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

June 25, 1998

36th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

L033a - Thu 25 Jun 1998 / Jeu 25 Jun 1998 1

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LA PROTECTION DE L'ENVIRONNEMENT

ONTARIO AGRICULTURE WEEK ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LA SEMAINE DE L'AGRICULTURE EN ONTARIO

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LA PROTECTION DE L'ENVIRONNEMENT

ONTARIO AGRICULTURE WEEK ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LA SEMAINE DE L'AGRICULTURE EN ONTARIO

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

WOMEN'S COLLEGE HOSPITAL

PUBLIC ACCOUNTING LICENCES

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

SPECIAL OLYMPICS

TORONTO FIESTA

EDUCATION FUNDING

NORTHERN HEALTH SERVICES

PAY EQUITY

WATERFRONT FESTIVAL AND FOLKLORAMA

VISITOR

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

LEGISLATIVE USHERS

INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS' EXPENDITURE REPORT

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

LAW SOCIETY AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LE BARREAU

HEALTH INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR L'ASSURANCE-SANTÉ

APPRENTICESHIP AND CERTIFICATION ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR L'APPRENTISSAGE ET LA RECONNAISSANCE PROFESSIONNELLE

GREATER TORONTO SERVICES BOARD ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LA COMMISSION DES SERVICES DU GRAND TORONTO

LIQUOR LICENCE AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LES PERMIS D'ALCOOL

ONTARIO HERITAGE AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LE PATRIMOINE DE L'ONTARIO

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT (LICENCE SUSPENSIONS), 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LE CODE DE LA ROUTE (SUSPENSIONS DE PERMIS)

INCOME TAX AMENDMENT ACT (EXPENSE ALLOWANCES OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT AND SENATORS), 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA LOI DE L'IMPÔT SUR LE REVENU (INDEMNITÉS DE FONCTIONS DES PARLEMENTAIRES FÉDÉRAUX)

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING

CHILD ABUSE

DEFERRED VOTES

TAX CUTS FOR PEOPLE AND FOR SMALL BUSINESS ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LA RÉDUCTION DES IMPÔTS DES PARTICULIERS ET DES PETITES ENTREPRISES

ORAL QUESTIONS

AIR QUALITY

TUITION FEES

AIR QUALITY

ONTARIO HYDRO

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

HOSPITAL FUNDING

RURAL AND NORTHERN HEALTH SERVICES

HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION

TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD

RURAL AND NORTHERN HEALTH SERVICES

PETITIONS

LINHAVEN HOME FOR THE AGED

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

FIREARMS CONTROL

RENT REGULATION

PROTECTION FOR HEALTH CARE WORKERS

CHIROPRACTIC HEALTH CARE

RENT REGULATION

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

RENT REGULATION

LABOUR LEGISLATION

WITHDRAWAL OF BILL 29

ORDERS OF THE DAY

CHILD CARE SUPPLEMENT INFORMATION COLLECTION ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LA COLLECTE DES RENSEIGNEMENTS NÉCESSAIRES À L'OCTROI DU SUPPLÉMENT DE REVENU POUR LES FRAIS DE GARDE D'ENFANTS

CHILD CARE SUPPLEMENT INFORMATION COLLECTION ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LA COLLECTE DES RENSEIGNEMENTS NÉCESSAIRES À L'OCTROI DU SUPPLÉMENT DE REVENU POUR LES FRAIS DE GARDE D'ENFANTS

CHILD CARE SUPPLEMENT INFORMATION COLLECTION ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LA COLLECTE DES RENSEIGNEMENTS NÉCESSAIRES À L'OCTROI DU SUPPLÉMENT DE REVENU POUR LES FRAIS DE GARDE D'ENFANTS

SUNNYBROOK AND WOMEN'S COLLEGE HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LE CENTRE APPELÉ SUNNYBROOK AND WOMEN'S COLLEGE HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE

SUNNYBROOK AND WOMEN'S COLLEGE HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LE CENTRE APPELÉ SUNNYBROOK AND WOMEN'S COLLEGE HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE

RED TAPE REDUCTION ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 VISANT À RÉDUIRE LES FORMALITÉS ADMINISTRATIVES

The House met at 1000.

Prayers.

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LA PROTECTION DE L'ENVIRONNEMENT

Mr Carroll moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 34,

An Act to amend the Environmental Protection Act / Projet de loi 34, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la protection de l'environnement.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): Pursuant to standing order 95(c)(i), the member has 10 minutes for his presentation.

Mr Jack Carroll (Chatham-Kent): It's a pleasure to be here this morning to lead off the debate on my first opportunity to introduce a private member's bill in the Legislature.

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I think Mr Carroll has an important bill, but there's no quorum here this morning.

The Acting Speaker: Would you please check if we have a quorum.

Clerk at the Table (Ms Lisa Freedman): A quorum is not present, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker ordered the bells rung.

Clerk at the Table: A quorum is now present, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker: The member for Chatham-Kent.

Mr Carroll: Quorum calls on Thursday morning are unusual, but I thank the member for Algoma-Manitoulin who had it called to make sure we had an audience to listen to what I think is a very important bill.

Bill 34 is a very simple bill, as one might expect. It says, "No person shall sell, offer to sell, or use gasoline as a fuel for operating a motor vehicle as defined in the Highway Traffic Act unless the gasoline contains at least 2.7% of oxygen by weight," and it allows the act to come into force on January 1, 2005.

There is a lot of talk about ethanol around the province, but the bill specifically does not limit the oxygenating agent to ethanol, because there is technology or there could be technology developed that would use other products. It talks simply in terms of an oxygen level of 2.7%. That currently would translate into an ethanol blend of about 8%. Ethanol is currently the most efficient fuel, and ethanol produced from corn is the most efficient. In six or seven years' time, there's no telling what could happen.

This House has seen quite a history of conversation about ethanol. Many very distinguished members of this House have spoken about the issue: the member for Parry Sound, the current finance minister, Ernie Eves, has spoken of it; the leader of the third party, Howard Hampton, has spoken often of it; former Agriculture Minister Elmer Buchanan of the New Democratic Party was a big champion of ethanol; the member for Grey-Owen Sound, Mr Murdoch, has spoken about it.

I must make some comment about my predecessor, Randy Hope, who was a member of the NDP government, the member for Chatham-Kent, who was a champion of the cause and in fact was very instrumental in moving the government forward and moving the creation of a plant in Chatham-Kent. I want to acknowledge Randy's role in that.

In actual fact, the third recommendation of a fuel ethanol discussion paper by the New Democrats in 1992 was "to actively encourage market demand for ethanol-blended gasolines by encouraging legislated ethanol use." Back in 1992 we talked about legislated use of ethanol, and here we are in 1998 and very little has happened.

There are three areas I would like to touch on this morning, three positives about this particular bill. The first one involves the environment. My colleague the member for Guelph will be speaking more to this issue because one of her interests in life is the environment. But the use of ethanol, the use of oxygen in fuel as an octane enhancer and as an additive reduces the level of carbon monoxide and benzene levels at the tailpipe. So it certainly reduces negative emissions at the tailpipe, and two of the most deadly are carbon monoxide and benzene.

From an agricultural standpoint, this is where we get into some big positives. Currently the use of corn to generate ethanol is a big boost to the farmers in our community. The Ontario Corn Producers' Association, Mr Eadie, said, "The impact of the legislation on the ethanol industry could be quite dramatic, requiring more than triple the present level of ethanol manufacturing to ensure domestic supply."

Farmers are the true stewards of our land. It's interesting that in that role, as the true stewards of our land and our environment, they have the capacity to produce a product that could be used to blend with gasoline to promote cleaner air. I think it's only fitting that we would have the farmers in that particular light.

Over and above the pluses for agriculture - and of course in Chatham-Kent, part of the corn-growing belt in Ontario, it would be a big plus - in many areas of the province we grow corn and, quite frankly, the ethanol process can use corn of lower quality that maybe doesn't have so many other uses.

Then we talk about the whole job creation issue. The state of Minnesota currently mandates the use of ethanol, the first state in the United States to do that. They use 2.7%, the number we are suggesting in our act. They indicate that in Minnesota this piece of legislation they enacted in January 1997 has led to the creation of 4,000 to 5,000 new jobs in that state, directly in the ethanol industry and in spinoffs. There is obviously great potential for us here in Ontario, because their ethanol use, based on their population, is substantially less than ours.

We know that the volume required - 900 million litres, roughly, is what is estimated, up to one billion litres - would see the necessity of the construction of three to four more plants of the same capacity as the great plant that we have in Chatham-Kent. So there is a great opportunity there for additional jobs to be created in the province through construction, as well as additional jobs through the manufacture of ethanol.

We rely on gasoline produced from crude oil to run our vehicles and, as you know, we import a lot of that. Our memories are still, I'm sure, relatively fresh from the time when other countries in the world that had control of that industry chose to hold the rest of us hostage. It would certainly be to our advantage to move to an environment where we could have a domestically produced fuel that we could use in our automobiles, rather than rely solely on foreign crude oil.

We are only looking at roughly an 8% blend. There are vehicles in the United States now, sold by the manufacturers - they are called E-85 vehicles - that will run on an 85% blend of ethanol. All the car manufacturers, in their warranties, say that up to 10% ethanol blend is quite acceptable. As a mater of fact, some of them even go so far as to encourage the use of ethanol. So there's no problem from the standpoint of automobile warranties, from the standpoint of performance, from the standpoint of the environment and from agriculture.

As we look to the future, while corn is currently the product of choice to produce ethanol, and ethanol is currently the oxygenating agent that looks to be the most efficient, there's a lot of technology being developed out there, being worked on, to use other products.

The other products are very interesting. Over and above other cash crops, sugar beets could be used, other types of grains could be used. We could even use cheese to produce ethanol. But over and above those particular edible products, there is technology being worked on to use waste paper, wood chips, leaves to produce ethanol. A lot of things that have not a lot of other use could in fact be used to produce ethanol. We could even go so far as to use residential waste. The technology is being worked on to use residential waste.

What we're really talking about in this Bill 34,

An Act to amend the Environmental Protection Act, is not so much ethanol or oxygenated fuels, what we're really talking about is cleaner fuel. We can talk about cleaner fuel all we want, but until such time as we take it upon ourselves to mandate, at a particular point in time, that all fuel sold in the province must contain a minimum level of oxygen, until we have the courage to do that, I don't believe those with the expertise to develop the new products we require will really see the benefit in developing them. Why would you spend a lot of money creating some new products to blend with gasoline if there wasn't any requirement that they ever be used?

When I look at Bill 34, when I look at the situation, I see that the environment wins, because it would reduce the level of carbon monoxide and benzene emissions from the tailpipe. The agricultural community in our great province, which is very important to us, wins big time. Noble Villeneuve, the Minister of Agriculture, has been very supportive of ethanol as an alternative fuel. When I look at that, I see we've created a lot of new jobs. To me, it looks like everybody wins.

It's ironic that, on this day that we're in this House debating an issue that involves cleaner air, a smog alert is issued in the city of Toronto. When we hear warnings to older people and children about being outside today because of the poor quality of our air, it's time we got serious about ways to improve the quality of our air.

Mr Gerry Phillips (Scarborough-Agincourt): I'm pleased to join the debate on the bill and to say that certainly I'll be supporting the bill, and to say how important it is that we move aggressively on the environment. The member mentioned it is ironic that we are debating this today because it probably is the worst air day in two or three years, if not more. It's almost symbolic that we would be debating a bill that should result in cleaner air.

I would also say that our corn producers are absolutely world-class. We can compete with corn producers anywhere in the world, without a question of a doubt. We have a ready-made future supply of high-quality corn at reasonable prices. As we look ahead at a sustainable fuel, this also meets that criteria. It is proven that it will improve the air quality. It's a bill that we have no difficulty in supporting.

I would say to the people who are watching this debate that it is a debate around the environment. It is useful to remind ourselves of what's going on right now outside our walls. By the way, the condition of the air in the Toronto area is very poor today. There is a warning to suggest that people with any kind of respiratory problems should stay indoors and avoid strenuous exercise. Also, many organizations are trying to cut down on emissions. It is also ironic that, as we're speaking here, the government has its lawnmowers outside, literally, right now.

When other organizations have stopped cutting the grass to cut down on emissions, the government has its own lawnmowers a matter of a few metres from this building, cutting the grass.

My concern is that, while this is an important bill, I hoped the government might have found a way to deal with the environment on a more comprehensive basis in addition to this bill. I think the environment is indeed suffering now as the result of government cuts. When Mike Harris became Premier, the ministry had a staff of around 2,400 people; it's now down by 750 people that they've cut out of the Ministry of the Environment. In 1994-95 the government was spending on the environment roughly $260 million; this year the budget is $143 million. The Ministry of the Environment budget is not quite cut in half, but almost cut in half.

I'm not one who says that money solves all, but there's no question that the protection of the environment does require an investment by the public in sustaining the quality of the environment. We find that, when we look at the government's commitment to the environment, they've cut the Ministry of the Environment budget almost in half. We see they've cut more than a quarter of the jobs out of the Ministry of the Environment. There were 700 water monitoring stations a mere six years ago; now there are 200 water monitoring stations. And so it goes.

It should perhaps come as no surprise to us that we are beginning to run into some serious problems on the environment. I realize that Mike Harris is an unabashed free enterpriser. I am very much supportive of our business community growing the economy, but one of the things that Ontario also demands is that we monitor and are stewards of the environment.

This bill, as I say, is a worthwhile step forward, but I would also say to the member for Chatham-Kent, I hope in his caucus he is spending a lot of time urging the cabinet to make the environment once again a high priority. You can see the number of people we have available to work on the environment, the amount of investment we've put into the environment, the number of water monitoring stations down now to 200 from 700 a mere six years ago. We've also seen substantial changes in the legislative and regulatory protection of the environment.

The government passed a bill called Bill 20 that changed the Planning Act. I think anybody who looked at that would acknowledge that it severely weakened the legal and the policy tools that were available to protect the environment. The Legislature passed Bill 76. That changed the Environmental Assessment Act and substantially tied the hands of the Environmental Assessment Board to review major environmental projects. I could go on: Bill 57 also changed the Environmental Protection Act; Bill 107 downloaded or moved on to the municipalities the responsibility for 230 water and sewage treatment plants, all of which require, for the property taxpayers, a substantial investment.

To conclude, so that I leave my colleague some time to talk on this bill, we are supportive of the ethanol bill. We are supportive of any responsible steps that will protect our environment. We are supportive because the Ontario corn producers are world-class in their ability to produce quality corn at worldwide competitive prices, so this is one future source of fuel that we are assured of. I hope the government caucus will put as much pressure as possible on the Premier and on the Minister of the Environment to do a U-turn and get back to giving the environment the priority it deserves here in Ontario.

Ms Marilyn Churley (Riverdale): I've told Mr Carroll, the member for Chatham-Kent, that we will be supporting this bill today. I want to publicly congratulate him for bringing it forward and would like to indicate again that we're in full support of this bill.

I acknowledge that Mr Carroll mentioned that it was during our term in government - in particular I remember very well the lobbying by Mr Randy Hope, the then member for Chatham-Kent, and of course as an environmentalist I was always there supporting him. We were in very tough recession and we were talking about spending money. As you know, that was a source of great criticism, particularly from the opposition at the time. But I believe overall everybody was in support of spending money on a plant in the area, because not only did it create jobs but it went a long way towards improving our environment.

This is a really good example of how you can create jobs and at the same time protect the environment. We need to be using this as an example and looking more and more to how we can put the two together, because unfortunately what we hear mostly, an awful lot, is that we have to cut red tape and regulations because it's a job killer. That is happening to some extent in the environment, and we haven't gotten away from that mentality.

This is a very important step today that has been taken by the member. I applaud him for bringing it forward. I'd like to see the Minister of the Environment come in today and assure us that he will back this and make sure it goes forward. I'm disappointed that we're not having third reading today. In fact, I would suggest that if there's support from everybody, we could go ahead today and just get right through it. I don't know if the minister is supporting this or not.

Certainly, as I said, when we were in government this issue became a very important one for the former member, Randy Hope, and we were able to work with the federal government and we invested in the plant in the area. I'm glad to see that the member today, Mr Carroll, is coming forward with badly needed regulations now.

I'm sure the member won't be surprised if I use this opportunity, having congratulated him, to talk, however, about the government's overall record on the environment and to tie some of the things Mr Carroll is bringing forward today into that record. One of the things that concerns me is, for instance, that his government, having gotten rid of the CURB program, which is another program our government brought in - that's the Clean Up Rural Beaches program. One of the reasons that was so important was it was a program to help agricultural farmers to deal with the runoff from pesticides on their land.

There was a report; I believe it was the draft state of the environment report prepared by the MOEE itself. That report indicated that runoff from agricultural operations is the leading cause of declining surface water quality in southern Ontario. That is pretty significant and important. I would like to see, while we are advancing - and I certainly support it - more work for corn producers and this certainly gives them an opportunity to produce more corn, and that's a good thing, but we can't ignore other problems as we increase agricultural activity. I would like to see the government bring back this program.

It was a small program, but it was a worthwhile one that started to deal with some of those runoff problems, for which I believe the farmers were happy to accept assistance from the government.

Today, as my colleague from Scarborough-Agincourt mentioned - I believe Mr Carroll mentioned it too - is a very bad air quality day in Toronto. I have been pushing the Minister of the Environment and this government for some time now to move ahead with clean air regulations. As you know, we've been pushing the government since they came into office to do something about mandatory tailpipe emissions testing. Our government brought in the very first volunteer experimental program in Ontario. By the time the election in 1995 happened, it was ready to move forward into a mandatory program.

The Minister of the Environment continues to say they want to move carefully and slowly to make sure it's done right. There certainly is evidence that the ministry no longer has the resources or the ability to put this program in place. That is a big problem. When we have bad air days like today, there is a whole bunch of things that need to be done. Yes, this will go a small way in helping with the problems, but only a small way. There needs to be an overall air pollution plan. There has been one.

There have been a couple of very damning reports that have come out recently on the state of the environment in Ontario in regard to this government's approach to environmental protection, which is to deregulate and cut. One of the things that is talked about is air emission problems and the issues around the government's cleanup program, it being weak and not going far enough, and furthermore there's no action on it; it's moving very slowly and it's not substantive enough.

Here we are today, on the last day of the session before what is now widely known is going to be a long, hot summer. I don't know if you can hear it in my voice today; I don't have asthma, but I do have problems in this kind of weather. I'm not going to die from it, I'm not even going to end up in a hospital. I know that. I can't ride my bike, though, on days I'd like to ride my bike to save emissions from my car going into the air, because the air's too hard for me to breathe today, riding my bike in the smog. That's a small problem.

There are people - as we know, up to 1,800 a year die in Ontario from pollution. The warnings today said that certain people shouldn't exercise; certain people shouldn't even go outside. It's a very serious problem that needs to be dealt with. This government continues to say it's going to, but here's the last day and we're going to have another long, hot summer, where people are literally going to die as a result of the smog problems. I would hope that the minister would come in today and say yes, he is going to support this private member's bill today, but that he is going to announce that the vehicle emissions control testing program is going to start this summer as well.

I want to take this opportunity again to thank the member for bringing forward this bill and to let him know that he has our support today. I will be speaking to the minister - I don't know if he has - to see if he's going to make sure that this bill - I'd like to see it, as I said, pass today and go through all three readings so we can get on with it. Perhaps Mr Carroll can indicate later whether the Minister of the Environment is going to let this go ahead, because I know that if ministers don't want bills to go ahead, they have really effective ways in dealing with that and making sure that they don't go ahead, that they die on the order paper or whatever.

Mr Gilles Bisson (Cochrane South): We know what it's like.

Ms Churley: My colleague from Cochrane South says, "Boy, do we know about that."

Having been a minister, of course, at one time, I would never have interfered with any backbenchers to let bills go through. But we know that happens.

This is one small piece in a very big puzzle and I hope we can get it to go through the House and have it effective.

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): First, I'd like to commend the member for Chatham-Kent for introducing a private member's bill intended to reduce tailpipe emissions in Ontario. There's no doubt that smog is a serious problem, as we witness here today. It aggravates a wide range of health ailments, especially respiratory illnesses and it damages the environment by harming vegetation, materials and crops.

I'd like to bring to the attention of the member for Scarborough-Agincourt, who commented on our track record, what has happened federally with his federal cousins. This was written by Elizabeth May and was in the Globe and Mail on June 22. She is the executive director of the Sierra Club.

It says, "Five years later it is clear that the Progressive Conservative floor has become the Liberals' ceiling." She goes on to say that five years later, under a Liberal government, "Environment Canada has moved from being the seventh largest department in the Canadian bureaucracy to nearly the smallest among 21." She also commented on a previous speech by the Conservative Prime Minister and what has happened to the current Liberal Prime Minister.

"The problem was not so much that I couldn't recall Mr Chrétien saying anything so forceful about the environment; it was that I couldn't even imagine him giving such a speech."

The member for Riverdale talked about the CURB program. Obviously she's interested in the NDP approach of charge, convict, fine and harass the public rather than working with farmers to ensure these kinds of pollutants will not reach our environment.

I'm pleased to report that the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs certainly supports this bill. The Minister of the Environment and I also support the proposed bill in principle. It would amend the Environmental Protection Act to require all gasoline sold in Ontario to have a minimum oxygen content of 2.7%. This would mean that Ontario gasoline would have to contain 7.5% ethanol or other oxygenates.

Currently the use of oxygenates in Canada is voluntary. The federal government gives ethanol-blended gasoline its Ecologo endorsement. There is general agreement that boosting the oxygen content of gasoline improves combustion. The use of oxygenates has been shown to reduce carbon monoxide. On the other hand, no significant improvements have been found for newer vehicles with advanced technologies. On average, oxides of nitrogen, or NO x emissions are not affected, although low aromatic gasoline shows an increase in NO x of some 5%.

The future of oxygen-blended fuels is being considered as part of a broader clean air strategy. Certainly Ontario has made a long-range commitment to reduce smog under an Ontario smog plan. We're taking action to address vehicle emissions from Ontario's more than six million vehicles. The ministry's air sniffer, called the Smog Rover, is out every week taking air readings in the GTA. Recently it found that 34% of nearly 5,000 vehicles monitored needed tune-ups. Our new Drive Clean program will reduce those numbers.

All of these initiatives and partnerships are working towards cleaner air for Ontario. In this effort, a major goal is to reduce smog-causing emissions by 45% by 2015.

Clean air is in everyone's best interests. I can assure the members of this House that the ministry will review the environmental implications of ethanol and other oxygenates in gasoline. We will make it part of our consultation with stakeholders as part of our overall strategy for cleaner vehicles and fuels.

This bill needs to be referred to a standing committee for full investigation and consideration. If it passes this test, it should be adopted as an innovative measure to provide renewable and alternative fuel choices. I urge all of you to give serious consideration to this private member's bill and to applaud the member for Chatham-Kent's sincere concern about this environmental issue.

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): I was going to congratulate the member for Chatham-Kent on bringing forward this initiative until I heard the member for Northumberland. The member for Northumberland seems to make the argument that it's okay for this government to have cut the Ministry of the Environment by half because the federal government has cut. Basically that's what he's saying. He's saying that the federal government has cut, so that therefore excuses what this government has done.

The member also demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of what the CURB program was, which surprises me, considering that he used to be a civil servant in the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. He seemed to think it was a fines program, putting fines on people. In fact, the CURB program was a program that assisted farmers with new technologies and new approaches to try to curb the runoff of waste, the runoff of pesticide and herbicide residues and fertilizers into the creeks, the streams and so on.

Under the CURB program, there weren't fines. One of the things the CURB program did was encourage farmers to build fences along streams so that livestock wouldn't get into the creeks and defecate in the creeks. I suppose that's in some way curbing or confining cattle, and I suppose, being a veterinarian, the member likes to see free-ranging for cattle or something. I don't know. He was opposed to the CURB program, obviously, and that explains why this government got rid of it.

We have a real, serious problem, particularly in the area of Lake Huron - I said "Lake Huron" not "Lake Urine" - with regard to agricultural runoff in the creeks and rivers running into that Great Lake. The farm community is concerned, as are many others. The idea of cleaning up rural beaches was something that was supported by the farm community, by the rural communities throughout Ontario, and certainly by environmental groups. It's a real shame that this government chose to discontinue that very important program.

Specifically with regard to this bill, the member for Chatham-Kent is emphasizing the importance of ethanol, not only for fuel but for other purposes, as a way of cutting down on the very serious pollution problems we face. He mentioned the role of his predecessor as member for Chatham-Kent, in the previous government, in providing assistance to establish the plant in his riding. The previous government provided somewhere in the neighbourhood of $175,000 to assist in the feasibility study and a pilot project, which eventually led to the establishment of the plant.

We were glad to do that, because we understood the importance, not only for the corn producers and for the agricultural community but for all of our society, of looking for and encouraging alternatives. We also saw it, of course, as an economic development possibility for that part of southwestern Ontario.

It is ironic, as one of the other members mentioned, that on a day when we have a terrible smog alert in the Toronto area, in Metropolitan Toronto, and people with respiratory problems, elderly people and young children are being advised to stay indoors, this government, which professes to be interested in the long-term - underlined - air quality program would have their lawnmowers running on the lawns of Queen's Park, putting out emissions from gasoline and so on into the atmosphere and adding to the smog we're all going to face in this area today, at a time when the city of Toronto is asking people not to run their own lawnmowers.

Now, the member for - where are you? Oh, yes, the long name - Prince Edward, Lennox and so on is suggesting that we should just have push lawnmowers and that would probably be good for people's health as well as long as they don't have respiratory problems; that if they must be out on a day like today to cut the lawn, then they should be using push lawnmowers rather than gasoline-powered lawnmowers.

Mr Galt: They shouldn't be using motorized ones either.

The Acting Speaker: Member for Northumberland, you had your turn.

Mr Wildman: The member for Northumberland is right on one thing: He should be cut off.

I congratulate the member for Chatham-Kent on bringing forward this initiative. We all of us are in favour of doing whatever we can to improve air quality and look for alternatives, and to encourage the agricultural community and encourage economic development in our small centres in the agricultural areas of the province. This is one of those initiatives and for that reason we support it. I just wish the government had a stronger commitment to air quality in this province.

Mrs Brenda Elliott (Guelph): I'm very pleased to rise this morning in support of my colleague's bill put forward recommending an amendment to the Environmental Protection Act. From every perspective when you look at this bill, this is one to be supported, and I'm very pleased to hear our colleagues in both the official opposition and the third party indicating that they will support this initiative.

I think Mr Carroll's constituents need to be very proud of the initiatives he has brought forward. In his riding we have commercial alcohol, ethanol producers. Interestingly enough, they don't only produce ethanol, which is an oxygenating agent; they also produce as byproducts, things like industrial alcohol, which is used for cosmetics, mash from the corn, which is used for animal feed, and the carbon dioxide used in ordinary beverages. It's a tremendous economic driver for his community should this become part of our laws in this province. The estimates are that it would double or even triple the commercial enterprises that are now under way producing ethanol.

As a former Minister of the Environment, what particularly pleases me about initiatives such as this one dealing with ethanol is that I look at it as another opportunity to enhance sustainable initiatives in this province. When I was the Minister of Energy, I was quite surprised to find bureaucrats in the Ministry of Energy at the time counselling me not to support the Minister of Agriculture when he was bringing forth initiatives to support ethanol development in Chatham-Kent. The reason, as I recall, although I don't have my notes from the time, was that increased use of alcohol would actually increase nitrous oxide and could in fact enhance smog.

I looked at it from a totally different point of view, I guess, perhaps from my own philosophical perspective about how environmental issues should be treated. I learned, from a very early time, that there's no environmental issue that's black and white; they're all shades of grey. In this particular one, you clearly see a reduction, with the use of ethanol, in carbon monoxide and in benzene, but more important, to my view, you see a tremendous increase in a sustainable element of how we work and live in our province.

Energy is absolutely critical for economic development. We pride ourselves on the number of jobs being created in this province. The potential in this initiative is for even more jobs to be created. But what I see in this initiative is a very strong emphasis on sustainability. This is a product that our own farmers will grow, that will be produced locally. When you ask environmentalists what they consider to be sustainable, they look at issues like not having to transport products a great distance. I look at this as a tremendous benefit in that we have a greater opportunity to be independent in Ontario.

We're not reliant so much on foreign fuels or on the vagaries of a foreign market or of price fluctuations or, say, potential strikes or catastrophes in other jurisdictions. I see this as a very, very positive thing for Ontario and for Ontarian workers.

Someone mentioned the fact that lawnmowers are running outside. I think that's an indication of how everything we do, simple little things, when added together have an effect on the environment. From the minute we wake up in the morning and first brush our teeth, we are using something. We are all consumers. In every possible way that we can find to minimize our consumption, our effect on the planet, or to do it in a less destructive way, we are being good stewards. This initiative is to be commended because it does emphasize that, but it does not limit. It also, as he said, allows an opportunity for new technologies to be developed, new products to be developed and enhanced.

In my view, this government has a good track record. Many years ago, there was not the environmental conscience that we have now. I think that has grown and been fostered in our students right from the very beginning. They appreciate what it is that we want to cherish and they are finding new ways of doing it and are trying to act responsibly. Years ago, there was a tremendous emphasis on the Ministry of the Environment to be the leader, to be the only leader, and I think that's what has changed tremendously.

There are certainly some bad apples out there as far as environmental actions are concerned, but there are a lot of good partners. I notice very carefully when I drive from place to place what is happening in stream rehabilitation. We are seeing tremendous improvements. In my own riding we are part of the Grand River area, and I have seen tremendous cooperation among all the municipalities to undertake new initiatives that have never been thought of before to do with conservation, to do with stream rehabilitation.

Those are the kinds of things that I think we want - long-lasting partnerships, good motives emphasizing effectiveness and cooperation - and the end result will be a cleaner environment.

It is my pleasure to support this bill. I congratulate the member. I think it's excellent any way you look at it, and I believe it will be very good for Ontario's environment at the end of the day. Congratulations.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): As has been indicated, many people will be supporting the bill this morning, as I will. I see it, however, as only a component of what should be happening in Ontario. I was absolutely devastated by the desecration, as I'm going to call it for want of a better word, of the Ministry of the Environment by this government.

It's nice to see one gesture, at least, taking place which may be of some benefit to the environment. But I look at the fact that if you want to enforce environmental laws in this province, if you want to make environmental laws, if you want to inspect appropriately, you've got to have the staff, you've got to have the resources and you've got to have the budget and, in this regard, this government has totally abandoned the environment.

We have had 880 positions lost in the Ministry of the Environment. Some 36% of the staff are gone from the Ministry of the Environment as a result of the budget cuts of this government. The operating budget has been reduced by some 42% in the Ministry of the Environment. In the Ministry of Natural Resources, 2,170 jobs have disappeared; that's 43%. The budget cut is 31% in the Ministry of Natural Resources.

If you look all around, for instance at the compliance and enforcement branch - we called that the investigation and enforcement branch, the green cops, if you will - that has been cut by $15 million, or 30%. The inspection staff and budget have been greatly reduced: 141 jobs lost. Reduction in inspection and enforcement has resulted in a drop in charges against polluters: 683 charges were laid against polluters in the first 10 months of 1996 compared to 1,037 in all of 1995, a 21% reduction. Fines have dropped 57%. The Ministry of the Environment's prosecution unit has been reduced from 10 people to four people.

The number of water monitoring stations has fallen from nearly 700 to just over 200. What is happening is that there is a total abandonment of the environment by this government.

Look out today at the problem we're confronting and this government has done virtually nothing. They're sitting in the Ministry of the Environment now, because they have - they had some excellent staff. I know they've fired at least a third of them out the door. But there is an excellent program for clean air that is sitting in the Ministry of the Environment waiting to be implemented. It involves not only mobile sources but stationary sources, something which builds on the Countdown Acid Rain program, for instance, which was implemented beginning in 1985 and is now fully completed.

There are so many initiatives that can be taken dealing with, for instance, tailpipe testing, the tuning of vehicles, the assurance, that the pollution abatement equipment in vehicles - all vehicles, not just cars but the trucks and buses you see out there - is as clean as possible. This is one of the steps that has to be taken. There are so many that have to be taken, however, and you can't do it by continually cutting the budget.

We have had several initiatives taken which weaken the position of the Ministry of the Environment and the environment in this province. For instance, we have had several bills that have been passed.

Bill 20, changes to the Planning Act, severely weakens legal and policy tools to curb both the environmental and economic excesses of urban sprawl and to protect Ontario's natural heritage. My friend from Chatham-Kent knows the potential problems that urban sprawl can cause for the agricultural community and for a very important industry in our province, that being agriculture.

Bill 76, changes to the Environmental Assessment Act, ties the hands of the Environmental Assessment Board to adequately review major environmental projects. There's no requirement that major new landfill sites will be referred to the board for full environmental review.

If you pass Bill 57, changes to the Environmental Protection Act, it gives the minister sweeping powers to exempt any person, activity or thing from the Environmental Protection Act.

Environmental regulatory review: Some 40 environmental regulations are proposed to be changed or scrapped under your so-called responsive environmental protection paper. Proposals include allowing blood to be dumped into municipal sewer systems.

When I look at the record of the Ministry of the Environment, I just wish several other members of the Legislature would have brought forward other bills to compensate for the absolute destruction of the Ministry of the Environment by this government.

I know this pleases a certain segment out there, the people who want to pollute, the people who don't want to spend the money on appropriate staff in their operations or on the training of that staff on the equipment.

There are two groups who oppose the desecration of the Ministry of the Environment, the dismantling of that ministry. One group is the general population who have to accept the consequences of poor environmental policy and regulation and legislation. We're facing that today, all over Ontario but particularly in the major urban centres where the smog is just hanging over these communities and great health problems are there.

Second, it's the good business people, the responsible people out there who have spent the time, have spent the money, who have purchased the equipment, who have put staff on guard and who have trained that staff. They are the people who are annoyed when they see others within the business community get away with breaking these laws.

You're going to find a lot of support among those top-notch, good corporate citizens. But what happens? You're catering to those who want to break the laws of this province.

While I am happy to see this bill come forward, it's only one little piece and this government has a lot to do. A lot of it has to do with attitude. I know they like to say: "We want people to be cooperative. We want to gain their cooperation. We don't want to prosecute.

We don't want to pass tough laws." The tougher the laws and the tougher those laws are enforced, the better it is for our province, for the health of all the people in this province, and the animals and the plant life, but second, the better it is for those good corporate citizens who have invested the money, the time and the employees, who have changed their equipment, who have avoided purveying pollution in this province. They are the ones who want to see these positive environmental changes.

Mr E.J. Douglas Rollins (Quinte): I want to rise today in support of the member for Chatham-Kent on his endeavour to bring this bill in. I think it's the foresight we need to see as a government, and as a backbencher, to have him bring this forward.

One of the things that is nice is that we're replacing some of the crude oil qualities that we are wasting and using. If we can cut that down by a few percentage points, such as 10 percentage points - I know the oil companies may not be as enthused about this bill as some of the other people in our environment who are concerned with it. But Sunoco has taken the bullet and led off by taking basically all the ethanol that's produced in Ontario. They are using it now. They're doing very well.

One of the things, as a mechanic and a service station operator, is that I know some mechanics say that if a car has been using ethanol there's a problem with it, but I think mechanics have been very ill-informed as far as the formulation of fuel is concerned and what it has done as far as the internal combustion engine is concerned, because ethanol injected does not destroy any parts or pieces of it.

Some of the information we have in front of us here: North Dakota, New Mexico, Idaho, those states, banded together and said, "We'll reward anybody with $100 if you will come forth with any engine to show us any deterioration or if it's caused because of use of ethanol in your engine. Where there's any destruction whatsoever, we will pay you." So far they have not paid out one penny towards that $100.

Chrysler Corp is one of the first to develop and test vehicles that will use the multi-fuel reformer developed by Arthur D. Little. It was funded by the USDOE and the DCCA. The reformer was originally designed to use ethanol fuel.

The state of Illinois is testing and demonstrating four of the first 15 pre-production E-85 FFV Ford Windstar minivans. These vans use the same 3.0-litre V6 FFV engine used in the E-85 FFV Ford Taurus model. These are the same kind of vehicles we see on the road every day, and those people are finding no problems with the use of those vehicles.

I know that the Ford Motor Co Ranger pickup, equipped with the 3.0-litre V6 engine, will be a flexible fuel vehicle capable of operating on E-85 fuel, gasoline, or a mixture of these fuels.

These people in these companies have had the foresight to see what ethanol and the oxygen-producing ingredient can add to our environment and make it just a little safer place.

We could go on longer, but I would like to share my time, so congratulations to the member again.

Mr Ted Chudleigh (Halton North): It gives me great pleasure to stand in the House today and support the member for Chatham-Kent's private member's bill in the time available to me.

I've heard a number of comments concerning agricultural production techniques in Ontario, and the run-off and conversations like that, and I wonder sometimes how intimately knowledgeable the members of the opposition are about production techniques in Ontario.

Much of Ontario's corn and soya bean production, which accounts for over 50% of the acreage in Ontario that is under cultivation, some nine million acres in total, is now done under what is referred to as a GPS system, a global positioning satellite. The harvesters, the fertilizers and the planters are all equipped with this mechanism that will give a position in the field of within one foot. So when the crop is being harvested it is monitored and the harvest throughout that field is known exactly as to what it is.

The next year, when fertilizing takes place, that same computer-based knowledge distributes the fertilizer in that field in exactly the position it is required to be in in order to maximize that yield.

Farming today cannot withstand the losses that would be involved with run-off or other wasted materials, such as the opposition have referred to. Agriculture today has entered the very high-tech business and is among the forefront of the farming community in the world, and we produce crops that are without equal. These crops, when put to good use in producing ethanol, will put a floor price under this product. I congratulate the member for Chatham-Kent for bringing in this bill.

The Acting Speaker: The member for Chatham-Kent, you have two minutes.

Mr Carroll: I want to first of all thank all my colleagues on both sides of the House who stood in support of this initiative. I appreciate their support.

I hadn't quite expected that my bill would be a lightning rod for the opposition like it was, but I guess this place being as it is, it was that.

I would like to make a comment about the tailpipe emission issue. The province and the federal government set standards and I believe that is their role. As citizens, we have an obligation, and the obligation we have as citizens is to maintain our vehicles in running order. We know when we don't get tune-ups, and we know that when we don't get tune-ups we cause our vehicles to issue more pollutants.

If the government has to be the big policeman all the time to come along and tell us when we're doing wrong, then how much can we expect the environment to be protected if it's only protected when the government is a watchdog? I encourage all the people who drive cars - they understand that manufacturers suggest what maintenance schedules are required. People understand that and they should be responsible for looking after those issues on their own.

What we have before us today is a bill that I believe represents a win-win-win situation. It represents a win for the environment, it represents a win for the agricultural community because it provides an additional market for some products that we can grow, and it represents an enormous win for job creation. Also, it allows some time for those who are out there to develop some new, innovative products to produce cleaner gasoline so that the environment we will be handing on to our children and to our grandchildren at some point in time is better than it is today and as good as we can possibly make it.

I appreciate the opportunity to present my bill today.

The Acting Speaker: The time allotted for the first ballot item has expired.

ONTARIO AGRICULTURE WEEK ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LA SEMAINE DE L'AGRICULTURE EN ONTARIO

Mr Bert Johnson moved the following bill:

Bill 37,

An Act to designate a week of recognition for Ontario's Farmers / Projet de loi 137, Loi désignant une semaine de reconnaissance envers les agriculteurs de l'Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): Pursuant to standing order 95(c)(i), the honourable member has 10 minutes for his presentation.

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth): It's indeed a pleasure for me to move second reading of Bill 37,

An Act to designate a week of recognition for Ontario's farmers.

If passed, this bill will provide special recognition for the contribution of Ontario's farmers to our society by proclaiming a week, commencing on the Monday immediately before Thanksgiving Day in each year, as Ontario Agriculture Week.

The act would set aside a time in which all citizens of Ontario can acknowledge, reflect on and celebrate the hard work of Ontario farmers, farm families and agricultural workers. These are the people and communities who provide us with the food we eat and with many of the products we use in our daily lives, which unfortunately we too often take for granted.

Thanksgiving Day and the week leading up to it is ideally suited, I believe, for paying tribute to Ontario's agriculture industry and celebrating its achievements on our behalf.

Throughout the year the hard work, dedication and expertise of farm families of Ontario ensure that safe, fresh, quality food and other agricultural products are available to everyone. At Thanksgiving the harvest is nearing completion and we can see the full bounty of what Ontario has to offer the world.

This bill is a result of much consultation and deliberation. In the gallery today are many of those leaders and individuals who provided input and ideas, and I'd like to thank them for coming to this second reading debate today - of particular interest, Mr Ed Segsworth, the president of the OFA, and Jon Dreise from the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario.

Today we are part of a global economy with a faster pace of life. Technology is advancing in quantum leaps, and yet nothing can replace the contribution of the farmer. There's nobody in the world who does farming and food production better than the farmers of Ontario.

Over a century ago, when this country was formed, nearly 90% of Canadians were engaged in agriculture. These days the percentages have decreased, but the facts surrounding our agrifood industry speak for its importance. There are more than 67,000 farms in Ontario where each farmer produces enough food to feed 120 people. More than 200 commodities are produced in Ontario, including fruits, vegetables, livestock, dairy products, poultry, grains, honey and oil seeds. Ontario is number one in Canada in total farm cash receipts, totalling $6.9 billion.

Ontario's agrifood industry is extremely diverse and includes a great number of people who would not define themselves as farmers. This bill celebrates their many contributions to Ontario, as they deserve special recognition and grateful acknowledgement by this province.

This is reflected in the fact that the agrifood industry contributes more than $25 billion to the provincial economy each year and employs over 640,000 people. Every $1 million of output from agriculture and related services generates 31 jobs. That's more jobs per dollar of output than any other industry. In 1997, we shipped $5.6 billion in agrifood products around the world, an increase of 167% in just the last 10 years.

The agrifood industry is in fact the second-largest industry in Ontario, and as the farmers of Ontario like to say, "If you eat, you're involved in agriculture."

The purpose of this legislation is not to provide an exhaustive list of those who can participate. Instead, it will give everyone involved in agriculture an opportunity to show their pride in what they do to provide for the people of Ontario and others around the world.

How many people do you know who, when asked where milk comes from, would say, "The fridge"? How many others are unaware of the tremendous process behind the production of foodstuffs they buy on a regular basis at their local supermarket? One of the purposes of Ontario Agriculture Week will be to correct the stereotypes and the myths about our agriculture industry that are both inaccurate and outdated.

Ontario's agriculture industry today is more complex and diverse than it was even 10 years ago. The industry is involved in all facets of research. It is on the crest of the latest breaking technologies and advancements in scientific fields. As an example, the farmers in Perth and other places use the global positioning system, GPS, to plant, fertilize and harvest their crops.

Our agriculture industry is leading and we as citizens of Ontario are benefiting in terms of jobs, investment and excellent products that we should be very proud of. These quality products are some of the best ambassadors wherever they appear in the international market. One of the goals of this bill is in fact to increase public awareness of this living agricultural legacy which belongs to all of us and should make us extremely proud as farmers, as agricultural workers and as Ontarians.

I know I'm speaking for everyone in the Legislature when I say that we understand the tremendous contributions that the farmers of Ontario make to the economy and the overall economic wellbeing of the province. We know that farmers, food manufacturers and rural residents share a lot of the attributes that will continue to put Ontario on the leading edge. The independence, good sense, innovation and foresight shown by the agricultural community in Ontario are keys to unlocking a future of prosperity, economic growth and job creation. As the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, the Honourable Noble Villeneuve, says, when Ontario's agrifood sector prospers, all Ontarians benefit.

The creation of Ontario Agriculture Week provides an opportunity for everyone in Ontario to celebrate the contributions of Ontario's agricultural communities and farm families. More importantly, it gives all of us an opportunity to give thanks for the hard work of those unsung heroes who provide us with the safe, sumptuous food we eat and many of the products we use in our daily lives.

After Harry Truman was elected to the presidency of the United States, someone went to his mother and said, "You must be very proud of your son." To this she replied: "I am, but I have another son who is just as fine. He's right outside plowing the fields."

I was born in Moorefield, Ontario, and raised on a farm. The hard work and dedication of my parents when raising our family was truly an example of what makes the farmers of Ontario great. My mother was a 4-H leader, secretary for many years of the Drayton Fall Fair board, farm correspondent and a leader of the Women's Institute, Farm Safety and the horticultural society. A special thanks to my father, Frank, who is 95 years old and a member of the Farmers Club, Farm Forum after we got a radio, Co-operators Insurance, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture and is still a member of the Drayton Co-op.

Today I'm pleased and proud and humbled to be the representative of the riding of Perth. Close to 13% of the people in my riding are directly involved in agriculture and related service industries. When you compare that with the provincial average of 2.43%, you can see that Perth county truly represents an agricultural force in the province.

There are over 2,800 farms in county Perth and each of the hard-working people of my riding plant more than 427,000 acres of crops. In total, these farm families generate more than $430 million in gross receipts.

I'd like to congratulate the farmers of Perth county and many other farmers across the province who are driving agriculture, the economic engine of Ontario, forward into the 21st century.

This proposed time of celebration in recognition of the farmers of Ontario is about more than the many individuals who are working to provide for us today; it's about the future as well.

As a one-time member of the Maryborough 4-H and the Wellington County Junior Farmers, I know the value of these programs and would like to congratulate all of the people of the province who participate in these worthwhile endeavours, particularly their leaders. The strong values and work ethic taught have always been a part of what makes Ontario great.

I look forward to the debate today and hope to have the support of all members of the Legislature. I see this as an opportunity to build momentum, ensuring that the hard work and dedication of Ontario's farmers is recognized and appreciated.

Ontario's agrifood sector is getting stronger, and a strong agrifood sector builds prosperous rural communities. Let's start now to ensure that the future of agriculture is a true cause for celebration.

I'd like to end with a saying that is often used by a friend of agriculture, "Mankind, despite all their accomplishments, owe their existence to six inches of topsoil and the fact that it rains." Thank you, Mary. It's a simple, truthful and accurate statement.

Mr Sean G. Conway (Renfrew North): I'm pleased to join the debate on the motion sponsored by my colleague, the member for Perth. I want to take this opportunity to say that agriculture and farming are certainly important in my part of eastern Ontario. The county of Renfrew over the decades has seen very considerable agricultural activity. Rural communities like Douglas, Beachburg and Cobden, to name but three, are a vital part of the daily life, not just socially but economically, of my home district.

It is an evident fact of daily life in Renfrew county that agriculture and rural affairs are extremely important, particularly to the economic wellbeing of my county. The agricultural community in the Ottawa Valley has seen some very strong leadership. When I visit annually the agricultural Wall of Fame dinner and awards ceremony, usually held in the town of Renfrew, I'm reminded that families like the Galbraiths, the Kilbys and the Gallaghers, to name but three, have been very important in providing leadership, not just to the county but to provincial and national organizations.

At the present time, Mr Bob Dobson from the Cobden area is the president of the Ontario Cattlemen's Association. People like Ellard Powers from the Beachburg area have played a very active role in not just provincial but national associations. Mr Del O'Brien, a very well known lawyer in the city of Pembroke, has been a very strong spokesperson for agricultural issues in the province and country for many years. That farming is important, that agriculture is important in my county is evident.

I must say, in the time I have this morning, farmers in my area would want me to say that all is not well. They are concerned in places like Douglas that they've lost their bank. They are concerned in communities like Admaston and Westmeath and Ross that the resources they have come to rely on in the community, provided by ministries like agriculture and food, for example, and natural resources, are being reduced.

It is absolutely clear to farmers and rural folks in areas like Renfrew county that the front-line services they have come to expect - and they know they have paid for through their taxes, to sustain in the community - operations like the local ag office, the local MNR office, the local Ministry of Transportation office, are in fact being reduced.

We are pleased, I suppose, that they haven't shut the ag office in Renfrew entirely, but if you're a farmer in Renfrew county, you know that in recent times the actual front-line services and the people - and we are talking about people - are simply not as available as they once were.

Some of the whiz kids like to say, "Well, there's voice mail and there's the Net." Yes, those things are interesting and they're new-fangled, but if you're a farmer in Ross township or Westmeath township - and Harry Danford's been the ag rep or he's been the red meat adviser - you've come to expect those people to be available in the community. We see fewer and fewer of those people. Not to say that Harry's been our ag rep, but he knows of what I speak in that respect. He probably has been an ag rep, for all I know. Seriously, there is a real sense of loss and reduction as governments, not just provincially but federally, pull back from service delivery.

I was reading in our papers not too many weeks ago that, I guess it was 75 years ago, Ontario prepared for an election. It was at a time when Mr Drury led a farmers' government. One of the stories in the Eganville paper a couple of weeks ago said that something like 1,000 people had come out in Eganville in the summer or late spring of 1923 to greet the farmers' Premier. Both MLAs were representatives of the farmers' party then in government.

That was then, and I know it was a long time ago, but it's important for me to recall that there was a time when the farmers were so powerful in this province they could elect a government. We know there has been much urbanization and now much suburbanization to reduce the power of the farm vote.

I want to take this opportunity to observe something I said a year and a half ago when we were dealing with the latest redistribution bill: "Thanks to Mike Harris and his supporters, the farm vote in this province is being substantially reduced with the latest redistribution bill. Never in the history of the province will the farm vote count for as little as it will at the time of the next election."

I want to make it very plain that farmers who have, for a century and then some, had a very significant voice in the affairs of this province and its government will have seen their representation in the next Legislative Assembly very substantially reduced because we passed the Fewer Politicians Act. Make no mistake about it, that redistribution bill represents a substantial shift of political power away from the farm communities and into the suburban belt just around this great city in which we now find ourselves.

For the apologists of this government, when they go to the Women's Institute, when they go to the local farm dinners, I hope they're going to have an answer, because in the next election there will be 27 fewer people returned to this assembly. At the time of the next election, the farm voice in this assembly will be at an all-time low. Yes, you will say, "That is because the Mississaugas and the Pickerings and the Newmarkets have grown tremendously," and that has to be recognized, but there was absolutely nothing in our redistribution bill to recognize the special situation in which rural and northern Ontario find themselves.

As I take my seat and give some of the remaining time to my good friend from Prescott and Russell, I just want to say to the sponsor of this bill, the member for Perth, that we have managed to pass in this Parliament a redistribution bill that substantially reduces the representation and the very voice that his private member's bill properly wants to celebrate. That is a legacy of this Harris government; it is not a legacy of which we should be proud.

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): I'm very pleased to be able to speak to this bill. Let me say at the outset that I support and appreciate the symbolic gesture that is being made here and I'll be voting for this bill. But in my view, it is absolutely essential to get on the record the more important things that go beyond symbolism, the things that have happened, and are happening right now, to farmers, to the farm community, to the rural community in Ontario.

I want to hark back to what the farm community did earlier this spring. The farm community joined together, 37 farm organizations joined together, to lobby the government to reinvest in agriculture. They weren't talking about symbolism, they were talking about real reinvestment in rural Ontario, real reinvestment in agriculture, real reinvestment in the people who work and make a contribution in rural Ontario. They lobbied government members and they lobbied opposition members.

Mr Bill Murdoch (Grey-Owen Sound): Yes, that's what they were doing. Spend more money, $10 billion -

The Acting Speaker: Member for Grey-Owen Sound, would you please remain quiet.

Mr Hampton: Farm organizations put a great deal of effort into trying to talk to this government. They waited with great anticipation for the budget, hoping there would be a sign that the government was going to reinvestment in rural Ontario. They were sadly disappointed, very sadly disappointed. In fact, if I can quote Ed Segsworth, president of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture: "We know they heard our message.

We also know they chose to ignore our message." In other words, representatives of farm organizations, after speaking to individual members, after speaking to cabinet ministers, knew that the government heard the message. The government chose to ignore the message, chose not to reinvest in rural Ontario.

Then there is the issue of what's happening through all of the provincial downloading. We know that virtually every rural municipality in Ontario has lost funding for roads and highways. We know that the rural economy, the farm economy, depends on being able to move the product to market. You can't move the product to market if roads and highways and bridges in rural Ontario are beginning to deteriorate. What has the government done about reinvestment in highway infrastructure, road infrastructure, bridge infrastructure in rural Ontario?

The sad story is the government has done absolutely nothing. It has thrown all these costs on to local municipalities. It has thrown all these costs directly on to rural residents, farm residents and said: "You're on your own. If you want to move your product to market, if you want to be part of the economy, you're on on your own. You increase your property taxes. You increase user fees. You increase administrative fees, if you want to move your product to market." When you get beyond the symbolism, that's the real message that is going out in Ontario today to all of the people who are members of the farm economy, to all of those people who live in rural Ontario.

But it doesn't end there. We're facing the abandonment of many rail lines. We're facing the potential closure of a number of Ontario ports, and I wonder where this government is in terms of putting together a policy, a program to support this kind of infrastructure.

Then there's the question of the budget of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. I see reinvestment in rural Ontario, reinvestment in agriculture as a very broad issue. It takes into account transportation; it takes into account rural infrastructure. Part of that, as a subset of that, is the question of the budget of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. What is interesting is what the MPP for Nipissing had to say when he was in opposition. He said that a Conservative government would restore the budget of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. That was the message that was put out.

What have we seen in three years? Again, I want to get beyond the symbolism. What we have seen in three years, and we're living in economic boom times - this is the perspective that we have to have. We are living in times when the American economy has done better than it has ever done since the late 1960s. We are living in a time when the American economy is absorbing our agricultural exports, our truck, car and auto exports, our pulp, paper and lumber exports. The American economy is literally powering North America right now.

In the best of all economic times, what has happened to the budget of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs in the last three years? It's been cut by over $100 million. When you add it all in, that's been the cut.

I simply want to say this. Even now, in 1998-99, the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs is going to absorb a further 3.5% cut in its budget when you factor in inflation. This is all incredibly shortsighted and, frankly, it's the wrong direction. If we want to be a player in the world agriculture and food market, these long-term investments have to be made. It's not just enough to bring forward a symbolic private member's bill saying, "We celebrate agriculture in Ontario." You have to put your heart into it. There has to be some substance to it.

Finally, I too want to speak about what farmers are going to find after the next provincial election. Twenty-seven seats in this Legislature are going to disappear. Of the 27 that are going to disappear, 22 of them are from rural Ontario. What farmers are going to find, what the residents of rural Ontario are going to find after the next election is that whatever voice they have had in this Legislature is going to be very much decimated after the next election.

I would say to you, when you add all of these things up: the downloading on to rural municipalities in terms of highway infrastructure, road infrastructure, bridge infrastructure, when you add in the absolute cut to the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs' budget, when you add in the continuing cuts to the budget, when you add in the fact that there are going to be far fewer representatives from rural Ontario in the next Legislature, what it says to me is that we're living in a situation where the government of the day chooses to ignore rural Ontario, chooses to ignore the food producers, the agricultural producers in this province.

In fact, I would go so far as to say we're living in times when the government of the day chooses to take for granted people who live in rural Ontario, chooses to take for granted the agricultural producers of this province.

I support this bill. I will vote for it. But it must be said that this bill cannot cover, cannot make up for the neglect that has been shown to the people of rural Ontario and the agricultural producers of Ontario by the government of the day, and that is a shame, absolutely a shame.

My colleagues will have more to say later.

Mr Harry Danford (Hastings-Peterborough): It is my pleasure this morning to rise and speak to this bill. I will try and keep my comments to this bill because in the very short time that we have in this House for private members, I will allow time for that.

I would like to begin by congratulating the member for Perth for bringing forth what I consider is a very important initiative. I'm particularly pleased that the member has chosen to designate the week beginning with Thanksgiving Day as Agriculture Week, since I feel it is in the harvest season that we should honour the hard work and dedication of farm families in the province.

In Ontario we have a lot to thank our farmers for. From the earliest French and Loyalist settlements along the St Lawrence River, the Great Lakes, the Grand, the Thames, the Detroit River and indeed the Niagara Peninsula, farming has been the economic mainstay of hundreds of our communities. French and Loyalist farmers carved their farms out of the bush of Ontario, using the most primitive tools of agriculture: an ox, a horse, a pick, an axe and a shovel.

Working long hours in all extremes of weather and relying upon their family, their friends and neighbours for assistance, they cleared the forest at the rate of five acres per year for their homesteads. Over many generations they established the farming community in Ontario as we know it today. Indeed, many of our present-day farm families can proudly trace their roots to the early French settlers or the Loyalist migration from the United States.

As the farm community grew, so did many of the institutions of rural Ontario that are so familiar to us today, such as The Grange, the women's institutes, the 4-H clubs, as well as the towns and villages that grew to serve the early settlers' needs. Even our present political system owes its existence to the demands of the rural community for proper representation in the Legislature.

Farming has grown so that now it is the second largest industry in Ontario. The member for Perth gave us statistics to support this in his comments earlier, but I think some of those statistics are worth repeating.

We generate over $25 billion worth of economic activity and we employ over 640,000 people. In 1997 Ontario again was number one in Canada in total farm cash receipts of $6.9 billion. Even more significant, each farmer produces enough food to feed 120 people every year. I think that is very significant. What an example of productivity and efficiency in the province of Ontario.

Some 200 commodities are produced in Ontario. They include everything, and I won't go into the list. There are also 1,200 food and beverage processors that are located in Ontario, and that makes up almost half of that industry in Canada.

We all know that agriculture is more than food to eat and to be on our tables in front of us each evening. Cloth and textiles begin in the barnyard as wool and indeed in the fields as hemp. Hemp, while it's still an experimental crop, is also used to make paper and a variety of industrial products.

Flowers and ornamental plants: Certainly our greenhouse industry is thriving in Ontario. Last year, in 1997, greenhouse plants had a value of over $4 million. We've already debated corn with a previous bill that was before us here this morning. Corn is involved in ethanol fuel, but it's also involved in soap, toothpaste, paint, varnish, sparkplugs and so many other things we use every day and perhaps sometimes take for granted and really don't realize where they begin. These are only a few of the products produced by farmers in Ontario today.

Agriculture Week will give us all a chance to reflect on the debt we owe to Ontario's farmers and their forebears, to applaud their pioneering spirit and entrepreneurial zeal and to wish them even greater success in the future.

I urge all members of this House to support Bill 37 and the passage of Ontario Agriculture Week.

M. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Prescott et Russell) : C'est avec plaisir que je prends la parole sur ce projet de loi que je crois d'une très, très grande importance. Lorsque nous parlons de reconnaître une semaine pour les agriculteurs de l'Ontario, je crois que ça pourrait sensibiliser davantage ceux et celles qui ne comprennent pas le rôle important que ces agriculteurs ont à jouer dans cette province et dans ce grand pays.

Lors de la tempête de verglas, nous avons pu être sensibilisés davantage, mais j'aimerais dire au tout début que nous avons, dans ma circonscription, plus de 1250 fermiers, agriculteurs, et nous avons aussi une mise en valeur de plus d'un milliard de dollars en équipement et en infrastructure.

De plus en plus, avec les coupures ou le délestage que nous connaissons, surtout lorsque nous regardons l'annulation de la taxe agricole à laquelle nos municipalités devront faire face en 1998, que va-t-il devenir à nos agriculteurs, et aussi avec les fusions des municipalités ? Dans le passé, les municipalités n'étaient pas aussi grandes qu'aujourd'hui. Souvent, à plusieurs reprises, nous pouvions voir sur les conseils municipaux des agriculteurs qui faisaient

partie du conseil. Mais aujourd'hui, de plus en plus, ça va être très difficile pour ces agriculteurs de se joindre à un conseil municipal ou de se faire élire.

Je crois que le gouvernement doit prendre les procédures nécessaires afin de protéger l'agriculture. Lorsque je dis «les procédures nécessaires», c'est que, dorénavant, ça va être encore très difficile d'avoir des personnes qui vont siéger sur des comités d'urbanistes. Quand je dis «des comités d'urbanistes», c'est dû au fait que les municipalités auront peu de représentants du secteur de l'agriculture sur le conseil municipal. Le gouvernement devrait s'assurer qu'une municipalité dont un certain pourcentage sera évalué agricole s'assure à ce qu'un minimum de personnes faisant

partie du comité d'urbanistes proviennent du secteur agricole.

Lors de la tempête de verglas, nous avons connu des périodes très, très difficiles, que nous connaissons encore. Je regarde des fermiers et des agriculteurs de fermes laitières, comme la ferme Cayer à St-Albert, qui a dû procéder avec des réparations d'au-delà de 80 000 $ et où on attend toujours des compensations du gouvernement. Je regarde la ferme Kaisan, où on élève des chèvres ; ils ont perdu au-delà de 160 chèvres durant le verglas. On attend toujours la compensation.

Mais pour cette tempête de verglas, et je ne sais pas si le gouvernement s'en rend compte, les coûts totals qui ont été estimés vont dépasser un milliard de dollars. Ce n'est pas seulement durant le mois de janvier que nous allons reconnaître tous les problèmes auxquels nous allons être appelés à faire face dans les prochains 20 ans. C'est que déjà, cinq mois après le verglas, les agriculteurs doivent procéder à un changement de leur bétail, leurs animaux. Une vache laitière qui a dû faire face à des périodes de stress, aujourd'hui on s'en ressent.

On doit procéder avec le changement de troupeaux puisque les animaux ont attrapé ce qu'on appelle la mammite : la viande ne peut plus être utilisée pour le boucher et le lait est réduit à 25 % et même encore plus, donc, des montants d'argent que nos agriculteurs vont être obligés d'aller chercher à la banque. Mais il faut se rappeler que depuis la tempête de verglas, les lignes de crédits sont rendues à la limite.

Mais je vais définitivement supporter ce projet de loi. C'est que surtout, le projet de loi provient d'un membre du gouvernement qui en reconnaît l'importance. Mais je crois que durant la semaine que nous allons décider de déclarer la Semaine des agriculteurs, nous allons faire une promotion. Quand je dis «une promotion», c'est que nous devrions encourager davantage les écoles à aller rendre visite à nos fermes.

The sales in Prescott and Russell alone are over $200 million a year, of which 81% comes from the dairy farmers. Some other areas are either the cash crop, the corn - if I go down to the Sussex area, it could be corn.

But once again I say this is a very, very important bill.

Je crois que nous allons pouvoir sensibiliser les Ontariens et Ontariennes, Canadiens et Canadiennes, en déclarant une semaine reconnaissant le rôle important que jouent nos agriculteurs dans notre vie quotidienne.

Encore une fois, je crois que, dans tout comité où nous affectons le développement, on devrait toujours consulter les agriculteurs, les personnes qui se connaissent dans le développement de l'agriculture.

I look at the disaster relief committee that was formed for the ice storm, and I just wonder if we think of having a representative of the agricultural community on that committee. At the present time, if we had done that, the farmers wouldn't be waiting like they are today to get compensation.

Once again, I will support the bill, and I congratulate the member for Perth.

M. Gilles Bisson (Cochrane-Sud) : Je ne vais prendre qu'un couple de minutes parce que je sais que mon collègue d'Algoma aimerait parler sur ce projet de loi, car pour lui c'est une question très importante.

Je veux dire premièrement que j'appuie le projet de loi du député. Je pense que c'est important. Je suis d'accord que la communauté agricole est très importante à la survie de l'Ontario pour beaucoup de raisons ; premièrement, parce que c'est eux qui sont responsables de s'assurer que la nourriture est produite pour nous, les consommateurs, finalement, les personnes qui ont besoin de manger. Sans ça, on a de grands problèmes. Il y en a qui mangent moins que d'autres, comme on le sait tous.

Deuxièmement, c'est une industrie très importante pour l'économie de l'Ontario. Je pense qu'il faut le souligner. Donc, je vais le supporter.

Je veux aussi dire je ne vais pas avoir la chance de rester pour le vote, mais je veux être sur le record en disant que je voterais pour. Je suis engagé à partir à midi cet après-midi, mais autrement je veux dire que oui, j'y donne mon support.

J'aimerais faire un autre commentaire en ce qui concerne le ministre de l'Agriculture. Le ministre, M. Villeneuve, a trouvé le temps de venir ici à l'Assemblée pour parler contre un projet de loi qui donnerait des protections aux francophones, un projet de loi que j'avais présenté, le projet de loi 17. Je trouve ça bien intéressant, qu'il est venu ici parler contre les francophones, mais il n'a pas eu assez de temps pour venir ici parler pour la communauté agricole. Je me demande : quelles sont ses priorités ?

À part ça, j'aimerais donner mes félicitations au député. Qu'on aille en avant avec ce projet de loi.

Mr Toby Barrett (Norfolk): To go back to the original intent of the member for Perth, the week leading up to Thanksgiving is ideally suited to pay tribute to our farmers. This bill proposes to create an agriculture week in the fall, a time when many local communities are already hosting their harvest and fall festivals. In my riding of Norfolk, ag week would parallel the Norfolk County Fair and Horse Show.

Overall, this creation of Ontario Agriculture Week would allow us to celebrate the heritage and the prosperous future of farming. We all know that farming is not easy, but as my aunt would say, it's good for the soul. We always seem to be equal part joy and struggle. Weeds, diseases, hail, drought and insects, the forces of nature, are constantly at odds with our farmers.

Farming has also been described as "the good life," but it takes more business skill, more technical and scientific knowledge and more patience than either God or government usually allows.

Agriculture, with a history of up to 10,000 years, has no single or simple origin. At different times and in numerous places, many plants and animals have been domesticated. One constant, however, is the plough. It's deemed the most important agricultural implement since the beginning of history. It's used to turn back and break up soil, bury crop residues and, of course, help control weeds.

I wish to quote a statement from W.A. Young, chaplain of the Ontario Agricultural College, in 1957:

"The pathway of the progress of mankind has been marked by the furrow of the plow. Not only is the plow the basic instrument of agriculture, it is the symbol of civilization.... Agriculture and civilization have come a long way together since our ancestors scratched the soil with a crooked stick. Godspeed the plow."

The horse collar was another very important invention in the history of agriculture. Apparently invented in China, the rigid, padded horse collar allowed the animal to exert its full strength, enabling it to do heavier work such as plowing and hauling.

Of the many changes that took place during the European period in agricultural history, few were more important than the Norfolk four system. Established in Norfolk county, England, before the end of the 17th century, this system was the standard practice on most British farms for the following 100 years. Wheat was grown in the first year, followed by turnips, then barley, with clover and rye undersown, in the third. The clover and rye were grazed or cut for feed in the fourth year. The turnips either fed cattle in open yards during the winter or were used to feed sheep. These crops eaten by livestock produced large supplies of previously scarce and quite valuable animal manure.

In more recent years farmers have been forced to make changes to address world surpluses and low commodity prices. Farmers have therefore increased their productivity by adopting new technologies. The effect is an increase in farm size and a reduction in the number of farmers. The farm operated by a single family, however, remains the dominant model in most of the world. As we enter the 21st century, we should recognize that only at the beginning of the 20th century did farming become a way of making a living as opposed to being a way of life.

In the 1929 issue of the Norfolk Agricultural Journal the Honourable John S. Martin, local MPP and Minister of Agriculture of the day - John was born in Cheapside in my riding - stated that no county had better prospects for the future than Norfolk, citing the rapid growth of area tobacco farming - the first tobacco crop was grown in our area in 1911 - and apple production with its attendant marketing organization. But he went on to say:

"While Norfolk is a county of specialties, it is, on the whole, a well balanced county.... Apart from its natural resources, Norfolk has a splendid asset in the spirit of the people. The enterprise and the readiness to cooperate on the part of the people of both town and country has been one of the big factors in our progress."

Farming in my riding of Norfolk has always been diversified. This 1929 issue describes the age-old menace to sheep production from dogs, although the author, T.B. Barrett, chairman of the sheep committee, states, "There are not nearly so many sheep-killing dogs in the county as there are chicken-stealing men." Chicken thieves - and I do not wish to reflect on anyone's family here.

I am proud to be part of the plan to initiate Ontario Agriculture Week. I believe this is a fitting tribute to those who work our land, raise our livestock and produce our food. I think Jimmy Allan, former MPP for Haldimand-Norfolk, a Dunnville lad, said it best when he stated, "Some skill in almost any trade can be acquired in a few months - learning to be a farmer takes a lifetime."

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): I rise to support the bill put forward by the member for Perth and to congratulate him, although I ask, just as a matter of interest in passing, why he chose to make this a bill rather than a resolution, since the bill is almost all

preamble with "whereases" rather than anything substantive. But to recognize the contributions of farmers by designating a week after Thanksgiving is supportable and symbolic, as my leader indicated. I would say, though, that we should be ensuring that the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs understands that there should be 52 weeks a year recognizing the importance of agriculture in the province rather than just one symbolic week after Thanksgiving.

Unfortunately I believe, as my leader indicated, that this government has turned its back on rural Ontario and on the farm community. I make one exception to that and recognize the contribution of the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs in responding to the request of the local federation of agriculture and myself to ensure that the ag rep's office be maintained in Algoma and be moved to the rural community. I accept that, but at the same time, as part of the overall cutbacks by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, the pasture adviser's position has been eliminated, in an area which is mainly a cattle-raising area. That doesn't make a lot of sense.

When we see $100 million cut from the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs budget, we understand what importance this government puts on agriculture. When we see that, despite the promises of the leader of the Conservative Party to restore the budget of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, this government has cut the budget more than any previous government, we understand the priority this government puts on agriculture.

With regard to the effect of this government's program of downloading on rural communities, when we see the cost of policing, ambulance, ground ambulance, public health, social services, roads, all the things that have been downloaded to the rural community, and we combine that with the changes this government made to the farm tax rebate system, all I can say is that farmers are going to see the taxes on their residence, as opposed to their farm buildings and farm lands, skyrocket because of the downloading this government has done in rural communities.

This government has given grants to rural municipalities to get them over the next provincial election, but once that election is over, property taxes are going to go sky-high.

Mrs Barbara Fisher (Bruce): If I have any time left at the end, I'll be sharing it with the member for Durham East. I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on behalf of Bill 37, proposed by my colleague from the riding of Perth, Mr Bert Johnson. Bill 37 would designate the week before Thanksgiving as Ontario Agriculture Week.

As the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs and as the member for the riding of Bruce, I certainly support this bill. It designates a week during the year to recognize and appreciate Ontario's farmers, farming families and those businesses and individuals involved in the agrifood sector.

The magnitude of the agriculture and agrifood industry in Ontario is astounding. Many Ontarians will not be aware of the major economic force this industry represents in this province. We take for granted the thousands of farms we pass as we drive through Ontario on our way to work and on our way to vacations. Agriculture does more than just put food on your table. It is also the producer of a wide variety of products, such as clothing, textiles, paper, fuels and many others.

The greenhouse industry in Ontario is also thriving. In 1997, the value of greenhouse plant production was more than $4 million. This creates year-round employment for Ontarians such as those employed by Bruce Tropical Produce, a 7.5-acre tomato greenhouse in Bruce township. Corn is produced into road de-icers, windshield washer fluid, ethanol fuel, soap, toothpaste, varnish and sparkplugs, just to name a few. Commercial alcohol in the riding of Bruce is a contributor to all of these, and this ties in very well with this morning's previous bill by Jack Carroll, Bill 34.

The figures and statistics related to the agriculture and agrifood industry are impressive and serve to remind us of the valuable contribution the agriculture sector makes to Ontario's economy. But let us not forget those who make this possible. Farmers and farming families are some of the most hardworking and dedicated workers in Ontario. The land is their heritage. The family farm is not just a job to go to on a daily basis, it is a way of life and has been for hundreds of years. Often the family farm has been in the same family for generations.

Bruce county is well known for its strong agriculture character and heritage. I would like to take this opportunity to recognize just a few of the hardworking and dedicated farmers in Bruce county who, through their volunteerism in their associations, give back to the agricultural community.

Some of these include the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario, the Ontario francophone farmers, the Ontario Corn Producers' Association, the Dairy Farmers of Ontario, the Ontario Cattlemen's Association, the Ontario pork producers, the Fruit and Vegetable Growers' Association, the Ontario Farm Safety Association, junior farmers' and 4-H clubs, the Canola Growers' Association and many others, many of whom are here today.

The struggles faced by Ontario's farmers are more challenging than many of us deal with on a daily basis. The success of the family farm depends on a favourable economic climate, strong markets and, last but not least, good weather. One ice storm, one hailstorm, one drought or one rainy season can make or break a farmer for an entire year or perhaps forever.

Ontario Agriculture Week is one way of expressing appreciation to Ontario's farmers. The food and other agricultural products upon which we depend are due to the hard work, skill and dedication of Ontario's farmers, their communities and their families.

We must also not forget our rural youth. Young people brought up in a farming family have extraordinary talents and skills which they acquire at a very young age and will use throughout their lives. The work ethic is developed early in these young people, who, as part of a farming family, are expected to contribute their share to the overall success of the farm, and they do it well. Employers lucky enough to hire these people for any type of job are usually well satisfied.

I would therefore encourage my colleagues in this Legislature to support this bill. I thank and commend my colleague from Perth, Bert Johnson, for bringing the bill forward. Ontario Agriculture Week will provide an opportunity for Ontarians to celebrate the contribution made by Ontario farmers to the quality of life enjoyed by all Ontarians and to appreciate the significant impact the agrifood industry has on the economy of this province.

The Acting Speaker: Member for Perth, you have two minutes.

Mr Johnson: Ontario's agriculture industry has always been and continues to be an important part of the province's economy. Farming in Ontario dates back to before the time that the first Lieutenant Governor, the Honourable John Graves Simcoe, had the land in Upper Canada surveyed for the purpose of establishing farming homesteads for the early Loyalist settlers.

The food and other agricultural products that sustain our lives are the result of the skill, hard work and dedication of Ontario's farming communities and farm families. It is important to recognize and acknowledge this ongoing contribution by Ontario farmers to the quality of life of all our citizens.

Thanksgiving Day is the annual day on which Ontarians express thanks for the bounties of the harvest. It is appropriate at that time to celebrate and acknowledge gratefully the contribution of Ontario's farm families in providing Ontarians with the food they eat and agricultural products during the fall and throughout the year.

In closing, I would like to thank the members of the House who have taken the time to speak to the bill today, the members for Renfrew North, Rainy River, Hastings-Peterborough, Prescott-Russell, Cochrane South, Norfolk, Algoma and Bruce. We all recognize, from parades, Big Bruce, who's trucked down nearly every small-town Main Street in Ontario.

I'd also ask all the members present to recognize the historic importance of agriculture in Ontario by supporting this bill. Ontario would not be the same without the contributions of Ontario farmers and farm communities. Let's start now to plan the celebrations for this fall. I look forward to your support later on.

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LA PROTECTION DE L'ENVIRONNEMENT

The Acting Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): We will deal first with ballot item number 19, standing in the name of Mr Carroll.

Mr Carroll has moved second reading of Bill 34,

An Act to amend the Environmental Protection Act.

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

Mr Jack Carroll (Chatham-Kent): I'd like to request that the bill be referred to the standing committee on resources development.

The Acting Speaker: Agreed? Agreed.

ONTARIO AGRICULTURE WEEK ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LA SEMAINE DE L'AGRICULTURE EN ONTARIO

The Acting Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): We will now deal with ballot item number 20, standing in the name of Mr Bert Johnson.

Mr Johnson has moved second reading of Bill 37,

An Act to designate a week of recognition for Ontario's Farmers.

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

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth): Mr Speaker, I ask for unanimous consent that my bill, Bill 37, be ordered for third reading forthwith.

The Acting Speaker: Is it agreed? I heard a no. The bill will automatically go to committee of the whole.

All matters related to private members' public business having expired, I will now leave the chair. The House will resume at 1:30.

The House recessed from 1201 to 1330.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

WOMEN'S COLLEGE HOSPITAL

Ms Annamarie Castrilli (Downsview): Today the government seeks second and third reading of a bill that would see the amalgamation of Sunnybrook Hospital and Women's College Hospital.

While I congratulate the many friends of Women's College Hospital who have fought long and hard to protect women's health, I say to you that this is not a happy day. I have said before that this government's programs have been a relentless attack on women. This legislation will now weaken its commitment to women's health.

Women's College Hospital came into being because women doctors needed a place to practise, because women wanted to be treated by women doctors and because research on women's health was inadequate. Much has changed since it came into being, but there's still much that needs to change in the area of women's health.

That is why a strong and independent Women's College Hospital is critical. Women's College Hospital is more than just a building. Its reputation is world-class. Its leadership in the area of women's health and research into women's health is undisputed both nationally and internationally. It is the only hospital in the western hemisphere designated as a World Health Organization collaborating centre in women's health. Only the Harris government fails to see the importance of this institution. This bill proves their myopia.

The bill before the Legislature this afternoon represents a valiant effort by all those who care about women's health. I and others in my caucus applaud them for their extraordinary efforts in a difficult situation, but let me be clear: I can't support this bill, because they and women everywhere deserve more.

PUBLIC ACCOUNTING LICENCES

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): Certified general accountants have been asking successive provincial governments to modernize the Public Accountancy Act for some 30 years now. They are looking to the government to provide true competition among accountants with different designations and increase consumer choice in the selection of accountants by removing the monopoly that exists in licensed public accounting.

A revitalized Public Accountants Council should focus more directly on the qualifications and competence of applicants for licences and accommodate different accounting designations under the act while still protecting the public. In Ontario, certified general accountants are recognized by statute as professional accountants. We're not talking about an unrecognized profession.

We believe that certified general accountants recognize that this government didn't create this problem but that it can demonstrate leadership by bringing change. They are willing to negotiate with other professional associations to develop a new licensing system. The Attorney General needs to announce that the monopoly in licensed public accounting must end, an announcement which would initiate a process by which the Certified General Accountants Association of Ontario, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario and the Society of Management Accountants of Ontario could meet and develop joint standards and procedures for licensing.

The Attorney General should tell the Legislature what plans the government has to modernize and amend the Public Accountancy Act to ensure that all qualified professional accountants - recognized by statute - with sufficient experience and knowledge are permitted to access public accounting licences.

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr W. Leo Jordan (Lanark-Renfrew): Last week I had the honour of representing the Minister of Health to present $1 million to the Pembroke General Hospital. This money will relieve budget pressures faced by the first restructured hospital in Ontario.

The reaction by health care officials was very positive. However, we received a very unrealistic account of their financial situation from the member for Renfrew North. The member characterized operating expenditures as debt. Businesses do run lines of credit, especially on a budget of $20 million. In fact, this hospital pools resources with other public partners to secure a rate below prime.

The ministry is addressing those expenses in three ways: the $1 million I presented, a cash advance of $2.4 million, and the hospital will submit a plan for reimbursement of costs. Also, the projected budget for 1998-99 shows a $3-million wage and staffing increase.

The Ministry of Health also, as a result of its review of the conditions of long-term-care facilities, committed $14.1 million to improve long-term care at Miramachi Lodge in Pembroke and $4.2 million for Lakeview in Cobden.

I thank the Minister of Health for the honour of representing her on this important occasion.

SPECIAL OLYMPICS

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): It's with great pleasure that I rise today to announce to the House the awarding of the Canadian Special Olympics National Winter Games to the city of Ottawa. I know that I speak on behalf of all the citizens of Ottawa when I state how much we look forward to welcoming the athletes, the volunteers and the spectators to this fabulous event.

The games will be in the nation's capital during the year 2000, in January. The participants will compete in figure skating, speed skating, alpine skiing, cross-country skiing, floor hockey, snowshoeing and, as a demonstration sport, curling.

As we have had the pleasure of hosting the Special Olympics previously, during the summer of 1981, we know that we shall be witness to what is in the best spirit of the games: skill, dedication and, above all, the camaraderie and fair play with which the athletes acquit themselves.

The city of Ottawa will continue the Special Olympics traditions: The events will be centred around the participants. They will be community-based. Most importantly, the Special Olympics will be driven by the many volunteers who give so freely of their time and effort and who, more than anyone else, make these games happen.

Congratulations are due to the city of Ottawa and the games committee, led by Peter Hoysted, all of whom worked diligently and successfully on the bid to host this particular event.

Ottawa will be a special place to be during the millennium year, and the Special Olympics is just one more reason. We look forward to seeing everybody in Ottawa during the winter of the year 2000.

TORONTO FIESTA

Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt): I'm really pleased today to tell members of the House and the public about a new, exciting music festival that's coming to the St Clair and Dufferin area. It's Toronto Fiesta, celebrating its first year of operation. It will be in effect July 10, 11 and 12 of this year.

Producers Lido Chilelli and Fernando Vallandares, along with the assistance of the Corso Italia business improvement association, will help this community festival grow into one of the city's most exciting events of the summer, attracting both Canadian and American tourists. Toronto Fiesta will be one of the few remaining free musical festivals and one of the leading festivals for promoting Canadian and international music talent.

A half-mile of Fiesta streetfest will be a unique attraction to the Toronto Fiesta, which will feature over 25 bands performing nightly on selected street corners, balconies and rooftops on St Clair Avenue West between Dufferin Street and Lansdowne Avenue. Over 200 performers will play a variety of musical styles, including Latin, flamenco, Italian, folklore, tango, jazz and calypso.

In addition to the music, arts and crafts exhibitors will be displaying and selling their products.

Through local cooperation, the Toronto Fiesta will support various non-profit organizations in the Corso Italia area, including the J.J. Piccininni Centre and Las Flores.

This is going to be an exciting time, and what's going to also add to this is that the finals of the World Cup of soccer also happen to be that weekend, so it's going to truly be an exciting two or three days. I invite everyone to participate.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Simcoe Centre): I rise today to state that the government's new student-focused funding formula is a good-news announcement for all the school boards in my riding. Contrary to the misguided doom-and-gloom mantra we hear from the opposition every day about spending cuts in the classroom, school closures and teacher layoffs, the four reconstituted school boards servicing my riding of Simcoe Centre will enjoy significant revenue increases in the classroom and overall.

For the first time ever, the new student funding model creates a basic universal per capita grant, no matter where they live. My riding is experiencing unprecedented growth. It is exciting that Barrie may be the fastest-growing city in Canada. While we hope this growth continues, it means that enrolment in our elementary and secondary schools is skyrocketing. The good news is that the government's new student funding formula recognizes enrolment increases with much-needed additional funding.

The new per capita student funding model is solid proof that our government is on the right track, especially for the partners in education in Simcoe Centre.

NORTHERN HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur): As the Legislature prepares to rise for the summer, I feel compelled to call on the Ministry of Health to recognize and deal with the serious problem facing our regional hospital in Thunder Bay, particularly as it relates to the number of acute care beds in our system.

While the minister and this government send out propaganda that brags about their commitment to improve health care, the reality in our hospital system turns that bragging into nothing more than a cruel joke, a joke that nobody finds very amusing.

The fact is that every day in our community, people needing a hospital bed come face to face with the fact that there is no room for them. The emergency halls are crammed with people who simply cannot be turned away, while many others needing care are directed elsewhere, sometimes to Manitoba, often to other hospitals in the north, all of which have the same space problem. Why is that? It's because the Health Services Restructuring Commission is forcing more bed cuts on our community, cuts that are simply leading to a crisis in acute care delivery.

Thunder Bay Regional Hospital is trying to get that message to you, Minister, as they have put together a proposal asking for funding for 20 temporary beds, beds that are absolutely crucial right now.

Minister, you must respond. This crisis in acute care services is not a made-up issue. It's real, and your officials know it's real. If you agree that people needing care in our hospitals should receive it, then you must recognize that your bed-cut targets are making people suffer and are truly dangerous.

Release the funds for those beds now. It's the responsibility of this government to provide quality care. Do not make people suffer any more.

PAY EQUITY

Mrs Marion Boyd (London Centre): The London and District Service Workers' Union, Local 220, is a local that is currently located in my riding. It represents nursing home workers throughout the London-Middlesex area.

These workers in these nursing homes are still awaiting pay equity. They are still waiting for the payment that is due to them for equal pay for work of equal value, as provided in law by the Pay Equity Act.

Earlier this month, they sent invoices to the minister responsible for women's issues, who they thought might be interested in championing their cause. However, they did not hear back from them.

This box contains hundreds of these invoices indicating that the payment for pay equity is overdue and billing the employer, the Ontario government, for the amounts owing, the adjustments owing.

I know that the minister responsible for women's issues must understand how important pay equity is and she should understand that many of these workers waiting for their pay equity settlement actually live in her riding and will be voters in the next election, so it is incumbent upon her to bring their plight to the attention of the Minister of Labour and to ensure that SEIU Local 220 gets its pay equity settlement as soon as possible.

WATERFRONT FESTIVAL AND FOLKLORAMA

Mr E.J. Douglas Rollins (Quinte): On this last day that the Legislature sits before the summer recess, I would like to invite each and every member of the House to attend the Belleville Waterfront Festival and Folklorama, held this summer on July 10, 11 and 12. Offering something for everybody, the Waterfront Festival and Folklorama has grown from a simple celebration of multiculturalism to one of the largest summer festivals of its type in Ontario.

Representing the various cultures and nationalities of the people who settled in the Quinte area, the ethnic pavilions offer food and entertainment from every corner of the globe. There are arts and crafts, the bathtub race and the belly-flop contest. Take the kids for a ride on the midway, see the water ski show and the fireworks. Just get there early on Friday evening to catch the parade which kicks off the weekend celebrations.

The Waterfront Festival and Folklorama has some big-name music acts too, such as Trooper, Sass Jordan, Spirit of the West, Junkhouse, Colin James and Fifty-Four Forty.

There is so much to see in the Belleville Waterfront Festival and Folklorama that it is hard to describe in the space of so little time.

The three-day celebration can be enjoyed for the price of $5 for a shore pass, and children under 13 are free. I hope to see each and every one of you some time over the summer.

VISITOR

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): I would like to inform the members of the Legislative Assembly that we have in the Speakers' gallery today Mr Chundra Bhandari, consul general for India. Please join me in welcoming him.

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): I want to take this opportunity to tell the Legislative Assembly that this is the last day for the legislative pages. I want to thank them for their hard work, diligence and good service.

Applause.

The Speaker: Another standing ovation for the pages.

LEGISLATIVE USHERS

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): I'd also like to inform the members that today is the last day in the House for many of our legislative ushers. Deon Cousins, Sherene Lindsay, Christeen Kivinen, Emma Hogbin, Mike Wood, Peter Smiechowski and Gaurav Gupta have served us with enthusiasm and efficiency and I wish them well in their future endeavours.

Members will continue to see the familiar faces of Carla Mulligan and Peter McLeod, who will be continuing in their good services to us in the fall.

With the legislative session sitting in the 6:30 to 9:30 period, I'd like to thank the ushers personally for all the hard work and good work they did while we were in session.

INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS' EXPENDITURE REPORT

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): I beg to inform the House I have today laid upon the table the individual members' expenditures for the fiscal year 1997-98.

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): Finally.

The Speaker: Finally, right.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS

Mr Toby Barrett (Norfolk): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on regulations and private bills and move its adoption.

Clerk at the Table (Mr Todd Decker): Your committee begs to report the following bill, as amended:

Bill Pr19,

An Act respecting the Municipality of Chatham-Kent.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

LAW SOCIETY AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LE BARREAU

Mr Harnick moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 53,

An Act to amend the Law Society Act / Projet de loi 53, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur le Barreau.

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

HEALTH INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR L'ASSURANCE-SANTÉ

Mr Duncan moved first reading of the following bill:

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

APPRENTICESHIP AND CERTIFICATION ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR L'APPRENTISSAGE ET LA RECONNAISSANCE PROFESSIONNELLE

Mr David Johnson moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 55,

An Act to revise the Trades Qualification and Apprenticeship Act / Projet de loi 55, Loi révisant la

Loi sur la qualification professionnelle et l'apprentissage des gens de métier.

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

Hon David Johnson (Minister of Education and Training): Mr Speaker, I will be making a few comments during ministerial statements.

GREATER TORONTO SERVICES BOARD ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 SUR LA COMMISSION DES SERVICES DU GRAND TORONTO

Mr Leach moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 56,

An Act to establish the Greater Toronto Services Board and the Greater Toronto Transit Authority and to amend the Toronto Area Transit Operating Authority Act / Projet de loi 56, Loi visant à créer la Commission des services du grand Toronto et la Régie des Transports en commun du grand Toronto et à modifier la

Loi sur la Régie des transports en commun de la région de Toronto.

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

Hon Al Leach (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I just want to let the House know that this bill will establish a Greater Toronto Services Board that will ensure service coordination across the entire GTA and that the representation model that has been developed will ensure that all municipalities have a voice at the table.

I would also like to thank Mr Alan Tonks, who did a great job in moderating the draft legislation, with all of the stakeholders, that resulted in the production of this bill.

LIQUOR LICENCE AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LES PERMIS D'ALCOOL

Mr Tsubouchi moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 57,

An Act to amend the Liquor Licence Act in respect of brew on premise facilities / Projet de loi 57, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les permis d'alcool en ce qui concerne les centres de brassage libre-service.

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

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations): I would simply like to thank two groups for assisting us in developing this legislation; first of all, Mr Don Wolan, president of the Brew on Premises Association of Ontario. The association has been very supportive of the legislation and has worked with us very closely to develop this, and I believe it will do a lot of good for the industry.

Second, I'd like to thank Frank Sheehan of the Red Tape Commission, who has certainly worked with our stakeholders and consulted with the industries out there to really ensure the viability of this industry.

ONTARIO HERITAGE AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LE PATRIMOINE DE L'ONTARIO

Mr Gilchrist moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 58,

An Act to amend the Ontario Heritage Act / Projet de loi 58, Loi visant à modifier la

Loi sur le patrimoine de l'Ontario.

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

Mr Steve Gilchrist (Scarborough East): Very briefly, this bill would give greater powers to municipalities to reflect the importance of our cultural heritag