundations initiative, which is funding new programs to help approximately 950 young people with developmental disabilities

make the transition from school to employment or other community activity. The $50-million announcement also included funding to ensure that group homes comply with the new fire code regulations

and to help community agencies recruit and retain qualified staff.

The government's ongoing focus on community living has resulted in a system that now supports more than 48,000 people with developmental disabilities in their

communities.

Let me stress that the success that has been achieved in community living has only been possible because of the commitment and effort of community agencies

that have worked hard to ensure the supports would be in place.

Despite the achievements and advances of the past several years, the demand for services continues to grow and there is increasing demand for more flexible,

responsive kinds of services. The government recognizes that the service providers are struggling to meet these demands and that this is placing a greater burden on the sector at a time when

agencies already have trouble getting and keeping qualified staff. The funding announced in last week's budget is the government's response to the concerns it has heard in discussions with

individuals, families, agencies and provincial organizations over the past year. With this new investment, the government is building on the progress that has been made and taking huge steps

forward to improving the lives of people with developmental disabilities across the province.

I'd like to reiterate this government's appreciation for the people who work with developmental services in Ontario. It is a workforce that is professional,

dedicated and capable. I would also like to acknowledge the families of people with developmental disabilities and their unwavering commitment to their loved ones. Working together, we are creating

a province where all people with developmental disabilities can live healthy, productive lives in their own communities.

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): I'm very proud and honoured to rise today on behalf of Dalton McGuinty, my leader, and the

members of the Ontario Liberal caucus to speak on this unanimous consent motion and to offer our enthusiastic support in recognizing May 15 as Community Living Day in Ontario.

I would first of all take the opportunity to welcome the many distinguished guests from the Ontario Association for Community Living and member associations

from across the province who join us today. I understand that well over 100 representatives, including clients, board members, managers, caregivers and friends, are with us here to celebrate

Community Living Day at Queen's Park. We thank you.

Today is more than just an opportunity for us as legislators to honour and celebrate the accomplishments of an organization that has worked for over 50 years

to bring communities and people together. The work it does now in more than 100 communities across Ontario is surely worth recognizing 365 days a year.

Today is also more than a chance for us to recognize the dedicated staff and caregivers who, day in and day out, provide opportunity, hope and friendship to

persons with intellectual disabilities. The tremendous dedicated work they do, which often seems undervalued and unheralded, is truly priceless.

Today is a day when we can truly look at the concept of community living, what it implies and what it means. To me, community living is a rallying cry that

continues to resonate in community after community in the lives of persons with disabilities right across this province. In many ways it's a cry for help. It's a plea for dignity, independence and

inclusion. It is a constant battle for fairness, for equality, and for recognition.

Community living is what we as legislators should be pushing and fighting for each and every day for the more than 1.5 Ontarians with disabilities. The right

to citizenship and participation that we all take for granted is often denied to those who can't fend for themselves. Community living is about giving the best supports we can to families and

parents of children and adults with developmental and intellectual disabilities who struggle every day to break down barriers, to overcome prejudices, and are in a constant struggle to find needed

services. Community living is truly what the Ontario Association for Community Living is all about.

For my brother Mark, who lives independently thanks to the wonderful staff at the Lakehead Association for Community Living located in my Thunder Bay riding,

and to all the brothers and sisters and sons and daughters who you have in your care, we thank you with all our hearts. The Ontario Association for Community Living not only started the movement

50-plus years ago; it has changed and shaped our society for the better.

I'm pleased to hear the member opposite speak so strongly in support of Community Living Day here in Ontario. While disagreements between my party and hers

perhaps do abound, I will certainly take her at her word that she's committed to continue the fight for community living, and the rallying cry of what it means, at the Tory caucus table. Perhaps

she can start by standing in her place and asking the Premier to fulfill a promise made six long years ago, a promise that would make a huge difference in the fight for equality and fairness for

Ontarians with disabilities. I'm referring, of course, to this government's failure to bring forward and enact a real and meaningful Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

Community living is about inclusion. Without real legislative protection, the hopes and dreams of many Ontarians will be left unrealized, unfulfilled and

untapped. My leader, Dalton McGuinty, and our disabilities critic, the member for Prince Edward-Hastings, and indeed all the members on this side of the House will not rest until this government

recognizes that an Ontarians with Disabilities Act is about human rights, removing barriers and overcoming obstacles. It certainly is more than the legislation that's been brought forward in this

House so far. We need a real and meaningful Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

I would also like to suggest to this member that she should be going back to her caucus to inquire as to why the government continues to ignore the fact that

costs of living have gone up everywhere. Shelter, food, clothing, utilities: an undeniable fact of life is that everything costs more, yet despite the absolute fact that things cost more, the

government has failed to build in even a fair cost-of-living increase to the Ontario disabilities support program, freezing benefits at 1987 levels.

Independent living does come with a cost. Ontarians with disabilities rely on the supports given to them through the Ontario disabilities support program. Real

dignity comes with having the means to get by, to live and to participate in meaningful ways. So I say to the member opposite, for the sake of all those about whom you've spoken today, please raise

the ODSP benefits to an adequate level so that independent living truly can mean dignified living.

We need to recognize there was a budgetary increase in last week's budget. I would like to say one thing: was last week's news of a budgetary increase to the

sector appreciated? Yes, it was. Was it enough? Absolutely not. By their own estimates, the Ontario Association for Community Living has requested an annual increase of $220 million to meet

critical needs in this sector. After nearly 10 years of flatlined support, it was and is clear that nothing short of significant investment in this sector would serve to address ongoing inequities,

lack of services and supports for families, and the growing list of people waiting for services. This government began the process, but I don't believe they had the courage to go far enough.

One of the most pressing challenges facing the entire developmental services sector, including the six cross-sectional associations that make up the alliance

of agencies serving children and youth, is the alarming lack of support given to caregivers and staff.

Despite repeated calls and information about how it is becoming more and more difficult to attract and keep qualified staff, despite the reality of how staff

turnover is threatening the continuum of care and how positions are being left unfilled and services disrupted, this government responded last year with a budgetary increase that in the end allowed

for less than a 1% increase in the developmental services sector for staff, while the broader public sector was given 2%. It's certainly an interesting message to send to this sector.

Further to that, the government must truly be made to recognize the extraordinary level of individual and family needs that are not being met. I have heard

personally from dozens and dozens of families desperate to find community placements for their sons and daughters. I've heard from mothers and fathers from all across Ontario who are in near tears

as they recount their struggles to find supports for their loved ones. I've heard from aging parents, some of whom are very ill, unable to get the supports they need to secure a place for their

child's future.

I've heard from parents who were forced to give up their child with disabilities because this government refused to enter into and fund special-needs

agreements between them and agencies like our associations for community living.

We need an adequately funded, multi-accessible system of community supports that is diverse, responsive and reflective of the needs of people with

developmental disabilities. That means restoring funds and introducing greater flexibility in order to meet special needs in our schools. It means ensuring the availability of day programs for

people with disabilities once they've left the education system. It means continuing the process of moving people from institutional care into supportive community environments. It means

recognizing the challenges faced by home share families who are struggling with the day-to-day costs of providing support. It means moving single parents of children with disabilities off the

welfare system, where many find themselves, and into a system where they can live with dignity.

There is little doubt that the challenges in the developmental services sector are many and that the obstacles are great. However, with courage and conviction,

I would like to envision a day when government support to this sector is defined not by political need but by the actual needs of those in our communities; in other words, the funding meeting the

needs, rather than the needs meeting the funding.

In the spirit of all that we honour here today and as part of this month-long celebration of community living, I would truly ask that this government commit to

work toward that end. Consult with the Ontario Association for Community Living, its workers and other agencies that provide vital support to people with disabilities, to determine where new

dollars to the sector would most fairly and effectively be used.

I also challenge the government today to please commit to rescinding the offensively titled Homes for Retarded Persons Act, which is still on the Ontario law

books. When you consider all the gains that have been made, all the pain and stigmatization that people with disabilities have suffered over the years, surely all we are standing up for today

deserves better than this.

I conclude with an appeal that all members of the Legislature take time to read a book entitled What Came First, The Chicken or the Egg?, a true-life account

of three families' struggles to build a home for their adult children with disabilities, which was published through the Toronto Association for Community Living. Reading first-hand the fights and

struggles that working families had to go through to get services for their children gives a greater understanding of what community living is truly about.

To the Ontario Association for Community Living, its member associations, its clients, its staff and caregivers, this day is for you. Thank you.

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): On behalf of the NDP caucus, it's my pleasure to acknowledge our support for Community Living Day at Queen's

Park. I want to commend the members of the Ontario Association for Community Living for lobbying all three political parties to recognize this day. We welcome our guests here this afternoon.

We would also like to thank all those municipalities that are making May Community Awareness Month and holding celebrations for awareness of community

living.

I have some remarks which are non-partisan, but in light of the comments made by the parliamentary assistant, I really feel I am compelled to place on the

record the following facts with respect to this government's funding of this important sector. The facts I refer to come directly from a brief that was provided to us by the Ontario Association for

Community Living in the lead-up to the 2001 provincial budget. I would like to raise three facts, and these are from the association.

One, while the government has provided some new funding over the past two years for additional services, funding for existing services has fallen 6.5% below

the level it was at in 1991.

Two, the cost of delivering these existing services has risen, due both to normal cost-of-living factors and uncontrollable costs, such as escalating worker

safety insurance premiums -- increases of up to 400% in some cases -- and to pay equity, which are not covered by the government. We know this government has jurisdiction with respect to WSIB and

its premiums, and they could be doing something about that. We also know this is a government that cancelled pay equity in 1996, pay equity that was going to some of the lowest paid workers in

Ontario, particularly those who work for associations for community living. When the court overturned that decision, this government then went in and capped pay equity at December 1998 levels. This

government shows its respect for workers by capping pay equity and by forcing associations for community living to fundraise to pay these benefits to these workers.

Three, eroded funding for existing services and the failure to fund new operational costs have left providers and families much worse off than 10 years

ago.

I say to the parliamentary assistant, with all due respect, that's your government's legacy to date. With respect to the amount of money that was announced in

the budget, I say it's about time, because your government has surely underfunded this important sector over the last six years.

On to my non-partisan remarks: Proclaiming Community Living Day challenges us as MPPs to use our influence as opposition and government members to give real

meaning to the desire and ability of people with intellectual disabilities to live as integral members of our communities. That means, firstly, firmly supporting government policy, adopted by the

Ministry of Community and Social Services in 1987 and accepted by all three political parties, to close institutions which house Ontarians with intellectual disabilities and repatriate them into

our communities.

There are over 1,100 vulnerable adults who still live in three institutions in Ontario, and we must agree that they will all be repatriated by the middle of

this decade. While that means having the community services and supports in place to assist many individuals who may well need continuous care, that care ought to be available as part and parcel of

a community versus an institutional setting.

Individuals with intellectual disabilities must be part of, not apart from, our neighbourhoods, new neighbours and new friends.

Secondly, it means guaranteeing aging parents, who long ago chose to raise their child, now adult, at home versus placing their son or daughter in an

institution, that there is a safe, secure residential placement or supportive housing unit for that same daughter or son to move into soon. The stress on aging families is enormous, and they need

to see some movement to reduce the waiting lists, not just movement whereby a space becomes available for an individual with an intellectual disability because their caregiver has died or is

hospitalized. Parents also need to know, as they wait for supportive housing to come on stream or residential placements to become available, that their quality of life will not be diminished

because of a reduction of in-home support for their adult sons and daughters.

Aging families need more, not less, support. And they need to be able to receive appropriate and necessary support so that they are never put in a position of

second-guessing the decision they made to keep a child, now adult, at home.

Thirdly, it involves recognizing the incredible work done by caregivers -- front-line staff workers or family members -- and compensating them accordingly. The

quality of those already in residential placements or supportive housing, those who are waiting to be placed, of the children supported at integrated schools or child care centres, of adults

utilizing day programs, of adults being supported in employment programs is directly related to the skills, the commitment and the morale of those meeting the diverse needs of some of Ontario's

most vulnerable adults.

But when front-line staff work day after day for wages that are 25% less than their counterparts in institutions or other public service agencies, sooner or

later they do get the message that their work is grossly undervalued and likely to remain the same. So despite their loyalty to the intellectually challenged, they move to other work where they can

make financial ends meet and actually get some satisfaction from their skills and the contributions that are being recognized and compensated.

This is what is happening in this sector. The average staff turnover rate is 22%, which is demoralizing for workers, very costly for associations for community

living, but most importantly, terribly disruptive and negative for those who really need continuity of care as a starting point for quality care.

If we want capable and committed staff to respond to the needs of intellectually disabled adults, we need to pay front-line workers what they are worth, and

that means a whole lot more money than they are now receiving.

Finally, it demands putting in place an Ontarians with Disabilities Act which will truly remove the barriers facing those with intellectual disabilities and

allow them to participate fully in all aspects of community life.

I have always felt like I was part of a community, and I suspect most members would feel the same. I don't know what it's like to live outside of or be

segregated from the mainstream. I don't want to know what it's like either. No one should be excluded from the community because of a disability. No one should have to live in an institution

because of an intellectual disability.

We have an obligation to integrate some of Ontario's most vulnerable citizens into our schools, our workplaces, our recreational facilities, our

neighbourhoods. It's the right thing to do. It's what we need to commit to today, on Community Living Day.

VISITORS

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'd just ask the members to welcome a number of students who are

visiting Queen's Park today from the Corrinth Christian School. Please welcome them.

ORAL QUESTIONS

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Minister of Education. For the last six days you have failed miserably

to defend your government's latest attack on public education.

I've asked you to name one organization or even one individual who might be in support of using public dollars for private elite schools, and you have been

unable to produce one name.

I've asked you to explain why, and my colleague has asked you to explain why, tax dollars should go to private schools that don't have certified teachers,

don't teach the standardized curriculum and don't participate in standardized tests. You've been unable to offer an explanation in that regard as well.

I've asked you why, at a time when today in Ontario we have parents who together with their children are fundraising for textbooks, you've been able to come up

with half a billion dollars for private schools.

My question to you, Minister, is, given your failure to explain to Ontario's working families why you are about to do what you are proposing to do, do you not

now agree that you should call this off? Understand that you have seen the light and admit that you've been wrong-headed and that you will no longer proceed with your private school voucher

plan.

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): As I said to the honourable member yesterday -- he obviously didn't do it --

all he has to do is look at the calls coming into constituency offices, look at the letters to the editor, look at the calls coming into open line shows and look at the correspondence he himself is

getting. If he has any doubts about the support the public has for parental choice, he needs to go no further than his own caucus to ask Michael Bryant, Monte Kwinter and other members of his

caucus who have supported recognizing and respecting parental choice on this issue.

Mr McGuinty: I want to assure the minister that my caucus is firmly united against private school vouchers.

I want to ask you --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Member take his seat. Stop the clock, please.

Sorry for the interruption. Leader of the official opposition.

Mr McGuinty: I want to try to determine exactly what it is that you have to do in your Ontario in order to become a school that qualifies for

parents who might be entitled to your private school vouchers. We've been able to determine that the only requirement is that they complete a form, a copy of which I have in my hand. It's called

"Notice of Intention to Operate a Private School."

It's just one page. That's it. It is not an application form. There's no application form required. All you have to do is submit a notice of intention. It asks

for basic school information, telephone number, fax number, name of the owner, address, school's enrolment, what type of school, whether or not you plan to subscribe to the Ontario curriculum, and

it asks, at the end of the day, for a signature. That, apparently, is all that is required in order to be able to access the $500 million in private school voucher funding.

I'm just wondering: as the minister who is part of a government which is dedicated to accountability, what kind of accountability exists if the only thing you

have to do to access $500 million in private school voucher funding is to complete this form?

Hon Mrs Ecker: First of all, no one is accessing $500 million worth of vouchers. Again, the honourable leader loves to misrepresent the

policy.

The Speaker: The Minister of Education can't say that. I'd ask you to withdraw that.

Hon Mrs Ecker: I withdraw that.

Again, the honourable Leader of the Opposition confuses the policy deliberately here in the House.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Minister of Education, you can't say that as well. You can't say "deliberately" doing that.

Hon Mrs Ecker: I withdraw.

Again the honourable member is stating the case as he sees it. But what surprises me is that he would stand up and try to say that those independent schools

are not accountable to the parents who send their children to them, that those independent schools do not offer quality education.

If the honourable member wants to go to the Ottawa Christian School, Redeemer Christian High School, Metcalfe Christian School in his own riding and tell them

he doesn't trust, doesn't like and doesn't respect the quality of education in those schools, he should perhaps tell those constituents of his --

The Speaker: Order. The minister's time is up.

Mr McGuinty: Working families are trying to understand this inconsistency, Madam Minister. You tell us your government is very committed to

ensuring that our hospitals are accountable, that our colleges and universities are accountable, that our school boards are accountable, our municipalities are accountable -- you're going to pass a

law banning any of those organizations running deficits in Ontario. So I was just wondering why, in that context, you are now saying, "Here are 500 million public dollars," when the only

requirement to access that funding is to file with your ministry a notice of intention to operate a private school.

Madam Minister, why not admit you have not thought this one through? This has been universally condemned by all those who are supporters of public education

and understand its value for all of us. Why do you not admit you have made a terrible misstep? Why not agree now that the best thing to do is take this entire plan and throw it in the garbage?

Hon Mrs Ecker: I find it rather shocking that the honourable member does not trust his own constituents, those hard-working parents in his own

riding that he says he speaks on behalf of, those parents who send their children to École Parsifal, Lycée Claudel, the Ottawa Christian School, the Redeemer Christian High School, the

Metcalfe Christian School. The honourable member stands here and tries to say that parents who choose to send their children to those schools are somehow not equipped to make judgments for their

children. I find that quite shocking.

I also find it quite shocking from the honourable member that when his own members are prepared, out of the conviction in their hearts, to speak out in favour

of this support -- when Michael Bryant said, "I can't suck and blow on this at the same time," when Monte Kwinter called on the government to act on this -- he now disrespects their views on this

matter.

The Speaker: New question, the leader of the official opposition.

Mr McGuinty: My next question is also for the Minister of Education. Madam Minister, it's become painfully obvious that you are unable to

defend your policies. While you are working to abandon public education and invite Ontario parents to abandon public education, we've been working very hard on putting together a positive plan that

would actually support public education.

An important part of our plan -- and this will come as no surprise to you, because we've been championing this for quite some time -- is that we believe our

children should be able to enrol in smaller classes. We think there should be a real and hard cap of 20 on class size from JK through grade 3. We know, as you do, that that will improve learning

for our children in that early age group.

You said many times that there is no money available for smaller classes in public education, yet you've been able to find $500 million for private, elite

schools. Minister, can you tell working families why elite, private schools are a greater priority for you than lowering class sizes in their children's public schools?

Hon Mrs Ecker: The honourable member likes to say he is in favour of smaller class sizes. But the first piece of legislation that was brought

in by this government to tell school boards they couldn't raise class sizes was Bill 160, and the honourable member voted against it. So there we go. The Liberal Party's view of a definitive policy

stand is: on one day they're for class size, on the other day they're not for class size. They voted against the only bill.

The only one having difficulty defending his policies in this Legislature is the honourable member. He goes out and says he's going to fight this tooth and

nail. But then he says to the media, "Oh, well, I'm not ideologically opposed to this. Oh, well, it may be OK to have funding for religious schools. Oh, well, maybe we don't do it now, but maybe we

do it later." Is that how the honourable member stands up on a matter of principle and fights tooth and nail?

Mr McGuinty: Minister, I am not ashamed to say that I will fight tooth and nail for public education for working families. This is very

perverse. It would seem to me that's the kind of statement you should be making. You should be working hard, day in and day out, to reduce class sizes, to restore enthusiasm in our schools, to

bring back extracurricular activities. That's the kind of responsibility you should be taking on.

Let there be no doubt about the stark and stunning contrast between me and my caucus and you, your Premier and this government. You would have Ontario parents

abandon public education. We want to improve public education. We have plans to save public education, and therein at the end of the day lies the difference.

I ask you once again: you tell us you're committed to public education. Prove it. Give us smaller class sizes for Ontario's working families and their

children.

Hon Mrs Ecker: The honourable member is again sitting here trying to say his position supports public education. Where was he when the first

piece of legislation was brought in by this government that said they had to protect special-needs funding? He was against that legislation.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Minister, take her seat. Come to order. Sorry, Minister.

Hon Mrs Ecker: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Bill 74 said school boards had to use special-needs money only for special-needs purposes. He

voted against that.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Minister, take her seat. The member for Windsor-St Clair, come to order. Sorry again, Minister.

Hon Mrs Ecker: He voted against that legislation that would have protected special-needs and does protect special-needs funding. The only

piece of legislation the government has brought in to start saying to boards, "Don't increase class size," and he voted against that. We brought in standardized testing. He is against that. We

brought in a standardized curriculum. He now wants to water that down. His solution for extracurricular activities was to decrease teacher workload by increasing student workload. That was his

commitment. Where was he when we put 360 million new dollars into education --

The Speaker: The minister's time is up, I'm afraid. Final supplementary?

Mr McGuinty: Minister, it may be painful, but once again I'll have you revisit the educational status quo in public schools today. We have a

crisis in our schools. We have a loss of confidence in the minds of our parents. We have parents and children out there fundraising for textbooks. We have 35,000 children with special needs who

can't get a psychological assessment because we don't have the necessary funding. That is the state of public education on your watch today in Ontario.

We have a plan to save public education by improving public education. We've talked about it at some length. I put the question to you again: if you are firmly

committed to public education, then why won't you invest in smaller classes for Ontario's working families and their children?

Hon Mrs Ecker: We did invest in smaller class sizes. We also backed it up with legislation, which the honourable member opposed. There was

$12.9 billion being spent on public education in 1995. It's now $13.8 billion and more money in the classroom.

The honourable member likes to talk about his plan. His plan did not do what our education quality reforms are doing: bringing in the new curriculum; testing

our students to make sure they are learning it; and a teacher-testing program to make sure all our teachers are getting the supports they need, another initiative the honourable member opposes.

We stand firmly behind public education in this province, because we believe it is very important for the quality of life and our economic prosperity in this

province. We also believe in and respect parental choice, both within the public system and outside the public system.

The Speaker: New question?

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): My question is to the Minister of Education. Your announcement of the $3,500 tax credit for individuals

to send their kids to private school was a bombshell, and still is a bombshell. I've got to tell you, you surprised a lot of Tory members. You also surprised a lot of Liberal members as well. I

have to say that during the 1999 election campaign, M. Harris denounced the idea of publicly funding the 700 or so religious schools and the 35 or so non-denominational private schools.

Minister, I want you to confess today: why is your government breaking that promise to the people of Ontario?

Hon Mrs Ecker: No one is breaking any campaign promises. I must say to the member from the NDP, at least we know where the NDP stands on

education reform; at least they've been consistent in their opposition on many of the quality improvements that we have brought forward.

Applause.

Hon Mrs Ecker: Yes, the Liberals can applaud the NDP, if they like.

We have been very clear about our commitment to the public education system, about the changes that the public education system needed to have done. Those were

things we promised the voters, promised the parents of this province: the new curriculum, the standardized testing, teacher testing, a Safe Schools Act for safer classrooms. Those were all things

we promised the voters of this province. Those are all things that we are indeed delivering on.

Mr Marchese: Madam, you need to check the record. This is what the Premier said: "They" -- vouchers -- "have never been espoused by me or the

Minister of Education, nor have I seen a suggestion anywhere around the cabinet table, nor do I think it will come as long as I'm Premier."

Then you said the following: "We've been very clear that our goal is a good quality public education, and the estimates of $300 million needed to fund

religious schools would be $300 million that would come out of the public school system." That's what you said. I didn't say that. It was you, Minister, who said that. What do you have to say to

your record?

Hon Mrs Ecker: The government stands by its commitments to public education.

Mr Marchese: Minister, I want to be clear, because you said, "I'm clear on our position," and then I read your position and you've got nothing

to say. I'm going to be here every day asking you the same question until you confess.

I'm inviting you to come to our summit this Thursday at 6 o'clock at Queen's Park to account for your flip-flop, and I'm inviting the Liberals to account for

theirs. M. Kennedy, the education critic, said, "The Liberals say it's an issue of fairness. Private schools do have to be funded but in a way that doesn't hurt public schools."

I invite you, Minister, I invite the Premier, I invite M. McGuinty, I invite M. Kennedy to come and account for your flip-floppery. Please come, because

I've got to say, the people who care --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop the clock.

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): On a point of order, Speaker: I seek unanimous consent to allow the NDP to move their seats to that side

of the House so they can be closer to the government. You ought to be ashamed --

Interjections.

The Speaker: OK, folks, we've had our fun for today. Now I'm going to start naming people. We're not going to waste time with points of order

like that. We've had our fun. It's getting noisy. You're all on warning now. I'm going to start to throw people out, so you'd better behave if you want to remain here this afternoon.

Final supplementary.

Mr Marchese: Mr Duncan, I think you have the same position as they do. That's the problem. That's why we invite you to come, with people who

care about our public schools who are joining today with New Democrats, to the summit this Thursday at 6 o'clock to defend public education --

Interjection.

The Speaker: The member take his seat. The member for Hamilton East, his last warning. Sorry for the interruption.

Mr Marchese: We invite everyone to come this Thursday at the summit the New Democrats have called here at Queen's Park at 6 o'clock. We invite

the Liberals -- McGuinty and their critic, M. Kennedy -- and we invite you, Madam, and the Premier to come and account for your flip-flop. Will you come?

Hon Mrs Ecker: The vision of all three parties with duelling pistols at dawn -- or sunset, as the case may be -- does give one cause for

concern here.

The Minister of Education and this government are very happy to confess: to confess to a commitment for public education that has protected money in the

classroom, to confess to increasing money for the public education system, over $316 million just this year alone for our school boards, our schools, our parents, our children in the public

education system.

Yes, we confess to giving parents more choice within the public system. Yes, we confess to bringing in higher standards so our students can learn what they

need to learn. Yes, we confess to having standardized testing to make sure our students can learn that. If he's asking for a confession as to my commitment and the commitment of my caucus to the

public education system, we are very happy to say yes.

The Speaker: The minister's time is up.

PLEA BARGAINING

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I've got a question to the Attorney General. A 17-year-old boy, Jeffrey Fleeton, was struck dead by a truck

with an illegal, oversized load. Now the company operating that truck is about to be let off scot-free by one of your provincial prosecutors. The charge, you see, is going to be withdrawn: no

trial, no conviction, no jail time, no fine, no record, nothing but a $2,000 donation to a charity for which the company will probably get a tax receipt.

Minister, please tell this House and Jeffrey Fleeton's parents what steps you're going to take today to prevent this outrageous miscarriage of justice

scheduled for tomorrow.

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): Let me say at the outset that we're all saddened by what was

indeed a great tragedy. My thoughts and, I'm sure, the thoughts of all members of this assembly are with the family and their friends. Having said that, this matter is before the courts. In the

circumstances, I am simply not in a position to comment further upon it.

Mr Kormos: His family doesn't want the minister's sympathy. His family wants this government's action. You see, two weeks ago this government

with great pride said that it's cracking down on criminals, that it's going to make our streets safer for Ontarians. It wasn't safe for Jeffrey Fleeton, a 17-year-old boy out there working at a

summer job. You're the Attorney General. This is your provincial prosecutor who has made a decision to plea bargain away a charge where the death of a 17-year-old boy ensued, to plea bargain it

away so there isn't even a conviction, isn't even a record -- a $2,000 donation.

It's your job to supervise your prosecutors. I'm calling upon you today, on behalf of all Ontarians, on behalf of justice, for you to intervene and tell your

provincial prosecutor to cancel that plea bargain, prosecute that case to the fullest and seek the maximum penalty. A dead 17-year-old boy and his family deserve that much.

Hon Mr Young: For about 130 years in this province, we have had a tradition; we have constitutional guarantees; we have responsibilities for

this Legislative Assembly; we have responsibilities for the courts. There are restrictions that are placed upon me and that have been placed upon Attorneys General before me. My friend opposite has

the right to raise issues in the Legislature, as he does. Given the traditions that have developed, the safeguards that are in place, I am not in a position to comment any further at this time.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Minister of Health. You will be familiar with a recent KPMG report

prepared for the city of Ottawa addressing the hospital funding issue. The report confirms what the hospitals in Ottawa have been telling us for some time, and that is that they have to contend

with a funding inequity. I'll quote from the report. It says, "The inequities in funding are costing Ottawa hospitals between $50 million and $70 million per year." Minister, my question is very

simple and very direct on behalf of hospitals in the Ottawa area: what are you going to do to address this funding inequity?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I can tell the honourable member that we have received this report, which was of

course commissioned by the city of Ottawa, and are reviewing it for any legitimate findings that are found in the report. If the honourable member wants to know what we're doing, I can report to

this House, as maybe the honourable member well knows, that since the 1995-96 fiscal year, funding to hospitals in Ottawa has gone from $587,765,607 to $714,146,622, an increase of 22%.

Mr McGuinty: Minister, if you think you are fulfilling your responsibilities by citing financial data, I would ask you to speak to patients

and their families living in the Ottawa area, because they will tell you they've got to contend with longer waiting lists than ever before. They've got to contend with shorter stays in hospitals

than ever before. They've got to contend with fewer hospital beds than ever before. They hear stuff about your primary care reform, but that has yet to materialize. That's the experience on the

ground.

I'll ask you once more. We have a report now confirming what we've always known, that there is a funding inequity when it comes to your treatment of Ottawa

hospitals. On behalf of Ottawa hospitals, on behalf of working families who rely on Ottawa hospitals, what specifically are you going to do, and when are you going to do it when it comes to

addressing this funding inequity?

Hon Mr Clement: I can say this: we are still trying to track down where the report's information comes from, because it is not related to any

information we have. It was a report commissioned by the city of Ottawa. The Ottawa mayor, Bob Chiarelli, might know something about where some of these numbers come from. They don't come from

Ministry of Health data or data from the hospitals, so from that perspective I'm at a bit of a loss to respond to numbers that don't seem to match with the published accounts of the government of

Ontario.

I can tell the honourable member that from 1995-96 to the fiscal year just ending, the increase to the city of Ottawa hospitals was $126,381,015 of taxpayers'

hard-earned money for the care that we find on hospital campuses, that is needed on hospital campuses. We have been there for Ottawa hospitals just as we have been there for hospitals throughout

Ontario because that is the locus of patient care. We are there; the hospital funding is up. We are concerned about sustainability of the health care system which, if the honourable member has any

thoughts on, we'd be happy to share --

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

YOUNG ENTREPRENEUR PROGRAM

Mrs Julia Munro (York North): My question is for the Minister of Economic Development and Trade. Summer is approaching, and that means many of

Ontario's young people are looking for jobs to help pay their way through school. Many will be able to find jobs at one of Ontario's premier tourist attractions or at theme parks or restaurants in

their hometowns. However, there are many other young people who are looking for something more.

I understand that you were part of an announcement last week that will give young Ontarians the opportunity to try their hand at running their own businesses

this summer. Minister, could you please explain why this program is important and what our government has committed to it?

Hon Robert W. Runciman (Minister of Economic Development and Trade): I want to thank the member for York North for the question. Last week,

along with representatives from the Royal Bank and Junior Achievement, we officially launched Ontario's young entrepreneurs strategy. The strategy was created to encourage entrepreneurship as a

career choice and to provide young people with business training, mentoring and financial help to start up their own businesses.

Our government has committed $15 million over four years to this program. We feel that giving our young people a chance to learn about being in business and

helping them get a new business successfully up and running is a smart and sensible investment in the future of the province.

Mrs Munro: I thank the minister for his answer. Minister, young people are the future of this province, and I'm pleased to hear that our

government is ready to give them a chance to try something new. Opportunities like this can make a huge difference in a young person's life.

You stated that you have committed $15 million to this program. Could you please explain exactly how this money will be spent and how the program is going to

teach our youth about the benefits of being their own boss?

Hon Mr Runciman: The strategy has three different components and will reach 2.5 million students and their parents. The first component,

future entrepreneurs, is a program for the classroom that introduces the idea of entrepreneurship to grade 7 and 8 students. The second component, Summer Company, provides hands-on business

training and mentoring, along with awards of up to $3,000, for 15- to 29-year-olds to help them start up a summer business. Finally, the third component, My Company, is a partnership with the Royal

Bank that combines hands-on business training and low-interest loans up to $15,000 to help 18- to 29-year-olds start up their own permanent businesses.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): My question is for the Minister of Education. Yesterday, the Premier was asked about the private school

voucher. He was asked why he was doing this private school voucher. He suggested it was a sense of fairness, that the issue was one of fairness. He suggested it was unfair to pay for a system you

don't use.

I'd like to know if you, as the Minister of Education, stand by these remarks of your Premier, when I, who don't have children, and many people like me who

don't have children, pay education taxes and have for a long time. I'm going to surmise, then, that I too will be getting a tax credit. Is that the case?

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): I would like to congratulate the honourable member for her support of

hospitals, schools and roads by paying her taxes. We do respect her choice by giving back some of her taxes. You have a tax cut. You have the choice about where you want to spend that money

according to your own priorities, according to what you believe is in the best interests of your family. We respect that with taxpayers. We respect that with parents in terms of parental

choice.

You as a party have talked about the need for parental choice in the public system. We agree with that. But we also think you need to respect parental choice:

those who may wish to go to independent schools, who may wish to go to schools that more closely reflect their religious or cultural values.

Mrs Pupatello: That's exactly the point: you have taken $1.8 billion out of the public education system since you took office, and now you're

turning over $500 million to a private school voucher system that all children cannot benefit from. I am telling you, Minister, on behalf of most of the people in Ontario -- whether we pay taxes or

don't pay taxes, what systems we support or don't support -- that all of us agree, as Canadians, that the basic tenet of good public policy is that it's not about who's paying but that all of us

can benefit from that good public policy.

You have not thought through this policy. The Premier says one thing. The Minister of Education says another. Your own caucus members are surprised to find

elements of a private school voucher in a budget document. I ask you again: is this a matter of fairness? If it is, this is going down a road that you owed the people of Ontario that question when

they went to the ballot box in 1999 and did not ask this most significant question. I suggest that you go back to the drawing board, because this is not a question of fairness.

Hon Mrs Ecker: I don't know where else the honourable member would expect to find a government statement of tax policy but in the budget.

That's where you usually put these things.

Secondly, she can misinterpret or misconstrue what the Premier is saying, because that's not what he said. He is committed to the public system. He is

committed to excellence in the public system. That is very clear.

Thirdly, in 1995 we were spending $12.9 billion on the public education system. Today we are going to be spending $13.8 billion. That's an increase. To the

honourable member, even in the Liberal new math, that is an increase for our public education system, support that system very much needs.

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): My question is also for the Minister of Education. Last week, after years of consultation with stakeholders, the

government made a very responsible announcement about accountability for our educational system. We introduced a new concept to the Liberals: parental choice. They're having some problems with

it.

I have received numerous calls and e-mails from constituents in the riding of Durham and elsewhere, people like Dirk Mostert, Leonard and Theresa Corvers,

Barry Thompson, Harry Salomons, Linda Jansma and Carla Witvoet, to name a few. I have been hearing from hard-working families who have struggled to provide this type of education for their

children. In much of what I have heard, there seem to be four common themes: choice, quality, accountability and fairness.

Minister, would you please tell not just parents in my riding but all the parents of Ontario about the advantages they will have with the decision made by this

government?

Hon Mrs Ecker: To the list of people who support this initiative we can add Monte Kwinter, Michael Bryant, and obviously today Gerard Kennedy.

Thank you very much.

This initiative is about supporting parental choice. I know the honourable members across the way in the opposition like to say that somehow or other this is

something that's supporting the elite. Far from it. We have many letters and comments from people who talk about the hardship for middle-class parents who may wish to make this choice. Frankly, in

more than 95% of the independent schools that belong to the Ontario Federation of Independent Schools, the students are the children of ordinary middle-class, hard-working Ontario families. We

support parental choice here in Ontario, just like other provinces: British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Quebec, Manitoba. This is not a revolutionary concept. This is something that helps

support parental choice, in making choices they believe are in the best interests of their children.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The minister's time is up. Supplementary?

Mr O'Toole: Thank you for that very comprehensive response, Minister. It's becoming much clearer, hopefully, on the other side. As you've

said, other supporters agree that this decision will help hard-working families in our communities who want a clear choice in educating their children. Will you please tell not just me but other

members in the House how this decision will help parents and students ensure they receive the best possible education, whether they attend an independent school, like Knox Christian School in my

riding, or any public school in Ontario?

Hon Mrs Ecker: I agree with the honourable member that not only do we have many excellent public schools in this province with teachers who

are very committed and go above and beyond for the children in this system, but we also have independent schools, in my riding, in his riding, in the ridings of the members opposite, that are also

very excellent schools.

We believe we have a track record that shows we are committed to excellence in education for our children. That's why we have taken the steps we've taken in

the public education system to strengthen the curriculum, to bring in a Safe Schools Act, to bring in legislation that prevents school boards from using money in places where they shouldn't take

classroom dollars. All of those are steps we have taken because of a commitment to public education: more money, new money, new investments in the classroom because we know they are needed to make

sure our children get the best education possible.

TRANSIT SERVICES

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): I have a question for the Minister of Transportation. We have an emergency situation facing our public

transit system in Toronto. Brian Ashton, chair of the TTC, warns that the system that more than a million people depend on every day will see major cuts to subway and streetcar services. We're

talking about cuts to the very heart of the system. The NDP has put forward a solution called the transportation trust fund. It is a dedicated fund that takes two cents out of the existing gas tax

to provide $180 million a year for transit and $120 million for local road repairs. Minister, will you support our transportation trust fund?

Hon Brad Clark (Minister of Transportation): What's startling about the question is that she's giving absolutely no credit to this government

in terms of its commitment to transit in Ontario. If you go back, we have given the city of Toronto $829 million for a subway. We increased it by $50 million to $879 million. We added $250 million

just recently into regional transit, and we've invested $500 million and convinced the federal government and the city of Toronto to equal that for transit. Quite clearly this government is

committed and will continue to be committed to transit. We want to get on with these developments.

Ms Churley: That was a disingenuous answer. This government has totally withdrawn from transit and local road supports in Ontario. Toronto is

the only jurisdiction in North America that does not get operating funds from a government. In this budget --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Member take her seat. Stop the clock. The member for Scarborough East, this is his last warning as well. I'm not

going to put up with the continued yelling across. I've yelled order a couple of times. Sorry for the interruption.

Ms Churley: In this budget, your government gave the TTC the back of your hand once again. You provided not one red cent for our subways, our

streetcars and our buses, yet you've got funding for seven new expressways elsewhere in the province.

Minister, I'm going to ask you again. We have a solution that the TTC likes and others like. It's a good solution. It is a viable solution: take two cents out

of the existing gas tax and provide that funding, dedicated funding -- every year it's there, and they can depend on it. Will you commit to funding the TTC here in Toronto today?

Hon Mr Clark: I thank the member for the question again. She still doesn't get it. This government has spent $829 million on the Sheppard

subway line. We committed to paying 75% for that subway line and we included up to $50 million more. So we're now at $879 million for the Sheppard subway run. On top of that, we have $500 million

for the waterfront projects. On top of that, we just included $250 million for interregional transit.

The member doesn't understand it. Maybe she should listen to Minister Collenette, who stated, "It's not just about public transit. It's about long-term

planning of how we develop and use our land. That's why we need to approach this together," which we're doing, with Smart Growth.

INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM FINANCING

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): My question is to the new Minister of Transportation as well. In the wake of last week's budget, I would

like you to clarify why your government is really not honouring its commitment to the roadways in our particular area as well. I would like to remind the minister that 250 miles from here is a

fast-growing community, the fastest growing in Canada over the last decade, and the fourth-largest community in Canada. There is no appropriate funding in the budget that deals with the massive

infrastructure needs in the city of Ottawa.

When you look at the budget, it almost completely avoids any responsibility. The budget says, "The government will examine the options and timing for widening

... of Highway 417." Then, "The government will also use this investment to cost-share other projects determined in consultation with the city of Ottawa." This is code for delaying and deferring.

We are looking for commitment, not cost-sharing on provincial projects, not studies, not options and not consultations.

Minister, can you explain to the people of Ottawa why this growing contributor to the coffers of the province is getting proportionately less and less of a

contribution to address its infrastructure needs?

Hon Brad Clark (Minister of Transportation): I thank the member for Ottawa Centre for the question. Quite clearly in the budget we announced

$250 million, which was a part of the SuperBuild Millennium Partnerships initiative; $70 million of that was addressing Ottawa's issues.

It's important for the member also to remember that since 1995 we have invested $500 million in the Ottawa area. The member, when he starts to talk about a

number of the planning issues that are underway -- and I understand that the mayor of Ottawa believes he should simply be able to point to an area out there and say, "Build a road there." We don't

do that over here.

What we have underway right now are a number of needs assessments for a number of portions of the highways. We're now looking at the Ottawa ring road and we're

co-operating with the city of Ottawa on that particular project. We're looking at two different studies that are already underway looking at operational design for the extension of Highway 417.

Quite clearly, the mayor doesn't understand that you have to design the highway before --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. The minister's time is up.

Mr Patten: I would suggest that the new Minister of Transportation take a look at the wording in the budget, because it says "Up to $70

million" and it says "to cost-share," and that usually means that you put in your 50%, we claim the whole amount and call it $70 million, and then you call upon the city to put in $35 million that

they don't have because you removed the commitment to fund them in the amalgamation for over $100 million.

We're talking about a very fast-growing city, one that contributes to the coffers of this particular province. The ring road has been messed around with for

eight years. It is not a priority for the city. The expansion of the highway is, yes. There are a number of things. The city is ready to move right now. You've got all the studies, all the things

you need to do. All this means, and what you're saying, is deferring, delaying. Maybe by the year 2005 you might have some kind of a contribution in this. You don't even have an agreement with the

federal government on their infrastructure arrangement to be able to get some resources to put in this area. Are you going to take some particular action and do it now?

Hon Mr Clark: I thank the member for the question. Maybe he doesn't think there's a need for the ring road, but we believe there's a need to

not only assess it, but to get on with it.

Quite ironically, I met with Minister Collenette, not a couple of weeks ago. I sat down talking to him specifically about some of the issues in Ottawa and

across the province, and how we work together to develop non-partisan, tri-governmental partnerships. The minister has stated himself that the amount of money that the federal government is putting

into transportation is a drop in the bucket. He has committed to working with me and with the municipalities to develop these tri-governmental proposals and partnerships. We're anticipating very

clearly he will be at the table. We're also anticipating that the municipalities will be at the table.

It's sad that in Ottawa the mayor is more interested in throwing rhetoric around and pointing fingers and trying to aggravate things as opposed to sitting

down. When I sat down with the mayor, I asked him to work with me on these projects. He has never called me. He has never picked up the phone. I asked him to work with me. He didn't do it, but

Minister Collenette is working with this government.

ELECTRONIC MONITORING

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): My question today is for the Minister of Correctional Services. Minister, as part of our government's

ongoing commitment to making communities safer, the Mike Harris government announced in the budget that $2 million has been allocated to your ministry for electronic monitoring of offenders who are

serving their sentences in the communities.

I am aware that electronic monitoring allows us to increase public safety by monitoring offenders in the community and holds them accountable for their

actions. Can you tell us more about electronic monitoring and the types of offenders who would qualify for this particular program?

Hon Rob Sampson (Minister of Correctional Services): To my colleague from Simcoe North, I want to start off by saying electronic monitoring is

just one of the tools that we use in corrections to help us better control and monitor individuals who are either released from institutions under a temporary release program or released from

institutions as a result of a parole program or sentenced by the courts directly to community-type sentencing. It's just one of the many tools that we put in the hands of probation and parole

officers and institutional managers to make sure that we have a full and comprehensive ability to manage and track these individuals and to apply what the courts have asked us to apply as it

relates to any particular type of community incarceration to these individuals throughout their community sentence or, as I say, as a result of some institutional release program.

Mr Dunlop: Thank you for that response, Minister. Yesterday I read in the Toronto Star that you are looking at other types of technology and

planning on expanding the use of electronic monitoring with a private partner.

Can you tell us why you need to look at other technology than the devices you are currently using, and if they are indeed effective or not?

Hon Mr Sampson: We started the electronic monitoring program in 1995, using the technology that was available then, and we've used it as

extensively as we possibly could. But of course the way technology has gone over the last while, it has developed. There are other types of technologies that can be used to help us apply a full

range of monitoring to the individuals released to community sentences or, as I said, released in some way or another from institutions. So we're taking a look at these technologies. They are in

fact being used in other jurisdictions around this world quite effectively to help, again, properly equip probation and parole officers with the full range of tools so that we know where these

individuals are when they are released to communities, and we know on a regular basis how we can get in touch with them should we have to do that. We'll look at the full range of technology. It's

something we should do, and we will be doing it.

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): I have a question for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Minister, my office has received

letters and calls from municipalities across Algoma-Manitoulin: for example, the town of Espanola, Gordon township, Northeastern Manitoulin and The Islands, the township of Baldwin, Assiginack, the

township of Central Manitoulin, the township of Sables-Spanish Rivers, the township of Nairn and Hyman and many others. Each of these communities has the same problem: a significant budget

shortfall as a result of your government's downloading. You've created an extra level of government in northern Ontario with the DSSABs, and now they are billing municipalities to pay for

downloaded services such as land ambulance, social services and social housing.

Can you stand here today and assure the communities in my constituency that you will increase the community reinvestment fund to offset the increases faced as

a result of your government's downloading?

Hon Chris Hodgson (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I appreciate the question because that term has been used quite a bit in the

media. I think the honourable member would know that there was a trade that took place because municipalities asked for some stability around their property tax base. Education each year on average

went up about 10%. They asked for that to be stopped because that eroded their ability to plan and predict for hard services. We did that. It was a $2.5-billion trade, uploading half the cost of

residential plus the children's aid; these are uploaded costs.

What went to the municipalities were other services that are best handled at the local level. If you want me to review the numbers for your particular

municipalities, I'd be more than willing to do that.

Mr Brown: The minister knows that what he just said is more fiction than fact.

Minister, I'd like to quote to you the mayor of Northeastern Manitoulin and The Islands, Ken Ferguson, a mayor you probably know very well on your side. He

says, "Our community has many seniors and individuals on a fixed income; the added taxation will be too much for many to afford without experiencing significant difficulties in their day-to-day

modest lifestyles." He goes on to write, "I am certain that it was never the intent of this province to create a situation where local municipal services were eroded by squeezing provincially

mandated services into an already tight municipal tax structure."

Minister, will you stand here and tell Mayor Ferguson and all the other communities of Algoma-Manitoulin that you will adjust the CRF so that these communities

do not have to increase their property taxes? Mr Ferguson is telling us that the increases in NEMI will be between 16% and 50%, depending on the ward.

Hon Mr Hodgson: I will undertake to review their numbers. I can tell you that when I was on municipal council, we always felt that at the

local level we knew what was going on. We could run things better than Queen's Park. If your councils are saying that with these new services they can't run it as well as Queen's Park did before

the trade, I can look into that.

I can tell you that the trades were to the benefit of municipalities, and we can show you the numbers on that. The children's aid alone has gone up

dramatically. That is no longer borne on the property tax rate. You can take a look at education; the rate has actually gone down on the residential property tax. It has allowed municipalities more

stability and more predictability on their tax base to plan for hard services. That's what AMO and others asked for for a generation. If you want to review those trades, I'd be willing to look at

that.

VICTIMS OF CRIME

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): My question is for the Attorney General. My constituents and I were very surprised to read that

CAVEAT, Canadians against violence, will close its doors at the end of the month. In 1991, Nina de Villiers was murdered by a violent offender who was out on bail. This violent offender had a long

history of predatory attacks on women. Priscilla de Villiers began a crusade to put justice back into the justice system. She made it her mission to ensure that victims of crime would have a voice

in a system that too often considered victims a nuisance. Mrs de Villiers founded CAVEAT to offer victims a sense of hope and to fight for their right to be heard.

Minister, can you assure this House that CAVEAT's work on behalf of all victims will not have been in vain?

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): I would like to thank the member for Scarborough Centre for this

question.

This is an opportunity for us to pay tribute to Priscilla de Villiers for all of her tireless work on behalf of victims of crime. She clearly experienced what

is undoubtedly a parent's worst nightmare. Yet somehow she found the strength to carry on and work for change. She worked and she made a difference.

The Mike Harris government has always been anxious to work, and has in the past worked, with CAVEAT, and I want to say publicly here that we're committed to

continuing to work with victims of crime.

I say to you that we are reviewing her current report -- the report from CAVEAT. In fact we are utilizing many portions of it in some initiatives that are

coming forward from my ministry.

Ms Mushinski: I'd like to thank the minister for that response. I think all members of this House would agree that Priscilla de Villiers has

made a positive and important impact on the justice system in Ontario and indeed in Canada.

I for one am very proud that the Mike Harris government has worked hard to change the justice system on behalf of victims. I only wish the federal government

would listen to the cries of victims and finally get tough on crime.

Minister, I'm concerned that in the absence of CAVEAT, victims will not have access to programs that support them in their hour of greatest need. Can you

assure my constituents of Scarborough Centre that under the Mike Harris government the concerns of victims will not be ignored?

Hon Mr Young: I can assure you, Mr Speaker, and indeed the people of Ontario, that the Mike Harris government will continue, as it always has

in the past, to firmly stand on the side of victims.

This government has taken action to ensure that victims are treated with respect throughout the justice system and receive the services they require. The

Victims' Bill of Rights, proclaimed in 1996, was indeed an important step forward. It acknowledged that there are needs of victims, and it travelled great lengths to addressing those needs. But

there was more to do after the passage and proclamation of that bill of rights, and we have done more. In the past fiscal year, 2000-01, we spent approximately $135 million on in excess of 40

programs that will help and assist victims across this province.

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): My question is for the Chair of Management Board. Front-line workers who care for Ontarians who are

developmentally disabled are chronically underpaid, and they want to know what you're going to do about it. The government's own study shows wages and benefits for these workers are seriously out

of whack with other social workers. They earn as much as 25% less. Those low wages are feeding huge staff turnover rates as high as 22%. The developmentally disabled deserve dependable,

high-quality care. Will you help bring stability back to the system and raise those workers' salaries?

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): Our government has listened to people with developmental disabilities and

their families, and I can tell you that we certainly have a lot of respect for the courage with which they face these challenges.

They told us that they need more flexible supports to live in the community, and that's why in the May 2001 budget we provided an additional $55 million in

annual funding this year, growing to an annual increase of almost $200 million over current levels by 2006.

On top of this, we'll help meet demands for new facilities for people with developmental disabilities through an additional five-year, $67-million commitment

toward the construction of new facilities to meet their needs.

We've consulted with this community. Clearly we have a lot of empathy for them and clearly we've come to the table with substantial money in the new

budget.

Mr Martin: Everybody knows that you're allotting more money to help the developmentally disabled this year, but there's widespread agreement

that workers' wage hikes must be a part of that package.

Minister, those workers are here in the gallery today, ready to jump at the chance to meet with you and make a deal. Every year, almost one in four workers

leaves the sector because they're underpaid.

Will you help the disabled and their families who depend so much on these workers and hammer out a deal to raise their wages?

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: I can only hope to point out again to the member that we have a substantial amount of assistance in the budget that was just

announced. I would assume that $55 million, increasing to $200 million over a period of two years, is substantial funding.

I can only add to this that perhaps I can help with quotes from some of the people in that community. June Chiu, the president, and Agnes Samler, the executive

director, of the Toronto Association for Community Living, said, "Minister Flaherty's announcement ... will help us meet the critical and increasing needs of people with an intellectual disability

and their families ... above all, we are relieved to see that there is commitment to a multi-year plan for this sector."

It goes on to say, "Once again, we commend you and your government for recognizing and valuing the lives of people with intellectual disabilities."

Clearly these are people who provide in this community, who are very satisfied with the efforts the government has made to address this issue.

CLINICAL RESEARCH

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): I have a question for the Minister of Health. You will be aware that media headlines today are

celebrating exciting advances in research that will aid in the treatment of breast cancer. At the same time as we join in that celebration, I want to bring to your attention the fact that there is

another piece of leading research that could be of enormous benefit to women in this province, in this country and indeed across the world. The research is into a new treatment for fibroids called

uterine fibroid embolization. It involves 550 women across Ontario. The study includes seven hospitals and three of our research institutions. It is the world's largest study into an alternative to

hysterectomy.

This trial could lead to the kind of alternative treatment that would mean 20,000 women a year in this province do not have to face a hysterectomy. That could

mean in turn that 10,000 hospital days could be saved. Yet this research is in danger of being cut off at the clinical trial stage because of a lack of funding.

Minister, I ask you today, will you undertake to find the ways and means to ensure this important clinical research can proceed in the interests of those

20,000 Ontario women a year who could be spared the risks of surgery and the complications of hysterectomy?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I thank the honourable member for the question. I can report to her and to this

House that I am aware of the research being done in this area. It is in the early experimental stages at present. I have had a conversation with one of the researchers, as well as with the Women's

Health Council, which as you know was appointed by my predecessor to fund, through a $10-million-per-year funding from the provincial government, initiatives and research in this area. So the

discussions are ongoing, but I will take the honourable member's suggestions under advisement.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The time for question period is over.

VISITOR

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Just before we begin, the members may know that today is the 25th anniversary of the intern program. Jackie

Scott, the aunt of one of our interns, Rachel Sheer, is in the public gallery. She is visiting from Castle Acre, Norfolk, England, and we would like to welcome her today.

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Pursuant to standing order 37(a), the member for Davenport has given notice of his dissatisfaction with the

answer to his question given by the Minister of Citizenship concerning settlement and integration services and federal-provincial agreements. This matter will be debated today at 6 pm.

VISITOR

Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough): Mr Speaker, on a point of order: I'd like to welcome the students from Prince of Wales school in

Peterborough. Welcome, guys.

PETITIONS

NORTHERN HEALTH TRAVEL GRANT

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): Just before I go to petitions, I want to tell Auntie Jackie that Rachel Sheer is in my office doing an excellent

job. So you can go back to England and tell everyone just how professional she really is.

I have a petition to the Ontario Legislature. It's northerners demanding the Harris government eliminate health care apartheid.

"Whereas the northern health travel grant offers a reimbursement of partial travel costs at a rate of 30.4 cents per kilometre one way for northerners forced

to travel for cancer care while travel policy for southerners who travel for cancer care features full reimbursement costs for travel, meals and accommodation;

"Whereas a cancer tumour knows no health travel policy or geographic location;

"Whereas a recently released Oracle research poll confirms that 92% of Ontarians support equal health travel funding;

"Whereas northern Ontario residents pay the same amount of taxes and are entitled to the same access to health care and all government services and inherent

civil rights as residents living elsewhere in the province; and

"Whereas we support the efforts of ... OSECC (Ontarians Seeking Equal Cancer Care), founded by Gerry Lougheed Jr, former chair of Cancer Care Ontario,

Northeast Region, to correct this injustice against northerners travelling for cancer treatment;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, support Gerry Lougheed Jr and petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move

immediately to fund full travel expenses for northern Ontario cancer patients and eliminate the health care apartheid which exists presently in the province of Ontario."

PROTECTION OF MINORS

Mr Bob Wood (London West): I have a petition signed by 306 people.

"Whereas children are being exposed to sexually explicit materials in many commercial establishments;

"Whereas many municipalities do not have bylaws in place to protect minors and those that do vary from place to place and have failed to protect minors from

unwanted exposure to sexually explicit materials;

"Whereas uniform standards are needed in Ontario that would make it illegal to sell, rent, loan or display sexually explicit materials to minors;

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

"To pass Bill 95, Protection of Minors from Sexually Explicit Goods and Services Act, 2000, as soon as possible."

AIR QUALITY

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Harris government's wholly owned Nanticoke generating station is North America's largest dirty coal-fired electricity producing plant and

Ontario's largest producer of the chemicals and acid gases which contribute to deadly smog and acid rain; and

"Whereas the Nanticoke plant, which has more than doubled its dangerous emissions under the Harris government, is now the worst polluter in all of Canada,

spewing out over five million kilograms" -- that probably should be kilotons, I would think, Mr Speaker -- "of toxic chemicals each year, including many cancer-causing chemicals and mercury, a

potent and dangerous neurotoxin; and

"Whereas at least 13 Ontario municipalities and seven northeastern US states have expressed concerns that Ontario Power Generation's proposed cleanup plan for

Nanticoke is inadequate in protecting the air quality and health and safety of their residents; and

"Whereas the Ontario Medical Association has stated that 1,900 Ontarians die prematurely each year and we pay $1 billion annually in health-related costs as a

result of air pollution; and

"Whereas because the Harris government has now lifted the moratorium on the sale of coal-fired power plants and has set a date for deregulation of electricity,

the operator of the Nanticoke plant will likely stoke up production to maximize profits which will only worsen the air quality in cities like Kitchener, Windsor, London, Niagara Falls and St

Catharines;

"Be it resolved that the Mike Harris government immediately order that the Nanticoke generating station be converted from dirty coal to cleaner-burning natural

gas."

I affix my signature. I'm in agreement.

ELECTRICITY GENERATING STATION

Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): I have pleasure in presenting this petition on behalf of the member for Oakville, Gary Carr, and

myself. This is a critical petition with literally thousands of names. It reads as follows, to the Parliament of Ontario:

"Whereas Sithe Energies Canadian Development Ltd is actively pursuing the development of an 800 MW electricity generating facility;

"Whereas the 14-hectare parcel of land on which the station is proposed is located on the east side of Winston Churchill Boulevard in the Southdown industrial

district of Mississauga;

"Whereas Sithe has stated its commitment to an open dialogue with communities where it has a presence and to being responsive to the concerns of the same;

and

"Whereas the government of Ontario has a responsibility to ensure the safety of Ontario citizens and to determine how this facility will impact those who live

in its immediate, surrounding area,

"We, the undersigned, petition the Parliament of Ontario as follows:

"That the government of Ontario direct the Ministry of the Environment to undertake a formal environmental assessment of the Sithe project."

This project is in my riding and abuts the riding of Oakville. I have pleasure in signing it in support.

SALE OF SCHOOLS

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenpor