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

March 31, 2004

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2004-Mar-31 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 31 March 2004 Mercredi 31 mars 2004

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

OPTOMETRISTS

KIDNEY DISEASE

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

AROUND THE BAY RACE

OPTOMETRISTS

ENERGY CONSERVATION

WATER QUALITY

GIFT TO UNIVERSITY

OF WESTERN ONTARIO

WILBERT KEON

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

OPTOMETRY AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES OPTOMÉTRISTES

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

HYDRO GENERATION

ORAL QUESTIONS

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

NUCLEAR ENERGY

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

DEMOCRATIC RENEWAL

CAREER COLLEGES

PHOTO RADAR

HYDRO GENERATION

HOME CARE

HYDRO RATES

TOURISM

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY

ENERGY CONSERVATION

CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

NURSES

WORKPLACE SAFETY

FIREFIGHTERS

PETITIONS

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

OPTOMETRISTS

SERVICES TO DEAF-BLIND PERSONS

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

LANDFILL

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

LANDFILL

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

LCBO OUTLET

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

LANDFILL

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

ORDERS OF THE DAY

PUBLIC SECTOR SALARY DISCLOSURE

AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LA DIVULGATION

DES TRAITEMENTS

DANS LE SECTEUR PUBLIC

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

OPTOMETRISTS

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington): I'm pleased to acknowledge Ontario's professional optometrists, who provide critical, front-line primary eye

care services. More than three million patients visit an optometrist for primary eye and vision care every year in our province, yet optometric fees have remained unchanged since 1989. In fact,

during the NDP's social contract, funding for optometric services were clawed back and reduced a further 15% from 1989 levels. In 1991, the government broadened the profession's scope of practice

and gave optometrists the responsibility to diagnose eye disease and disorders, but they failed to provide the funding required for the profession to invest in new testing technologies.

When you take inflation into account, optometric fees in Ontario not just been declining; they are now the lowest in all of Canada. The current fee no longer

comes close to covering the cost of services provided. The lack of a fee increase for over 16 years has resulted in a crisis situation for Ontario's optometrists as they struggle to acquire and

maintain the equipment necessary to provide quality eye care.

The Ontario Association of Optometrists has asked the government to appoint a mediator to resolve this. The government has flatly refused to respond. It is the

responsibility of the Minister of Health to ensure healthier outcomes for our citizens and meet with Ontario's optometrists immediately or face breaking yet another health care promise to

Ontarians.

KIDNEY DISEASE

Mr Shafiq Qaadri (Etobicoke North): I rise today on the occasion of Kidney Health Month to congratulate the Kidney Foundation of Canada on

celebrating 40 years as the only national health charity dedicated to improving the health and quality of life of people living with kidney disease. As a physician, I have witnessed first-hand the

positive impact that the Kidney Foundation has had on Canadian patients.

Each March holds a special significance for those whose lives have been affected by kidney disease. The Kidney Foundation of Canada and its thousands of

dedicated volunteers in Ontario head out door-to-door to raise funds for research, education and patient services. Thanks to the $67 million in research that the foundation has funded since 1964,

people with kidney disease have access to better therapies and expanded treatment options. Yet the numbers continue to grow steadily. An aging population and increasing incidence of diabetes are

among the many factors. At the end of the year 2000, 10,000 Ontarians were living with kidney disease or had dialysis. The rate is increasing by approximately 15% annually.

The Kidney Foundation has successfully advocated for the expansion of dialysis services across Ontario. Currently, 1,300 Ontarians are on the waiting list for

kidney transplants. On behalf of all the members here, I'd like to salute the important work that the Kidney Foundation of Canada does for Ontario's patients.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Ms Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): I rise today to bring forward an issue in the House that is of great concern to students and

administrators at colleges and universities across Ontario. Although this government has moved to freeze tuition, there has been no word about how colleges and universities ought to deal with the

shortfall they now face because expected funds are no longer available.

During the election, the promises flew fast and furious and the McGuinty Liberals promised they would "expand our post-secondary capacity by at least 10% over

five years," that they would "enhance the quality of our institutions," that they would "recruit new faculty for colleges and universities."

Are these just pipe dreams? Right now, colleges and universities are worse off than they were when you came to power. They now have less money to provide quality

education to our students. You're forcing them to make choices that could very well impact the quality of education our students receive. Our colleges outlined their financial plight to your

government several months ago and called for additional funding. So far, they have heard nothing.

This is the Premier who styles himself the education Premier. Mr McGuinty, colleges and universities are part of the education system. It is time you made sure

that our colleges and universities have the funding they need to continue to provide the excellent education Ontarians deserve.

AROUND THE BAY RACE

Ms Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): I rise in the House today to celebrate and share with this House and my colleagues another successful Around

the Bay Road Race that occurred in the city of Hamilton this past Sunday, March 28.

Did you know that this was the first marathon ever held in North America, and not only that, that it is the longest continuous road race in the history of North

American running? It started, actually, in 1894 in Hamilton, and today there are two races: a five-kilometre race and a 30-kilometre race for the more ambitious athletes.

At this year's 110th road race, there were 6,200 runners from all over the country. The annual Around the Bay race is a special event with participants not just

from Hamilton but from every possible community around the country. I'd like to take this time to acknowledge and thank the race director, Mr Zajczenko, for his great effort and commitment to

another successful race, as well as all the participants in the race -- all the runners -- all the volunteers, and the support of community members in Hamilton.

What a great race this was, and every year this race continues to grow. I invite you and all the members of this House to join us next year. This is an

opportunity to witness Hamilton at its best, to see us for what we are, the strength as a city, and a city that is committed to maintaining tradition and fostering community spirit.

OPTOMETRISTS

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): Hundreds of optometrists came to Queen's Park today to call on the Liberal government to provide adequate

funding for eye care in the upcoming budget.

Three million Ontarians visit optometrists every year to get their eyes examined. With the passage of the Regulated Health Professions Act in 1991, optometrists

assumed additional responsibilities to diagnose diseases and disorders of the eye, but increases in funding to reflect these new responsibilities and the increased cost to buy up-to-date technology

have not followed suit.

It's been 15 years, since 1989, since optometrists last had an increase in OHIP fees. The current fee

schedule doesn't cover the true cost of eye exams in

Ontario. This is creating a crisis for optometrists who are trying to buy and maintain specialized equipment. The crisis is reinforced with increased overhead and electricity costs.

Last year, negotiations began between the Ministry of Health and the Ontario Association of Optometrists. The purpose was to develop a new funding agreement for

OHIP-insured eye services. Regrettably, these broke down in July 2003. The association has asked the Liberal government to bring in a mediator to help. There has been no response from the

government, and negotiations have not resumed.

Ontarians want high-quality eye care. They want to know their optometrists are using the best specialized equipment for eye exams. They expect their optometrists

to be adequately paid for their medical expertise. An increase in funding for eye care is required, and we call on the Liberal government to include this in the budget.

ENERGY CONSERVATION

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): I rise to reaffirm the importance of promoting energy conservation in our schools. The blackout in the year

2003 was a punctuation mark on how reliant we are on electricity. Our government is committed to building a reliable, sustainable and diverse supply of energy. In doing so, we will also make

conservation a cornerstone of our energy future.

A conservation ethic starts by changing behaviours in our workplace, in our homes, in our communities and in our schools. To ensure a lasting effect, however, we

must reach our young people.

Today I pay tribute to two initiatives that are making this happen. There is the EarthCARE Canada program, a partnership project with the Ottawa-Carleton and

greater Essex district school boards that teaches savings and conservation in schools, but it also gets students to act as ambassadors for increasing community understanding about conservation.

The second initiative is the ecoschools program developed by the Toronto District School Board in co-operation with the Durham, Halton, Waterloo and York school

boards. It focuses on offering tools that teachers and students can use to conserve energy in schools. It also chronicles ideas that students can use at home and in the community to reduce energy

consumption.

This government believes firmly that creating a conservation culture will be critical if we are to achieve a sustainable energy future and a cleaner environment.

But this work in our schools and our youth will make this happen for the future, because they carry home these ideas to their families, friends and parents.

WATER QUALITY

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): I arise today to inform the House of a potentially deadly situation at Six Nations in my riding. Last

night, Six Nations Chief Roberta Jamieson held a public meeting advising citizens not to drink well water until they are sure it is safe. Random testing of 312 wells found 82% contained coliform

bacteria and 27% of those tested had dangerous levels of E coli. This is worrisome. There are nearly 1,400 wells in the community.

We know the Mike Harris and Ernie Eves governments brought in the toughest legislation and regulations to ensure Ontario had the cleanest, safest water in the

world.

The current provincial government crows about the steps it has taken to ensure quality drinking water for everyone in Ontario. Just last month the white paper on

watershed-based source protection planning was released. But under this government's watch, the largest native community in Canada has turned up some of the dirtiest well water in Canada.

In a post-Walkerton Ontario, native communities are falling between the cracks. Where is the provincial-federal coordination on drinking water? Are both levels

of government talking to each other? Quite honestly, does the left hand know what the right hand is doing? The people at Six Nations feel that neither the provincial nor the federal governments

appreciate the urgency of this problem. In fact, much of rural Ontario drinks from wells. The question is: Is their water safe?

GIFT TO UNIVERSITY

OF WESTERN ONTARIO

Ms Deborah Matthews (London North Centre): It is great pleasure for me to inform the members of the assembly that an announcement of great

importance was made this morning at the University of Western Ontario in my riding of London North Centre. Dr Paul Davenport, president of the university, announced a donation of $26 million from

Mr Seymour Schulich to the university's faculty of medicine and dentistry.

Through Mr Schulich's generosity, every year, for generations to come, 60 medical students will receive $20,000 in support of their tuition and education

expenses and 50 graduate students in medical sciences will receive yearly scholarships of $15,000.

This endowed gift recognizes the tremendous importance of accessible higher education, a view that this government enthusiastically shares. Mr Schulich's

donation will also provide enhanced support for two Canada research chairs and create the Tanna Schulich chair in neuroscience and mental health. This gift, when combined with matching funds from

the Ontario student opportunity trust fund for undergraduate student awards, the Ontario graduate scholarship program and the federal research chairs program, will bring the total impact of Mr

Schulich's donation to $50 million.

In recognition of Mr Schulich's exceptional gift, the school of medicine will be named in his honour pending university senate approval and will be known as the

Schulich School of Medicine.

WILBERT KEON

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): It's a great privilege for me to rise to honour Dr Wilbert Keon, who founded the University of Ottawa Heart

Institute 35 years ago and who today marks his last day on the job from which he will retire.

Thirty-five years ago today, Dr Wilbert Keon became known as a doctor, a surgeon, an administrator, a professor, a researcher, a fundraiser and a

parliamentarian. Most important, though, around Ottawa and eastern Ontario he's known as a humanitarian. He's made an enormous difference in the lives of so many families, not just in Ottawa and

eastern Ontario but indeed across Canada.

Over the past 35 years, the heart institute has become a world-renowned centre of cardiac excellence, with prevention, surgery, rehabilitation and research. Over

Dr Keon's tenure, he has helped raise more than $50 million for the heart institute from our community. It speaks volumes that Dr Keon has had a phenomenally positive relationship with eight

Premiers of Ontario and worked tremendously well with all three political parties in government.

Dr Keon and Dr Don Beanlands, who built the University of Ottawa Heart Institute, could have done that anywhere, could have brought their expertise and perhaps

been more well rewarded financially, but they did it here in Ontario.

I see the member for Ottawa Centre and the member for Ottawa-Vanier here. I know all of my colleagues, including Norm Sterling, the member for Lanark-Carleton,

our caucus and the entire House want to congratulate Dr Keon for a job well done.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

OPTOMETRY AMENDMENT ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LES OPTOMÉTRISTES

Mr Kormos moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 45,

An Act to amend the Optometry Act, 1991 / Projet de loi 45, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1991 sur les optométristes.

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

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): This bill amends the Optometry Act of 1991 to allow optometrists to prescribe therapeutic pharmaceutical

agents for the treatment of certain eye diseases.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I move that, pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45

pm to 9:30 pm on Wednesday, March 31, 2004, for the purpose of considering government business.

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

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

All those against, say "nay."

I think the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1350 to 1355.

The Speaker: Mr Duncan has moved government notice of motion number 19. All those in favour, please rise to be counted.

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Arthurs, Wayne

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Craitor, Kim

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Eves, Ernie

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Jeffrey, Linda

Kular, Kuldip

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

Marsales, Judy

Martiniuk, Gerry

Matthews, Deborah

Mauro, Bill

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Miller, Norm

Mossop, Jennifer F.

O'Toole, John

Orazietti, David

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Peterson, Tim

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Racco, Mario G.

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Runciman, Robert W.

Sandals, Liz

Scott, Laurie

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wong, Tony C.

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

The Speaker: All those opposed, will you please rise.

Nays

Churley, Marilyn

Hampton, Howard

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Murdoch, Bill

Prue, Michael

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 73; the nays are 7.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington): On a point of order, Speaker: It's appropriate to the motion the House just passed. This evening you, the

Premier and the Lieutenant Governor are hosting the Order of Ontario Awards. I was hopeful that perhaps in these circumstances the House leader and Speaker's office would be a little more sensitive

to that and maybe have the timing of the House -- when I've attended these ceremonies, and I know all members who have honourees here this evening find it most disturbing when the bells are ringing

for up to five minutes while we're trying to have the Lieutenant Governor present the Order of Ontario. I just offer it as a suggestion. I would encourage the government House leader and the

Speaker's office to consider that in future occasions, if not this evening, out of respect.

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): Speaker, you'll be aware that up until the Harris-Eves government that was

the practice of the House. It is disturbing. I've sat through a number of these ceremonies, and will endeavour to speak with the other House leaders to see if we can avoid bells going off at those

times today.

The Speaker: Thank you for raising the point. It is in the standing orders that if we need that, we'd have to have unanimous consent of the

House, because it is a part of the standing orders here.

Having heard no motion to that effect --

Mr Jackson: Mr Speaker, I move that unanimous consent be granted that the House reconvene this evening at 7 o'clock instead of 6:45. I believe

the ceremony will be concluded at that time.

The Speaker: I heard a "no."

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

HYDRO GENERATION

Hon David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources): I'm very pleased to stand in my place today to make an announcement about Ontario's energy

supply. As a society, we have a tremendous dependence upon electricity. The buildings we live and work in depend upon it. The subway, the streetcars, the street lights require it. The computer

technology that we use for work and fun won't function without it. In one form or another, it is a key part of our very infrastructure.

With this growing dependence has come recognition of the need to produce power in environmentally safe, clean and responsible fashion. At the same time, last

August's blackout brought home to us in a very dramatic way the importance of an adequate supply of reliable power, not to mention that a reliable, sustainable, competitively priced supply of

electricity also means a strong and prosperous economy, an enhanced quality of life. It is these conditions that have required us to seek creative and innovative solutions.

In January of this year my colleague Dwight Duncan, the Minister of Energy, announced our intention to seek up to 300 megawatts of new renewable energy

capacity as soon as possible. One of the components of meeting that goal is wind power. The wind turbine, for example, at Exhibition Place can produce enough electricity each year to light 250

homes. Since it produces no pollution, it displaces up to 380 tonnes of carbon dioxide annually. This is a proven technology that works, and they will increase our supply of renewable energy.

Another component of meeting our goal is expanding water power. Water power has always been a key part of the electricity mix. Right now, it provides 27% of

the province's generating capacity. I'm convinced we can do more in both of these areas.

That is why I am pleased to announce today that our government will be making crown land available for wind and water development, and seeking ways to expand

our water power capacity. Today, the Ministry of Natural Resources is posting the decision to open up crown land to wind power development on the Environmental Bill of Rights registry and is

inviting interested parties to apply for crown land sites for wind farms. We're also posting a draft water power strategy that outlines how we'll work with aboriginal communities, businesses and

individuals to explore water power opportunities on crown land. By allowing wind farms on crown land and looking at ways to expand water power, we're contributing to a healthier and more prosperous

Ontario for all.

Wind power is one of fastest-growing forms of energy in the world. As I've said, it does not produce greenhouse gas or other airborne emissions. It is founded

upon a reliable, renewable resource that is abundant in nature and that humanity has harnessed for millennia. It is based on technology that is quite simple and has been around for centuries.

You may be wondering where and how this is going to take place. Commercial wind farms must have a consistent supply of wind in order to be viable. Wind farms

will not be viable all over this province. Most crown land is located in areas with few people, such as off-shore or in remote parts of province. Areas with the most potential include the North

Shore of Lake Superior and some off-shore areas in the other Great Lakes.

Any proposed turbines will be required to meet location and design criteria that reduce their visual impact and noise. Wind farm proponents will have to follow

an environmental screening process to identify potential concerns, including any effects on wildlife and fish. Our intention is to provide successful applicants with a commercial wind energy lease

that will be valid for a term of 25 years.

Water power has been harnessed for ages. Much of our current capacity was in place in the 1970s. Again, you may be wondering where and how we'll proceed. We're

looking both to redevelop existing sites and to consider the potential of future sites. How about dams and run-of-the-river projects? There is significant potential to redevelop existing sites,

potentially as much as 3,000 megawatts. In some cases it will simply involve updating aging technology.

There is still a variety of development opportunities available on crown land, including opportunities that could be developed to supplement or replace diesel

generation in Ontario's remote north.

As well, the proposed strategy gives preference to the development of projects that will benefit local aboriginal communities. It encourages local aboriginal

participation in new water power development.

Of course, there is also a thorough environmental review process to follow for water power that includes public consultation.

With these important safeguards in place, we are confident that we can encourage the development of renewable energy while ensuring Ontario's natural heritage

is protected for future generations. We are doing our part to ensure a healthy and prosperous Ontario with a growing supply of renewable energy.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Responses?

Mr Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): I am glad to see that the minister has moved forward with this file. I know that the energy community was very

concerned that it was being shut down. I know, for example, that the Sault Ste Marie site has been in process for about four years.

One of the areas that the previous government was able to implement was wind power mapping, and I hope that's completed. Throughout Ontario, the ministry

undertook to find out which sites would be best available for the communities out there to produce the energy in certain areas. Of course, though, today's announcement has nothing to do with the

fact that tomorrow's price increase in electricity will be reflected within the populace at large.

Some of the other areas of concern would be the fees associated with this. If the correct fees aren't allocated, there will be individuals or companies out

there that could potentially tie up sites. I would hope the minister has reviewed this so the fees would encourage those individuals who are serious about coming forward with wind power generation,

as opposed to taking on the lease for a 25-year period, leasing it to other individuals and getting a fee back and/or stopping the generation from being developed on certain sites.

I believe the 25-year agreement term was something that the energy community at large was looking for. They wanted to make sure that they have a payback time,

and I think that will reflect something they were asking for.

As well, I was glad to see that the off-grid communities are being considered. I know, for example, in Fort Severn, where Hudson Bay, Manitoba and Ontario

essentially come together, they have diesel power generation there. They have one ship a year coming in. They are very dependent on ice roads to get their winter supplies of diesel coming up, and

if there is a late freeze-up, you can't get the diesel in there. They have major restrictions.

The only concern in the off-grid communities -- mostly First Nations, as the minister mentioned -- would be the cost for those communities to put wind power

generation in them. I would hope they would come forward to help those communities provide wind power generation to supplement the diesel power generation in those communities.

Also, the end user on the grid is a key component to this, because wind power generation can supplement, in a major way, end users. The problem there is that

when you're trying to get electricity out to communities at the end of the grid, it's very costly. If they're placed in the right positions, it will be very beneficial not only to that community

but to the grid as a whole.

The other area of major concern is the water power generation. I know the previous government had begun negotiations, but my understanding is that the Minister

of Energy had shut down the negotiations with the MNR for the utilization of the over 600 dams that are currently in the MNR's control. What was taking place there was that these dams could be used

for low-flow generation, which will supply large amounts of electricity to the grid. My understanding is that the negotiations had stopped there, but I hope it's back on line with what we are

seeing here.

I know the previous government had put in place a policy that any retrofit upgrades or reconstruction of any MNR-controlled dams would take low-flow generation

into consideration. I hope that's once again on the move.

I'm glad the ministry is moving forward. I think that if they take the time to get it right, all of Ontario will benefit.

I know that my colleague Mr O'Toole has some comments regarding this as well.

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): Respectfully, I think Minister Ramsay is in fact doing the right thing. In all respect, the best form of flattery is

imitation, so I extend my congratulations to the former Minister of Natural Resources, Jerry Ouellette, who led this charge to make crown land an available resource for the production of wind.

For those listening and the viewer, I also commend a copy of the work that was done by an all-party committee of the select committee on alternative fuels. I

should name the committee: Jim Bradley, who was on that committee, would know that this is the right move; Steve Gilchrist; Ernie Parsons; Marilyn Churley; Minister Ouellette was also on that

committee.

If you want to take a look at this, I think it's an extremely important resource developed by this government as a long-term strategy. I encourage you to look

specifically at sections B and B.2 of that report, dealing explicitly with water power and wind power.

I should tell those who are interested in this generation issue that each megawatt of energy generated from wind can create 15 to 19 jobs.

Look at the leadership of other jurisdictions in the world, like Denmark and Germany. There is a long way to go, and Ontario is on the right foot under this

government to develop a long-term strategy, not just for energy but for renewable energy.

I commend the minister. You are doing the right thing. You are imitating a policy that many of us have participated in, and I commend the work of the members

of this select committee. Minister Bountrogianni was on that committee. Do the right thing and listen to what the opposition has to say.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): On behalf of New Democrats, I look forward to responding to the two or three announcements that are

contained in this today.

First, let me deal with the non-announcement. The non-announcement is this: With respect to crown land, the average person knows that you can log it, you can

mine it and you can gravel-pit it. So the fact that you can now put up a wind turbine on it -- most folks are going to say, "That's a no-brainer," and it is.

The real announcement is this: The Liberal government, whose Premier said during the election campaign that Liberals believed in public power, is now going to

implement what the Conservatives were going to do. The Conservatives were going to take the best remaining water power sites and the best wind power sites and turn them over to private,

profit-driven corporations. It was not going to be public power; it was going to be more of the Enron, more of the Brascan. What did the minister say today? The best remaining water power sites are

going to be turned over to private, profit-driven companies. The best wind power sites, many of which are on crown land, will be turned over to private, profit-driven companies.

The real impact of this announcement -- and I say to the Conservatives once again, you should be happy. They took your energy policy, put a red wrapper on it

and now they're trying to say, "This is good and wonderful for the consumers of Ontario."

Let me give one example of how bad this is. The former government sold four hydro sites on the Mississagi River to Brascan for a song. Hydroelectricity

produced by falling water is the cheapest way to produce electricity. Those plants on the Mississagi River produce electricity for about half a cent a kilowatt hour. In the private, profit-driven

market, Brascan turns around and sells it for six and seven cents a kilowatt hour -- 10 and 15 times what it costs to produce. And the people of Ontario wonder why their hydro bill is going through

the roof.

The interesting thing is that the Liberals complain about what the Conservatives used to do. Not only do you not do anything to change it, but you have adopted

it. You're making it your own. Conservative privatization and deregulation have now become Liberal privatization and deregulation.

There are some interesting things in this announcement to make it sound new and different. The minister says, "This will be new and different for aboriginal

communities." Minister, I have to tell you, aboriginal communities like Deer Lake and Pic Mobert were developing their water sites in 1990, 1991, 1992. There is nothing new here. You want to

pretend that somehow wind power will be new to First Nations. Go to Fort Severn, Big Trout Lake and Kasabonika Lake; the wind turbines are already there. There is nothing new here for First

Nations.

What this is about, pure and simple, when you take all of the window dressing and red packaging off it, is that Conservatives were going to sell off the best

water power sites in Ontario to their private sector friends, and Liberals are going to do the same. The Conservatives were going to turn over the best wind power potential sites to their private

sector friends. Liberals are going to do the same.

The fact that we need green power is a no-brainer. The fact that provinces like Manitoba and Quebec, where they have public, not-for-profit hydro systems, are

way ahead of us is evident to everyone. What is interesting is that despite what they said during the election campaign, the Liberals are adopting lock, stock and barrel the Conservative strategy

of privatizing our hydro resources.

I just say to people across Ontario, the government's going to now try to tell you that this is good for you, that the hydro bill will continue to go up, that

especially low-income Ontarians and modest-income Ontarians will have a hard time paying their hydro bills. The Minister of Energy will tell you that this is a good thing. He'll even tell small

business that this is a good thing. It's not a good thing. These sites should be kept under public control, operated on a not-for-profit basis so they benefit Ontarians, not your private sector

friends.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Could I get some order in the House, please. Thank you.

ORAL QUESTIONS

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Mr Ernie Eves (Leader of the Opposition): Mr Speaker, perhaps I could get some guidance. Is the member for Thunder Bay-Superior North the new

Minister of Finance? Congratulations, Michael.

I guess I'll have to stick with my original question. To the Premier: Yesterday we touched upon the fact that the Minister of Finance was relieved of his

responsibilities under the Ontario Securities Commission on February 26, yet he was not relieved of his responsibilities under the three exchange acts until a week later, on March 4. Could you tell

us why that was?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The answer remains the same. Out of an abundance of caution, the ruling

that we received from the Integrity Commissioner was that removing the Minister of Finance from his responsibilities for the OSC directly was the appropriate and responsible thing to do, but we

thought that we should take an additional step beyond that, although it was not called for, and that's the reason we took that step.

Mr Eves: The Minister of Finance was placed in a position of potential conflict for those seven days with respect to his responsibilities

under those three exchange acts. Can you explain to us and to the people of Ontario why you left him in that position of conflict for seven days?

Hon Mr McGuinty: Again, the Integrity Commissioner specifically stated that the Minister of Finance was not in a position of conflict, that he

did not contravene the Members' Integrity Act. Again, all I can say, notwithstanding the recurring interest on the part of the leader of the official opposition, is that the Integrity Commissioner

has spoken on this matter very, very clearly and said that the Minister of Finance has acted responsibly.

Mr Eves: The Integrity Commissioner said that with respect to the facts supplied to him, in his opinion, up until the date the Minister of

Finance actually was relieved of his responsibilities on February 26, he was not technically in a conflict position. Did the Integrity Commissioner or anyone advise you, your staff, the Minister of

Finance, his staff, that he in fact was in a conflict position with respect to those three exchange acts and that's why on March 4, an order in council was passed to relieve him of his

responsibility under those three acts?

Hon Mr McGuinty: Again, I say to the leader of the official opposition that we acted out of an abundance of caution. We went beyond the

bounds, I would argue, of what was absolutely essential and made sure that the Minister of Finance was removed from any possible appearance of conflict. That's why we did that.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): New question.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): Your stand and your standard of ethics seem to have changed from when you sat on this side of the House

into the long walk on that side of the House. You promised open, transparent and, most importantly, accountable government. Yet throughout this entire Sorbara affair, day after day, members of this

House, members of the opposition representing the people of the province of Ontario, have come in here to ask you questions and I don't think you've answered one of them a single time. Do you not

think you have any responsibility to come into this place and answer our questions?

Hon Mr McGuinty: I am more than pleased to entertain any questions put forward by members of the opposition, but I would think the opposition

also has a corresponding responsibility to speak to those issues that weigh heavily on the minds of Ontarians. For example, they might be wondering today, asking why it is that, notwithstanding the

fact we have produced information pursuant to the Salary Disclosure Act, OPG and Hydro One employees are not found on that list. They're not on that list because that previous government removed

them from that transparency.

Mr Baird: The essence of our entire system is that the people of Ontario can hold the government of the day accountable through their elected

representatives, who come here and for an hour a day have the opportunity to hold you accountable. You've said you'll entertain questions, but you're certainly not answering them. Do you not feel

you have any responsibility whatsoever to have a corresponding response to a specific question?

The Minister of Finance kept you in the dark for 66 days about his conflict of interest at the OSC. By your answer to my leader, are you saying it only matters

if there is a public appearance of a conflict of interest, but if there's a conflict of interest behind closed doors it's somehow OK?

Hon Mr McGuinty: Well, it is a little bit rich getting lectured by members opposite when it comes to openness, accountability and

transparency. But I will remind the member opposite: He again makes reference to this notion that the Minister of Finance somehow kept something from me, and the Integrity Commissioner addressed

that very specifically. He said, "Put bluntly, it would have been manifestly wrong for you to involve yourself or your ministry in any aspect of the OSC's investigation.... In particular it would

have been wrong for you to have taken it upon yourself to disclose, or to cause the disclosure of the OSC/Royal investigation."

Mr Baird: You have appointed a minister for democratic renewal to try to make this place more relevant, but when the most essential point of

holding the government accountable is question period and you continuously, day after day, refuse to answer even the most direct question and you change the subject, I frankly wonder why we're even

coming here to this place every day.

Hon Mr McGuinty: I didn't detect a question there. At the end of the day, the people of Ontario of course will pass judgment on just how

accountable we hold ourselves to them. But I can say to the member opposite and to his colleagues that I will not try to dictate to them when it comes to the questions they put to me. I will do my

very best to answer their questions. The answers may not be pleasing to the members opposite, but I will work as hard as I can to ensure they are pleasing to the people of Ontario.

NUCLEAR ENERGY

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. A couple weeks ago your good friend and soulmate John Manley said that

nuclear power is the way to go for Ontario. When I asked you your views, you said that nuclear power had a real future for Ontario. Yet we see today that your friends at Atomic Energy Canada still

can't build nuclear reactors on time and on budget. The new reactors that they're trying to build are $160 million over budget and over four years late. I know what that means for hydro consumers:

The bill keeps going up and power is more and more unreliable. When nuclear power still can't operate on budget and on time, why are you trying to sell Ontarians more nuclear power plants?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I know the Minister of Energy is anxious to speak to this.

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): There is a range of supply options that Ontario could consider. For instance,

our government has decided to phase out coal. We're interested in reducing the SO x , the NO x , getting down greenhouse gas emissions. We have talked about natural gas and a

range of alternatives. I congratulate my colleague today, because for the first time we're going to have renewable power in Ontario in a meaningful way. In addition to wind, there are other

renewable sources. My colleague mentioned water, getting the most we can out of our water system. We are moving forward to ensure that we correct the supply crisis. The member will know what the

IMO said today, that we'll have a real problem in 10 years. We can't waste any more time in terms of ensuring that Ontarians have adequate and reliable electricity. Our government is looking at all

the possible options to ensure that that supply is adequate and moving forward.

Mr Hampton: I remember when I used to ask these questions of Conservative cabinet ministers and they'd do anything they could to avoid

answering the question. Now we have a Liberal minister, and the specific question is, how do you justify your endorsement of nuclear power when we know it costs more and it's unreliable? He refuses

to answer the question.

John Manley said you should share the risk in the nukes when moving to private development or private involvement. Imagine, Duncan Hawthorne, head of Bruce

Power, said, "Well, if we're going to build any more nuclear power plants, we'd want to be very certain that the project risk is not ours." He wants the consumers, the taxpayers of Ontario, to pick

up all the risk while he picks up the profit, yet the Premier's good friend and soulmate says that that would be a good deal for Ontario. Imagine, the people pick up all the risk, the company picks

up the profit and this Minister of Energy and this Premier think that's a good deal. Can you tell us why, once again, you're adopting the worst elements of the Conservative hydroelectricity

strategy?

Hon Mr Duncan: Mr Manley's group provided the government with some advice -- advice that we are taking under consideration. One thing we can't

do, however, is take under advice anything that member says. This is the member who in January of this year said that coal was bad and last week said that coal should stay. That's what we said.

This is the member who campaigned against private school tax credits, and what did he do on one of the first votes in this House? He voted to maintain them.

Today, the member attacked my colleague for moving aggressively on renewables and conservation. I guess we shouldn't be surprised, because in 1992 the party of

the member opposite cancelled all conservation initiatives in Ontario. The member opposite has also spoken publicly against private power, but it was his government that introduced private power to

Ontario and closed down the public power coming in from Conawapa, a bad decision for --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you.

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): Again to the Premier -- I can see the government continues to fiddle while coal burns -- before the

election you promised to lower auto insurance rates by 20%, but that hasn't happened. In fact, across the province, drivers are receiving renewal notices with double-digit increases. At the same

time, the auto insurance corporations, your private auto insurance friends, have declared an incredible $2.6-billion profit, a 673% increase over the year before. What is your government's answer?

Rates still haven't come down 20%. Rates are still going up. Why have you broken your promise to the drivers of Ontario, while the private companies continue to hike their rates?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): It's hard to understand how the leader of the NDP can ask with a

straight face a question about keeping a promise when it comes to auto insurance in Ontario. I am proud to say that we moved within, I think it was 15 minutes of being sworn in as a government to

freeze rates in Ontario. I'm very proud of the fact we moved so quickly in that regard.

All auto insurance companies filed new rates in late January. The superintendent of financial services is in the process of approving those rates and drivers

will begin to benefit from the new rates, the new lower rates, starting in mid-April.

Mr Hampton: The Premier needs to know that the public spokesperson for the private insurance companies says that after pocketing an extra $2.6

billion and seeing a profit increase of 673%, he likes your policy but he says to people, "Don't expect any reduction in your rates." You're right: I believe in public, not-for-profit auto

insurance because in the province of Manitoba, for example, people haven't seen 50% increases. They haven't seen 20% increases. All they've seen over the last two years is a 7% increase. Rates for

most people are about half what they are in Ontario. For many people, they are three and four times less than they are in Ontario.

You said you were going to reduce rates. How do you justify a $2.6-billion increase in profits and a 673% increase in profits under your watch?

Hon Mr McGuinty: The member opposite is a fervent and consistent champion of government-run auto insurance in every instance, in every

circumstance, except when he's in government. They had five long years to bring in government-run auto insurance and they failed to do so. We acted, again, within 15 minutes of being sworn in as a

government. We have committed to reducing rates by an average of 10% and we look forward to delivering on that very shortly.

DEMOCRATIC RENEWAL

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): My question is for the Premier. As you know, this afternoon the standing committee on general government will be

debating the member for Toronto-Danforth's motion that will authorize members of the committee to fully review the Sorbara-Royal Group Technologies affair. In your election platform, you promised

the people of Ontario, "Your MPP should be free to represent your views, not just parrot the views of his or her party. We will make sure all non-cabinet MPPs are free to criticize and vote against

government legislation."

You also promised to give more independence and power to legislative committees and you promised that MPPs would not be manipulated to do the bidding of the

Premier and his un-elected advisers. Will you assure this house that you will not whip the government members of the standing committee to vote against Marilyn Churley's motion?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I am very proud of our caucus. I fully expect that they will, in this

circumstance and in other circumstances, vote in keeping with their very best judgment and consideration of the issue.

Mr Wilson: This afternoon is the first real test of your promises concerning democratic renewal. You promised openness and transparency in

government. Premier, this could even be a banner day for the Liberal Party. You could actually keep a promise today by not whipping your members, doing the right thing and allowing the committee to

get to the bottom of this whole mess. Do you support Marilyn Churley's motion to get to the bottom of this mess?

Mr McGuinty: The member speaks of this being some kind of a test for our party. I would suggest that it's going to be a test as to whether or

not the members opposite can breathe any kind of life into this corpse of an issue which has no bearing whatsoever on those kinds of concerns that weigh heavily on the minds of Ontarians.

CAREER COLLEGES

Mr Kuldip Kular (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): My question is for the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. I have been

following an issue in the newspapers that I find quite alarming. Reports say there is a case before the Superior Court of Justice regarding alleged OSAP fraud in 1998 and 1999 involving a private

career college. The newspapers are calling this case Canada's largest-ever student loan scam. What I find most alarming is the allegation that under the previous Tory government's watch, several

million in student loan assistance may have flowed to bogus students enrolled in an alleged illegitimate private career college.

Minister, what is our government doing to ensure that our registered private career colleges are operating as credible institutions?

Hon Mary Anne V. Chambers (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): I'd like to thank my colleague the member representing

Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale for his question. I must tell him, however, that I am unable to comment on any matter that's before the court.

I can say that the private career college sector does provide a very viable and valuable service to students in Ontario. There are some very strong colleges

out there that are providing programs in business, technology, health -- a variety of areas. I can also tell the member that within a few days after being appointed Minister of Training, Colleges

and Universities, I directed my ministry to perform detailed reviews -- visits to every single one of the colleges. Those visits are almost complete now. My interest is in protecting the students

and also in strong colleges.

Mr Kular: I understand that private career colleges are governed by the Private Career Colleges Act. Do we have any plans to review this

legislation to ensure that the legislation best serves students attending these institutions?

Hon Mrs Chambers: The Private Career Colleges Act is 30 years old. It's time to revisit it, and I have in fact launched a review of that act.

It's a significant sector. There are almost 500 schools registered. Between 2000 and 2003, some 237 of those schools closed. On an annual basis, between 40 and 50 new schools are registered. I

think we need to make sure that the act protects students and protects the good colleges.

PHOTO RADAR

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): My question today is for the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. Minister, your Liberal

party in its campaign document, Growing Strong Communities, never once promised Ontarians a tax grab in the form of photo radar, if elected. Yet the Premier and the Minister of Transportation seem

determined to reintroduce this NDP tax grab to line the provincial coffers. We know that you believe it's a tax grab. On December 17, 1994, you actually said in the Toronto Sun, "All it's really

done has made the coffers of the treasury swell with amounts of money that are starting to verge on the obscene."

Now your government is considering granting permission to municipalities to use photo radar. Can you stand in the House today in the name of community safety

and give municipalities a choice on photo radar, that they can keep the money they collect from fines and, further, only direct it to front-line policing?

Hon Monte Kwinter (Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services): The member should know that the responsibility for the

implementation of photo radar will be that of the Minister of Transportation. I refer to the question to him.

Hon Harinder S. Takhar (Minister of Transportation): We are always interested in any measures that will improve safety on the highways and on

the roads. If we ever consider photo radar, it will only be considered for safety reasons on the highways and the roads.

Mr Dunlop: Just for the record, I am disappointed Minister Kwinter wouldn't answer that question, because there is a clear connection between

photo radar and community policing. There is no question about that. I think that at the cabinet table you have to make that distinction.

Mr Takhar, if your government foolishly ends up allowing municipalities to implement the photo radar tax grab -- and we know it's a tax grab; all you gentlemen

over there basically said it in the past. Gerry Phillips, for example, talked about it. Photo radar? "These are just cash machines. They're a gold mine for the province." That's Gerry Phillips on

March 2, 1994.

Minister, if you allow the municipalities to implement photo radar, does this mean that this is replacing your promise to put 1,000 new police officers on the

streets of our province?

Hon Mr Takhar: As I said earlier, we will only consider photo radar for safety reasons. It will not be considered for a cash grab, but we are

always interested in any measure that will improve safety on the highways. I would like to point out, though, that the member from Leeds-Grenville is also in favour of photo radar.

HYDRO GENERATION

Mr David Orazietti (Sault Ste Marie): My question is to the Minister of Natural Resources. Minister, today you announced that you would be

making crown land available for wind power development. In your statement to this House you said that wind power is one of the fastest-growing forms of energy in the world. Aside from the several

megawatts that I seem to have next to me here, can you tell me what sense of capacity you think this province has?

Hon David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources): I'd like to thank the member for Sault Ste Marie for his question, his interest in renewable

energy and his astute observations about some of the members in this House. I appreciate that very much.

That's a very good question, because there is a two-pronged approach that we're taking when it comes to assessing what the wind power potential is in Ontario.

First of all, we are completing, in the Ministry of Natural Resources, a wind atlas. Basically, that is an inventory of the capacity in the wind strength of this province to generate electricity.

We think there is great potential here, especially, as I mentioned in my statement, around the Great Lakes, especially in the part of world where you live and further north, the North of Superior

shore -- great potential -- but also off Lake Erie, both in the seabed of Lake Erie and also off the shore.

Mr Orazietti: Minister, I am pleased to hear about our province's capacity for energy growth. I would like to address the second part of your

statement dealing with the posting of the draft water power strategy. Clearly, the harnessing of water power has the potential of adding new electricity supply for all Ontarians. This could be an

excellent opportunity for development in Ontario and especially in northern Ontario. How will the harnessing of hydroelectric of power benefit northern towns, cities and First Nation

communities?

Hon Mr Ramsay: As the member knows, the generation of electricity through the power of water was one of the original sources of power for this

province at Niagara Falls. Even today, we still depend upon 27% of hydro generation for our hydroelectric needs. We think we still have great potential, and as you rightly say, most of that now is

in the north.

I wish we had the topography of Quebec or British Columbia, where we had great water power potential -- we don't -- of those provinces. The north of this

province is relatively flat, but in the James Bay lowlands we have tremendous opportunity of small developments, and this is of particular interest to me because of the involvement of First Nations

communities. This will be a great potential for not only replacing some of the diesel-generated power that they have in their communities, but also, working with them, the potential of a revenue

stream for those communities to enhance their economic development.

HOME CARE

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is for the Premier. For almost a decade, the community support agencies that improve the

lives and health of our seniors in this province have been without adequate funding. Our seniors deserve the kind of support that will allow them to remain in their own homes in dignity and in

comfort. In fact, you have said in your election document that you want to provide funding "to strengthen home care so that seniors can stay in their homes as long as possible."

Mr Premier, will you commit right now, right here today to provide these community agencies with the funding that they need in order to keep our seniors

healthier, more independent and better able to live in their homes? Will you commit to that, or is this to be yet another broken promise?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I'll refer that to the Minister of Health.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'd say to the honourable member, as you will know, the Minister of Finance

will shortly present the budget for the province of Ontario. I will tell the honourable member that that information will be there that will be helpful, but I would also like to report to him that

the talk we've had around here as a government is that the transformation we're working on in health care will ask our hospitals to do only what they're best built to do: by making investments in

those complementary services at the community level, including home care. So I very much would like to support the premise of the member's question and the language that he used there. We agree

that well-functioning home care is essential to good, functioning quality health care in Ontario, and we'll be working on this.

On one other matter: As a result of some support made available to the provinces as a result of the health accord, we do have some additional resources flowing

to the province from the federal government that will enable us to make progress on that issue.

Mr Prue: I thank the minister for those kind words, but I'm expecting just a little bit more.

The Premier, on September 17, 2003, in a letter to an umbrella group of community support agencies called VITAL, stated, "Our commitment to home and community

care rests on one simple principle -- our seniors deserve access to services and supports that will allow them to remain healthy and independent." Then he goes on to say, most importantly, "We

agree that a good start would be to use the first budget to resolve the underfunding of these services by increasing the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care portion of the base funding for

community support agencies by 25%."

I ask the question again: Will you stick to your written promise and include in your first budget the $700 million to improve the services seniors depend upon,

or will seniors suffer another broken promise?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I'm very pleased to say that the advice and direction there about using our first budget to send our signal about our

commitment to home care is exactly the strategy that we're working on. I'm pleased to say that in addition to the comments the member used about home care as a necessity for the independence of our

seniors, we also recognize that for our hospitals to function properly, we need to make sure that those post-acute stays at home are properly supported as well, so that people discharged from

hospitals have proper care at home to make sure that the service they received in the hospital takes and that they're not re-admitted. I agree with the honourable member that this is an important

priority for our province, and we'll demonstrate that.

HYDRO RATES

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): My question is to the Minister of Energy. Tonight, at the stroke of midnight, the Liberals will break yet another

promise. This time you will threaten the poor and those least able to afford them while you switch on skyrocketing electricity prices.

Minister, you know full well that back in 2002 our government responded to the needs of Ontario by introducing affordable, sustainable prices over a four-year

period -- a 10-point plan that capped rates at 4.3%. You will also know that it was your government, then in opposition, that unanimously supported that price cap. You say one thing to get elected

and do something else once elected. It is shameful.

What are you doing for those people on fixed incomes, those poor, those small business people who are not expecting this price increase? What are you going to

do for those least able to pay these unaffordable prices?

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): The member is quite right: We introduced Bill 4, which will erase the

$850-million charge to the provincial government that your failed energy policy put on the people of Ontario. My colleague the Minister of Municipal Affairs had the rent bank announcement, and my

colleague the Minister of Community and Social Services has $2 million to help those low-income families. We expect that bills for the average consumer will go up by about 4% to 5%.

Finally, we're doing something that that government never considered: conservation. We've built into the new price of electricity the incentive to conserve --

something they never did. Our plan will create new supply and will address the $850-million problem that that government's policy created. Finally, our policy will ensure a reliable supply of

electricity going forward into the future.

Mr O'Toole: That's an absolutely shameful answer. I am appalled that you have tried to sham the people of Ontario. In fact, if the truth were

known, you know full well that this is only part of an increase in price of between 9% and 27% for those least able to afford it.

I look in detail at your shameful announcement of $2 million. You know full well that 50,000 people working in Ontario earn less than $20,000. Your Minister of

Community and Social Services announced 650,000 people on social assistance. If I do the numbers very quickly in the limited time, that works down to less than $2 per person per year, yet you're

passing on, at a very minimum, a $10-a-month increase. This is a shameful, embarrassing announcement on your part for the very vulnerable in our society in Ontario.

Hon Mr Duncan: That member was a member of a government whose first act was to cut welfare rates by 22%. That member voted on umpteen

occasions to freeze the minimum wage in Ontario. That member was part of a government that created no new electricity supply in nine years.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. This is not a shouting period; this is question-and-answer period. I ask the Minister of Energy to

complete his answer.

Hon Mr Duncan: That member was part of a government that allowed its backroom boys and girls to bill Ontario Hydro and Ontario Power

Generation millions of dollars in untendered contracts, all of which are being paid for by low-income citizens in this province.

TOURISM

Mr Peter Fonseca (Mississauga East): Minister Bradley, I'd like to take this time to ask you a few questions regarding tourism in the city of

Mississauga. On Friday, March 26, Mississauga released their executive

summary on the Mississauga tourism premier ranked destination evaluation, the framework for which I understand was developed

by your ministry. Could you please share with all of us here the process that is used to establish the framework in cities such as Mississauga?

Hon James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism and Recreation): The member for Mississauga East of course raises a very good question. The premier

ranked destination framework is a product developed by my ministry's investment and development office. Members would know that it is a tool to assist regions in identifying the attributes needed

for their destinations to be the best that they can be.

The framework is a comprehensive economic planning tool, my colleagues will remember, which assures regions that their municipal resources are being targeted

at well-researched, objective and strategic areas identified through the process to enhance their tourism industry.

On top of these tools, my ministry provided funding to the city of Mississauga and its wonderful mayor, Hazel McCallion, in the amount of $20,000 to assist in

the assessment, covering predetermined costs such as production and printing of the final report. I'm pleased the city of Mississauga has completed this report.

Mr Fonseca: I have one further question regarding the premier ranked tourist destination evaluation. From the process, the city of Mississauga

has come to a number of recommendations that it believes will help take it to the next step in becoming the premier tourist destination.

Could you please explain to myself and the other members from Mississauga how the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation will help cities such as Mississauga

implement those recommendations?

Hon Mr Bradley: First of all, I want to indicate to the member that my ministry has already assisted the city of Mississauga through a

$100,000 tourism recovery grant to encourage businesses to hold their meetings and conventions in Mississauga.

Furthermore, my ministry will assist Mississauga in the implementation of the recommendations arising out of the tourist destination framework by having a

ministry tourism consultant sit on the city's standing committee on advisory capacity. My ministry will also provide market readiness training from local tourism stakeholders and assist in

promoting investment opportunities in Mississauga.

My parliamentary assistant, Tim Peterson from Mississauga South, and I look forward to working with the city of Mississauga, its fine mayor, Hazel McCallion,

and council -- indeed all municipalities -- in enhancing their attractiveness as tourist destinations.

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): My question is for the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Minister, your government stated in

the throne speech, "Your new government understands it can only hold others to a higher standard if it subjects itself to the same standard." Do you agree?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I think that in the days since the election, this government has held itself to

a higher standard.

Since the member opposite is unable to ask a real question, I'll use this opportunity to talk. One example would be the way that we're using this legislative

chamber and legislative committees to enhance the quality of legislation. In my own responsibilities we've had both Bill 8 and Bill 31 and we've used the legislative process and members from all

sides of this House to travel to parts of our province that historically, under that party's government, received no opportunity for input. This is but one apt demonstration of the work that we've

already done as a government.

So, yes, obviously we're holding ourselves to a higher standard -- a much higher standard, certainly, than that party when they were in government.

Mrs Witmer: We've heard a lot of rhetoric, as we continue to hear from that minister. But the question I would put to the minister is, if you

do agree, as you seem to think that you do, I ask you, why will you not amend Bill 8 and subject yourself to the higher standard that you ask of others? Why will you not commit to being accountable

yourself to the same higher standards and mutual accountability?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I'm pleased to take the opportunity to say that of course we will, in two very significant ways. First, with respect to the

accountability agreements, an essential part of Bill 8, these are mutually agreed-upon agreements negotiated between both sides and have the effect of saying that in exchange for these precious

resources made available by the people of Ontario, we have a set of expectations from our hospitals about what they'll provide.

Second, with respect to the Ontario Health Quality Council, for the first time in our province a government in this House is prepared to provide information to

Ontarians across a broad range of indicators about how our health care system is performing, in an easy-to-read format so people can clearly see where we have room to improve and what improvements

we have made.

There's one additional important point: Because each and every Ontarian must be involved in the sustainability of the future of medicare, we're going to begin

to report to Ontarians on the state of the health of Ontarians, about how we're doing on priorities like stopping people from smoking, activity rates and obesity.

So yes, on the issue of accountability, this government stands there. Roy Romanow said that accountability is the missing principle of the Canada Health Act;

we're delivering it.

ENERGY CONSERVATION

Mr Dave Levac (Brant): My question is for the Minister of Energy. This government has been speaking a lot about the conservation of energy. In

this House and in many other places in speeches across the province, you've reiterated our commitment to reach a conservation target of 5% by 2007. Conservation, as we all know, is essential, as it

helps curb our need for electricity and reduces, at peak times, the strain on our system, which we seem to need on a regular basis. What has been done by this government to encourage conservation

and the demand-side management of our homes and businesses?

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): Thank you to the member for asking that question. First of all, in Bill 4, we

ended the irresponsible price cap of the previous government, which gave no incentive to conservation. Secondly, as part of that bill, we incented local distribution companies with the largest

investment in Canadian history in conservation: a quarter of a billion dollars will be flowing next year into conservation.

We're leading by example and will reduce our own electricity consumption in government by 10%. I should say that one of my Tory predecessors was quoted in the

Globe and Mail as saying this about conservation: "The private sector asked us to get out of large-scale government conservation programs. Those efforts may have made the odd person feel good but

they had absolutely no effect." We think Jim Wilson was very wrong about that, as his whole policy was wrong about electricity. We're going to clean up the mess that gang left for us, starting

now.

Mr Levac: Thank you for that answer. I look forward to your aggressive approach to conservation, as we all know it does indeed have an impact

on our communities and it will indeed help us with our energy problems.

Minister, you've said repeatedly that the government would be educating the public on how to conserve energy and reduce their bills. What has been done so far

and how have we been able to inform the public on this very important initiative?

Hon Mr Duncan: We already have dozens of tips on conservation on the Ministry of Energy's Web site. It's also going to be made available in

brochure format.

Interjection.

Hon Mr Duncan: I want to say that the reaction of my predecessor --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): The former minister seems to be very excited about this. Could we give the present minister a chance to

respond? Thank you.

Hon Mr Duncan: I can understand why he's upset. While he veiled crown corporations like OPG and Hydro One, we lifted the veil of secrecy.

While they privatized nuclear inspection services, we brought them back into public hands. While they talked about supply, they delivered none; we are. They cancelled all conservation efforts

during their time in office. They talked about green energy and did nothing about it. They threw small consumers on to the volatile spot market; we're developing a plan that'll give them reliable

prices going forward. Please, keep asking us questions --

The Speaker: Order.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I hope this type of demonstration is not encouraging to anybody else. When I ask you to sit, please do.

CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): Premier, you recently promised that your government would "make it easier to access services at all stages of

a child's development." The Northeast Mental Health Centre is being forced to cut services to deal with a $2.3-million deficit, and the first round of cuts includes children. They are: the end of

the district day treatment program, which provides mental health services to secondary school students; the end of mental health services for children in CAS foster homes; a reduction in mental

health services for children under the age of six living in Sudbury district east, Espanola and on Manitoulin Island; a reduction in services to children who are dually diagnosed with mental

illness and developmental disabilities; a reduction in the preschool speech and language service, so the waiting list for service will grow from eight months to one year.

Premier, these cuts are going to have a devastating impact on children in northeastern Ontario. When will you intervene to keep your promise to make it easier

for children to access services versus losing them altogether?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): It's for the Minister of Health.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): This is a question that was raised in the House a week or two ago by my

colleague, the member from Algoma-Manitoulin. I undertook at that time to begin to work alongside my colleague who's delivering children's services in this province to see what efforts we can

undertake to enhance the quality of services provided for mental health across the province of Ontario.

While I'm not in a position today to tell the member what the outcome of those deliberations are, what I am in a position to say is what I said to the member

from Algoma-Manitoulin: that we take this issue seriously, recognize the concern associated with it, and we're working on it.

Ms Martel: Minister, if I might, I wrote to you about this issue on February 24. I haven't got a response. The cuts announced were announced

last Friday, and they are but the first in a series of cuts. The next round will include adult services and community mental health services.

I remind you that your Premier made a recent promise to ensure that children could get access to services. They are going to lose these services altogether.

There will be a dramatic impact on the CAS and its foster care program and a dramatic impact on the school system, because young children will come in with their speech and language skills

compromised and older students will drop out because they can't get help with mental illness. You will have emergency departments being affected, because children in rural areas will have nowhere

to get service and some of the most vulnerable kids, with mental illness and with developmental disabilities, will have nowhere to go to get service.

The time for discussion is over. You need to give additional funding to the Northeast Mental Health Centre. Will you do that now?

Hon Mr Smitherman: What the member leaves out is that the problems that face our mental health system in this province started on your

government's watch. The reality is --

Interjections.

Hon Mr Smitherman: You don't want to hear it?

Interjections.

Hon Mr Smitherman: No, I just -- they were yelling.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order.

Hon Mr Smitherman: The reality, which is well known to all who are providing mental health services across this province, is that

community-based mental health services have seen no increase since before Bob Rae's hair turned white. That's 1992. The reality is that our government, as we seek to bring a budget forward and

deliver on our plan for the transformation of health care services, is to enhance the quality of investments at the community level. We're working very hard on this issue.

NURSES

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): My question is for the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. Nurse shortages are a problem

throughout the north, particularly in remote and rural areas. Many communities are deemed underserviced, and ensuring that people in these areas have access to nurses is challenge.

The past government introduced a plan in the 2003 budget to provide free tuition for nurses who agreed to work in underserviced areas. I'll quote from the

Thunder Bay Chronicle: "Kevin Crigger discovered a program last year that would pay his nursing school tuition if he worked in a community that desperately needed nurses. He liked the idea because

it meant he'd be able to work at the hospital in his hometown of Dryden."

This free-tuition program has enormous potential to improve the quality of health care and access to health care in the north. Can you tell me, yes or no, are

you planning on cutting this important program?

Hon Rick Bartolucci (Minister of Northern Development and Mines): I refer that to the Minister of Health.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'm pleased to tell the member that here's the scenario: Your party, while in

government, announced the program, talked about it, put it up on your Web site and never implemented it. No program was ever created that allowed applicants to file.

I spoke with the young man in Dryden who was referenced in the question and I gave him this commitment, which I repeat to the House: Our party as a government

believes very strongly in the idea that we have to offer incentives to enhance service in communities, including communities like Dryden as was referenced in the question. We will align that

program with a series of other initiatives to ensure that our plans for family health teams, as an example, are implemented across this province so that the people of Dryden will have the benefit

not only of one single nurse but of a combination of health care professionals, working together to deliver on the very significant primary health care challenges that are facing many communities

across our province.

Mr Miller: Thank you, Minister, for that answer. You should have figured out that you're in government now, so it's your job to implement the

programs. That's what you're supposed to be doing. In your election platform you promised to hire 8,000 more new nurses in Ontario. Assuming you're not going to break this promise, how then do you

intend to attract these nurses to the areas where they're needed, like the underserviced communities in remote and northern Ontario?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I find it passing strange that the man from the party whose Premier said nurses were like Hula Hoops, that they were as

old-fashioned and out of date as Hula Hoops, should now be here talking about them.

On the issue of nurses, we have made extraordinary strides, and 400 or 500 new nurses have already been hired in Ontario toward our commitment to 8,000. Our

determination to enhance the quality of nursing, to rebuild the foundation of nursing that was ripped apart by that party while they were in government in Ontario, has already begun. We have begun

to do that.

I'm working with the Minister of Labour on health and safety initiatives because too many nurses are experiencing workplace health and safety challenges. I've

indicated to the RNAO and the Ontario Nurses' Association that the nursing agenda is a huge priority for us. We've already taken steps, and we will fulfill that commitment because nurses are the

heart and soul of health care.

WORKPLACE SAFETY

Mr Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): My question is for the Minister of Labour. I have some serious concerns about the number of

workplace fatalities reported last year. In 2003 there were 72 workplace fatalities. In the construction sector alone there were 30 workplace fatalities. I would like to know what your ministry

plans to do to try to resolve this problem and make Ontario a healthier and safer place.

Hon Christopher Bentley (Minister of Labour): The member for Scarborough Southwest makes some excellent points. We are determined to make our

workplaces healthier and safer than they have ever been before. No person who goes to work should have to worry about what will happen in terms of their safety at the workplace.

What have we been doing? We're already hard at work. In construction, we've had 500 proactive inspections of construction sites in the greater Toronto area

since mid-December. That's not all. We've hired 25 new inspectors. They'll be starting work after their training, very soon. But that's not all. A few weeks ago, I launched the Minister's Health

and Safety Action Group. We will identify through these groups best practices by business and labour and work together with them to make those practices apply in workplaces throughout the province.

Because of the very point my friend made with respect to construction, we will start with the action group in construction and make the workplaces on construction sites in Ontario better and safer

than they've ever been before.

Mr Berardinetti: I thank the minister for his response. I also want to ask about health and safety in other sectors. Last year almost 100,000

people suffered injuries severe enough to force them to miss time at work. There were another 185,000 people who were injured but remained on the job. That's equivalent to almost the entire

population of London. Minister, I'd like to ask you, what you are going to try to do to reverse those high numbers?

Hon Mr Bentley: Once again, my friend quite graphically places the enormity of the challenge before us. That 300,000 workplace accidents every

year is the equivalent of the entire population of my city of London every single year. So with respect to the health and safety action groups, we have launched those. As I've indicated, we've

already had the first meeting of the construction group, but there are other sectors. So on Monday last, I had the first meeting of the manufacturing group, bringing experts together from labour

and business to share their best practices and make those apply throughout the province of Ontario.

My colleague the Minister of Health mentioned the challenge in health-related sectors. So tomorrow, Thursday, we have the first meeting of the health action

group to bring together the people who are working on the front line of health, from the perspective of management, nurses and physicians, to make our health care facilities as safe as they can

possibly be.

FIREFIGHTERS

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): My question is to the minister responsible for community safety. The minister will know, because my colleague Ted

Arnott provided him with this information just a short time ago, that last week five members of the Barrie Professional Fire Fighters Association received letters encouraging them to no longer

volunteer in the nearby township fire department, the Springwater fire department, which is in my riding.

Of course, the Ontario Professional Fire Fighters Association has been doing this for a long time now, discouraging what they call double-hatting: that is,

you're a full-time firefighter in one jurisdiction, and in your spare time, in a free society, you volunteer to help out a community that needs your professionalism and your expertise on their fire

department.

Minister, I just ask you, since you're aware of this situation, and it's happening across the province -- it has been happening a long time -- what are you

going to do about it?

Hon Monte Kwinter (Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services): I thank the member for the question. Before I give you the

response that I've been working on since the day I took on this responsibility, I do not approve of anyone denying their professional experience and not going to a fire. That makes no sense.

Having said that, I have been working with the Ontario Professional Fire Fighters Association, with AMO and with the fire chiefs to make sure that we can come

up with a solution that really is fair and equitable. To that event, I have met with the professional firefighters and told them that I would like to have mediation. If we can't do that, then I'm

going to bring forward legislation. But the main concern I have is to make sure that the safety of the citizens of Ontario is not put in jeopardy because of some dispute between competing

factions.

Mr Wilson: I must say, that was a very good answer --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you. That was a nice try. Petitions.

PETITIONS

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I'm pleased to present yet another petition on behalf of seniors from the Black Creek Leisure Homes in Black

Creek in the riding of Erie-Lincoln. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas during the election campaign, the Dalton McGuinty Liberals said they would improve the Ontario drug benefit program, but now are considering delisting

drugs and imposing higher user fees; and

"Whereas the Liberal government has increased costs to seniors by taking away the seniors' property tax rebate and increased the price of hydro;

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

"The Dalton McGuinty Liberals should keep their campaign promise to improve the Ontario drug benefit program and abandon their plan to delist drugs or increase

seniors' drug fees."

Beneath that of my friends Carol Smith and Ron Bathurst, I affix my signature in support.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a petition from my constituents in Parry Sound-Muskoka, and it says:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the community of Yearley, Ontario, within the electoral district of Parry Sound-Muskoka experiences frequent and prolonged power outages; and

"Whereas the power outages have become a health and safety issue to the residents of the community and the students who visit the outdoor education centre;

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

"That the Minister of Energy instruct Hydro One to conduct an investigation of the distribution and feeder lines that serve Yearley, and take the necessary

steps to ensure reliable energy through ongoing forestry maintenance and required line improvements."

I agree with this and I add my signature.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Bill Murdoch (Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Liberal government was elected after promising in their election platform that they were committed to improving the Ontario drug benefit program

for seniors but are now considering delisting drugs and imposing user fees on seniors; and

"Whereas prescription drugs are not covered under the Canada Health Act unless dispensed in a hospital; and

"Whereas the federal Liberal government refuses to acknowledge this as a necessary health service despite the Romanow report's strong support for a national

drug program;

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

"To immediately and unequivocally commit to end plans for the delisting of drugs for coverage under the Ontario drug benefit program;

"To immediately commit to ending plans to implement higher user fees for vulnerable seniors and to improve the Ontario drug benefit plan so they can obtain

necessary medications; and

"To instruct Premier Dalton McGuinty to demand more health care funding from Ottawa instead of demanding more funding from seniors."

I have signed this.

OPTOMETRISTS

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario will be considering a private member's bill that aims to amend the Optometry Act to give

optometrists the authority to prescribe therapeutic pharmaceutical agents for the treatment of certain eye diseases; and

"Whereas optometrists are highly trained and equipped with the knowledge and specialized instrumentation needed to effectively diagnose and treat certain eye

problems; and

"Whereas extending the authority to prescribe TPAs to optometrists will help relieve the demands on ophthalmologists and physicians who currently have the

exclusive domain for prescribing TPAs to optometry patients; and

"Whereas the bill introduced by New Democrat Peter Kormos (MPP -- Niagara Centre) will ensure that patients receive prompt, timely, one-stop care where

appropriate;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we support the bill proposing an amendment to the Optometry Act to give optometrists the authority to prescribe therapeutic

pharmaceutical agents for the treatment of certain eye diseases and we urge the government of Ontario to ensure speedy passage of the bill."

I agree with the petitioners.

SERVICES TO DEAF-BLIND PERSONS

Mr Phil McNeely (Ottawa-Orléans): "Whereas the opportunity to communicate is fundamental to the human condition; and

"Whereas deaf-blindness, by its compounding nature, presents extraordinary and compelling human need; and

"Whereas intervention is an essential service which enables deaf-blind people to communicate; and

"Whereas CNIB Deafblind Services delivers intervention services to deaf-blind people in Ontario; and

"Whereas emergency funding by the government of Ontario to CNIB Deafblind Services is due to expire on March 31, 2004;

"We, the undersigned, petition the government of Ontario to:

"

(1) Provide emergency funding to CNIB Deafblind Services effective immediately...;

"

(2) Provide guaranteed long-term funding to CNIB Deafblind Services to allow for rational planning of services...; and

"

(3) Initiate a process with CNIB to: (

a) assess the long-term need of deaf-blind people for services; (

b) determine an adequate level of services to address

those needs; (

c) commit adequate long-term funding to address the needs identified; and (

d) implement a quality assurance process, with input from deaf-blind consumers, to monitor the delivery of

those services."

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): It's my pleasure to present a petition on behalf of the constituents of Durham riding.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Ontario's seniors have worked long and hard to build the outstanding quality of life achieved in our province; and

"Whereas seniors' drug benefits enable older persons to lead healthier lives and avoid more extensive" and expensive "care in hospitals and nursing homes;

and

"Whereas, in addition to their taxes, many seniors already contribute toward their prescription drugs through deductibles and dispensing fees; and

"Whereas many seniors on fixed pensions already face higher costs through property taxes and electricity charges;

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

"That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario not eliminate or reduce the provincial drug benefits provided to seniors."

I am pleased to support this on their behalf.

LANDFILL

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the county of Simcoe proposes to construct a landfill at site 41 in the township of Tiny; and

"Whereas the county of Simcoe has received, over a period of time, the necessary approvals from the Ministry of the Environment to design and construct a

landfill at site 41; and

"Whereas, as part of the landfill planning process, peer reviews of site 41 identified over 200 recommendations for improvements to design, most of which are

related to potential groundwater contamination; and

"Whereas the Minister of the Environment has on numerous occasions stated her passion for clean and safe water and the need for water source protection;

and

"Whereas the Minister of the Environment has indicated her intention to introduce legislation on water source protection, which is a final and key

recommendation to be implemented under Justice Dennis O'Connor's report on the Walkerton inquiry; and

"Whereas the Minister of the Environment has announced expert panels that will make recommendations to the minister on water source protection legislation;

and

"Whereas the Ministry of the Environment will now be responsible for policing nutrient management; and

"Whereas the citizens of Ontario will be expecting a standing committee of the Legislature to hold province-wide public hearings on water source protection

legislation;

"We, the undersigned, call upon the government of Ontario and the Ministry of the Environment to immediately place a moratorium on the development of site 41

until the water source protection legislation is implemented in Ontario. We believe the legislation will definitely affect the design of site 41 and the nearby water sources."

I'll sign my name to this as well.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals by no means campaigned on raising the rates associated with the Ontario drug benefit program; and

"Whereas the majority of seniors, many of which live on a fixed income, cannot meet the expense of higher costs for essential medication; and

"Whereas seniors in Simcoe-Grey and across Ontario should never have to make the choice between eating and filling a prescription;

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

"To cancel any plans to raise costs for prescription drugs for our seniors and to embark on making vital medication more affordable for Ontarians."

I agree with this petition and put my name on it.

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I'm pleased to present a petition with respect to seniors facing higher drug costs. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas during the election campaign the Dalton McGuinty Liberals said they would improve the Ontario drug benefit program but now are considering delisting

drugs and imposing higher user fees; and

"Whereas the Liberal government has increased costs to seniors by taking away the seniors' property tax rebate and increased the price of hydro;

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

"The Dalton McGuinty Liberals should keep their campaign promise to improve the Ontario drug benefit program and abandon their plan to delist drugs or increase

seniors' drug fees."

Beneath the signatures of the Wagners, Brent Wigner and Judith Todd, I affix my signature in support.

LANDFILL

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): "Whereas the county of Simcoe proposes to construct a landfill at site 41 in the township of Tiny; and

"Whereas the county of Simcoe has received, over a period of time, the necessary approvals from the Ministry of the Environment to design and construct a

landfill at site 41; and

"Whereas, as part of the landfill planning process, peer reviews of site 41 identified over 200 recommendations for improvements to the design, most of which

are related to potential groundwater contamination; and

"Whereas the Minister of the Environment has on numerous occasions stated her passion for clean and safe water and the need for water source protection;

and

"Whereas the Minister of the Environment has indicated her intention to introduce legislation on water source protection, which is a final and key

recommendation to be implemented under Justice Dennis O'Connor's report on the Walkerton inquiry; and

"Whereas the Minister of the Environment has announced expert panels that will make recommendations to the minister on water source protection legislation;

and

"Whereas the Ministry of the Environment will now be responsible for policing nutrient management; and

"Whereas the citizens of Ontario will be expecting a standing committee of the Legislature to hold province-wide public hearings on water source protection

legislation;

"We, the undersigned, call upon the government of Ontario and the Ministry of the Environment to immediately place a moratorium on the development of site 41

until the water source protection legislation is implemented in Ontario. We believe the legislation will definitely affect the design of site 41 and the nearby water sources."

I'll sign my name to that.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): I rise to present a petition from some constituents and some folks from greater Ottawa. It concludes:

"Therefore we, the undersigned ... demand that the new Liberal government act immediately to:

"(1) meet Ontario's obligations under the affordable housing program agreement;

"(2) create sufficient, truly affordable new social housing that meets the needs of all low- and moderate- income Ontarians."

I'm pleased to give this to Michael.

LCBO OUTLET

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): A petition that calls for a liquor store in Baxter:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the LCBO agency store program is intended to revitalize our small towns and villages and to provide rural consumers with responsible and convenient

access to LCBO services;

"We, the undersigned, hereby petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to make available to the village of Baxter an LCBO agency store."

I agree with that petition and have signed it.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I'm pleased to present yet another petition, signed by the Mulle family and Enid Crozier, as a matter of fact. I

don't know if that's any relation to our esteemed Deputy Speaker, if he has relatives in Black Creek. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas during the election campaign the Dalton McGuinty Liberals said they would improve the Ontario drug benefit program but now are considering delisting

drugs and imposing higher user fees; and

"Whereas the Liberal government has increased costs to seniors by taking away the seniors' property tax rebate and increased the price of hydro;

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

"The Dalton McGuinty Liberals should keep their campaign promise to improve the Ontario drug benefit program and abandon their plan to delist drugs or increase

seniors' drug fees."

In support, I affix my signature as well.

LANDFILL

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the county of Simcoe proposes to construct a landfill at site 41 in the township of Tiny; and

"Whereas the county of Simcoe has received, over a period of time, the necessary approvals from the Ministry of the Environment to design and construct a

landfill at site 41; and

"Whereas, as part of the landfill planning process, peer reviews of site 41 identified over 200 recommendations for improvements to design, most of which are

related to potential groundwater contamination; and

"Whereas the Minister of the Environment has on numerous occasions stated her passion for clean and safe water and the need for water source protection;

and

"Whereas the Minister of the Environment has indicated her intention to introduce legislation on water source protection which is a final and key

recommendation to be implemented by Justice Dennis O'Connor's report on the Walkerton inquiry; and

"Whereas the Minister of the Environment has announced expert panels that will make recommendations to the minister on water source protection legislation;

and

"Whereas the Ministry of the Environment will now be responsible for policing nutrient management; and

"Whereas the citizens of Ontario will be expecting a standing committee of the Legislature to hold province-wide public hearings on water source protection

legislation;

"We, the undersigned, call upon the government of Ontario and the Ministry of the Environment to immediately place a moratorium on the development of site 41

until the water source protection legislation is implemented in Ontario. We believe the legislation will definitely affect the design of site 41 and the nearby water sources."

I'd like to sign my name to that.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals by no means campaigned on raising the rates associated with the Ontario drug benefit program; and

"Whereas the majority of seniors, many of which live on a fixed income, cannot meet the expense of higher costs for essential medication; and

"Whereas seniors in Simcoe-Grey and across Ontario should never have to make the choice between eating and filling a prescription;

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

"To cancel any plans to raise costs for prescription drugs for our seniors and to embark on making vital medication more affordable for Ontarians."

I agree with this petition and I have signed it.

Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I am pleased to read yet another petition from the good folks at Black Creek Leisure Homes in the beautiful

Niagara Peninsula. Holly Beers and H.W. McKee lead off this petition, which reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas during the election campaign the Dalton McGuinty Liberals said they would improve the Ontario drug benefit program but now are considering delisting

drugs and imposing higher user fees; and

"Whereas the Liberal government has increased costs to seniors by taking away the seniors' property tax rebate and increased the price of hydro;

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

"The Dalton McGuinty Liberals should keep their campaign promise to improve the Ontario drug benefit program and abandon their plan to delist drugs or increase

seniors' drug fees."

In support I add my signature.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

PUBLIC SECTOR SALARY DISCLOSURE

AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 /

LOI DE 2003 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LA DIVULGATION

DES TRAITEMENTS

DANS LE SECTEUR PUBLIC

Mr Duncan moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 15,

An Act to amend the Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act, 1996 / Loi modifiant la Loi de 1996 sur la divulgation des traitements dans le secteur

public.

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): Mr Speaker, I will be sharing my lead time this afternoon with Khalil Ramal,

the member for London-Fanshawe; Shafiq Qaadri, the member for Etobicoke North; and my parliamentary assistant, Donna Cansfield, who is doing a remarkable job on energy conservation in her capacity

as chair of the conservation action group.

This bill is about providing transparency for Hydro One and Ontario Power Generation. The McGuinty government believes transparency and accountability are the

best safeguards of our public services. We are making government work better for people by making it more transparent and accountable to the people of Ontario. The passage of this bill would mark

another key commitment that our government has delivered to the people of Ontario. We pledged to make OPG and Hydro One subject to freedom of information and privacy as well as salary disclosure

laws. Bill 15 is an important step in the delivery of positive change in our energy sector.

We are taking action today to end the secrecy at Hydro One and Ontario Power Generation. The provincial government, as all members know, is the sole

shareholder of these successor companies of the old Ontario Hydro. As shareholder, we feel that the operations of these companies should not be hidden from public scrutiny. Transparency and

accountability are at the core of our priorities. This bill and our change to freedom of information regulations demonstrate our commitment to these key principles.

The lack of transparency and accountability at OPG and Hydro One under the former government led to a serious waste of public funds. We're cleaning up the mess

left by the former government and working hard to fix what's broken. This is just another example of how we're giving Ontarians the straight goods. We are acting decisively to ensure that Hydro One

and Ontario Power Generation will be subject to the same salary disclosure rules as all other public servants -- we saw those disclosures earlier today. In addition, we're making these provisions

retroactive to 1999, because when we applied freedom of information to Hydro One and OPG, we found a lot of things we never imagined we'd find. Again, accountability and transparency are essential

to good governance and will prevent the kind of abuse that happened under the Harris-Eves government at both of these large corporations.

The other reason, and in some ways a more important reason, is that we're committed to improving the value Ontarians get for the money they invest in their

public services. We have also ensured that Hydro One and OPG are subject to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, as I mentioned a moment ago. These actions ensure that the same

rules apply to them as to other crown agencies, corporations and publicly funded organizations. We voted in favour of the original legislation some five or six years ago, and this extends it. This

lifts the veil of secrecy that was left by the Tory government, and now we understand why it was left. When we saw the disclosures that have come out under freedom of information and privacy, we

saw that they created a little fiefdom for their friends and political fixers to make money on untendered contracts without any opportunity for scrutiny by the public.

The McGuinty government will ensure that provincially held assets -- and these are assets. This is Niagara Falls; these are our power generation assets across

this great province; it's the dams on the Mattagami River; it is the nuclear assets at Bruce, Pickering and Darlington. We will ensure that those assets are managed in the best interests of the

public.

We believe the people of this province have the right to access information about the activity of these two very important companies. Initiatives including

aggressive conservation, new and greener sources of supply and accountability at our crown corporations will help us meet our objectives of cleaner air, consumer protection and a sustainable supply

of electricity for this province moving forward. Public accountability is a key component of that.

Let me address the act in its specifics for a moment. Unlike other provincially owned companies, Hydro One and Ontario Power Generation employees have not been

required to disclose salaries under the Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act. Again, this action was taken by the Harris-Eves government after its 1998 restructuring of Ontario Hydro. Our plan is to

ensure that the same rules apply here as elsewhere. We want to ensure that provincially held electricity assets are managed in the best interests of the public, with transparency and accountability

being an important part of that.

As I mentioned a moment ago, we are committed to improving the value Ontarians get for the dollars invested in public services. In Ontario, many other

provincial organizations providing public services have disclosed this kind of salary information since 1996. Municipalities, colleges, universities, hospitals, to name a few, must provide this

information. It was only OPG and Hydro One that were cloaked in a veil of secrecy by the previous government. Ontarians need to know what they are paying for, whether it is through taxes or

electricity rates. We are ensuring that salary information for OPG and Hydro One is treated in the same manner as other public sector organizations in the province.

The McGuinty government is proposing to retroactively make public the salaries of those who earned more than $100,000 a year at Hydro One and OPG, going back

to 1999, when those corporations came into existence following the wrap-up of the old Ontario Hydro. We are doing this to ensure consistency with other public sector organizations that have

disclosed this kind of salary information since 1996. Disclosure for the years 1999 through 2003 will be required within one month of the bill receiving royal assent. I call on my friends in the

Conservative Party and the NDP to give this bill speedy passage so the public can have access to this information.

When this bill, the Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act, came into force in 1996, all other public sector organizations had to provide, by March 31st of each

year, the names, salaries and taxable benefits paid to employees who earned $100,000 or more in the previous calendar year. The bill authorizes employers to disclose the value of taxable benefits

as defined by the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency. That's a very important thing. We also need to know what we are spending on benefits.

I was quite astounded when, under freedom of information, we found out that OPG, even though it wasn't making money, had a one-third interest in a lease on a

private box at the Air Canada Centre. Who was attending the games? Many of the members of the previous government. They were sipping on fine wines and having oysters, all the while running the

company into the ground, all the while not providing for new supply. Do you know what our Premier did when we found out about this? Our Premier ordered that we get out of that lease. We are having

some difficulty, but in the interim the Premier ordered me to make sure that those tickets went to kids who otherwise wouldn't get to hockey or basketball games. That is a big difference between

the Tory government and the Liberal government. That is why this kind of legislation is so important.

While preaching fiscal restraint -- a lot of members here are new, but I am sure they followed in the news the daily diatribes against welfare recipients,

cutting welfare benefits 22%, taking away pregnant mothers' nutrition supplements on welfare, scolding public servants and unions for being greedy, and all the while millions of dollars in

untendered contracts were going to Tory political hacks, veiled so the public couldn't see it. Premier Dalton McGuinty and his government have lifted the veil. Not only can the people of Ontario

see what was going on, they can smell the stench from a party that had become too comfortable in power. They can sense the hypocrisy of members speaking out about restraint and at the same time

secretly availing themselves of benefits that many in the public can only ever dream of. As a result of this very progressive legislation which sheds light on these two corporations, that will

never happen again.

You should also note that this act gives individuals the statutory right to request access to records in the custody and control of government institutions.

This general right of access is subject to narrow and specific exemptions and exclusions contained in the act. Of course, I am now referring to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy

Act. This act protects the privacy of individuals by requiring government to follow specific rules regarding the collection, use and disclosure of personal information.

It was interesting that the previous government, in shielding these two corporations from public accountability, referenced their ability to operate in the

marketplace. As I said earlier, we are committed to improving the value Ontarians get for the dollars invested in public services. The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act contains

certain exemptions that protect confidential commercial information of corporations if disclosure could cause them harm in the marketplace.

Interestingly, in one of the cases of a former Tory political aide's contract, it had a one-page e-mail. That was the only paper, and there was nothing

commercially sensitive; it was just simply giving the government of the day advice on what this or that media member thought of any particular policy. That was clearly an excuse by the previous

government to keep that kind of information out of public hands. So we believe we're still protecting the commercial interests and viability of OPG and Hydro One.

I want to speak for a moment about the role of the privacy commissioner here. The Information and Privacy Commissioner has long been an advocate of ensuring

transparency and accountability. We will continue to look to the commissioner for comments and suggestions as we work to ensure greater transparency and accountability in the provision of such

public goods as electricity.

We also made the freedom of information requests retrospective; that is, we made them apply to years past. Again, that was important. As I indicated earlier,

it raised all these issues that have now become well known in the public and have clearly branded the previous Harris-Eves government as hypocritical or certainly being of two minds when is comes

to fiscal restraint: on the one hand, publicly preaching restraint; on the other hand, rewarding friends and political cronies with large contracts. As I said earlier, we have to remember that it

was the same gang that was giving their friends these untendered contracts that cut social assistance benefits by 22% as one of the first acts of their government.

In conclusion, transparency and accountability are at the core of our priorities. This bill and our change to the freedom of information regulations

demonstrate our commitment to these key principles. Our government is taking action to ensure that the secrecy ends at Hydro One and Ontario Power Generation. The provincial government is the sole

shareholder of these successor companies to the old Ontario Hydro. As shareholders and as an elected body, we feel the operations of these companies should not be hidden from public scrutiny.

Keeping the lights on is essential to the success and well-being of our hospitals, schools, businesses and homes. If we address energy policy in a responsible

way, our economy will prosper and our families will have a stronger Ontario in which to grow. Our initiatives include aggressive conservation, new supply and accountability at our crown

corporations. Bill 15 will help us meet our goals on accountability and transparency.

The passage of this bill would mark another key commitment that our government has delivered to the people of Ontario. We pledged to make all provincially

owned power companies subject to freedom of information and salary disclosure laws. Bill 15, this bill, is an important step in the delivery of positive change in our energy sector.

Some of the other initiatives we have looked at are aggressive conservation. My parliamentary assistant, Donna Cansfield, is here today. She is the head of our

conservation action group. I want to pay special tribute to her today. The electricity conservation supply task force report called for a champion of conservation, and Donna is that champion. We

are lucky in Ontario to have her working on our behalf.

As I said earlier in the House, the NDP government in 1993 cancelled all conservation programs in Ontario. The old Ontario Hydro -- Maurice Strong was then the

chair. Under that Rae government, they cancelled all conservation initiatives. Had the initiatives that had been put in place been followed through on, we would have saved 5,200 megawatts a year.

Let me put that into perspective for you. That would have allowed us to close Nanticoke, the largest and dirtiest of our coal-firing plants, as well as some of the other coal plants -- a total

generation of about 7,500. That would have got us five-sevenths of the way, had the NDP simply not done such a short-sighted thing.

The previous government, the Harris-Eves government -- well, I quoted my predecessor, Mr Wilson, when he was the energy minister, saying in the Globe and Mail,

"Well, the private sector said they wouldn't work. It might make a few people happy if we did this." But the fact is, conservation does work. It works all over the world. The only place we don't

have a great conservation program is in Ontario. Why? Because of the NDP and the Conservatives simply not showing any interest in it. They wanted the old ways, the old practices, where they tried

to pretend you could give electricity away or subsidize the price.

I see the leader of the third party, a member of a government that introduced private power into Ontario that's still costing the Ontario Electricity Financial

Corp $4.5 billion, a member of the third party who in January wanted the coal plants closed and last week wanted them open. In his book, Public Power, this member advocates the need for private

sector involvement in electricity. He's been all over the board.

He was also part of a government that cancelled a deal with the province of Manitoba that would have provided run-of-the-river hydroelectricity from the

Conawapa project on the Upper Churchill River in northern Manitoba, a deal that had been signed, I believe, in 1988. Had they not cancelled that, we would have another 1,250 megawatts of clean,

renewable power coming into Ontario that we won't have now. I'm pleased to tell you that I'll be meeting with the energy minister from Manitoba later this week to further discuss if we can get this

great project back on.

I hope the third party and the official opposition will allow speedy passage of this legislation so that we can get on to the real problems of undoing what the

Conservatives and the NDP before them did, and that is to undermine our economic viability in terms of electricity. We're committed to doing the responsible thing, to bringing on new, reliable

supply that will ensure we won't see the same -- we had a 40% increase in the price of electricity when Mr Hampton was a member of government. Before they froze the price, it had gone up 40%.

I think that was almost as bad as the increase under the Tory government when they put small consumers on the spot market. The spot market that the Tories

created hasn't worked. None of their goals have been achieved. Later this month, we'll be outlining a responsible policy in electricity that will deal with the mess created by the Tories and the

NDP in hydro.

I'm proud to be part of a government that's bringing about real change. Here today, we have the opportunity to pass a