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

October 28, 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

L051A - Wed 28 Oct 1998 / Mer 28 Oct 1998 1

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

EDUCATION FUNDING

ONTARIO NORTHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

CZECHOSLOVAKIA

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

GREEK CELEBRATIONS

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

SCHOOL CLOSURES

HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL DAY

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES AMENDMENT ACT (CHILD WELFARE REFORM), 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LES SERVICES À L'ENFANCE ET À LA FAMILLE (RÉFORME DU BIEN-ÊTRE DE L'ENFANCE)

FUEL AND GASOLINE TAX AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA LOI DE LA TAXE SUR LES CARBURANTS ET LA / LOI DE LA TAXE SUR L'ESSENCE

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES

ACQUIRED BRAIN INJURIES

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES

ACQUIRED BRAIN INJURIES

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES

ACQUIRED BRAIN INJURIES

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING

CHILDREN'S TREATMENT CENTRES

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

HOMELESSNESS

LONG-TERM CARE

TUITION FEES

VIOLENCE IN SCHOOLS

TEACHERS' WORK-TO-RULE

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

PETITIONS

MANDATORY INQUESTS

PORNOGRAPHY

PALLIATIVE CARE

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

PROPERTY TAXATION

PROTECTION FOR HEALTH CARE WORKERS

EDUCATION FUNDING

PALLIATIVE CARE

HOTEL DIEU HOSPITAL

SCHOOL CLOSURES

DENTAL CARE

OPPOSITION DAY

FIREARMS CONTROL

The House met at 1333.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex South): I wonder how many teachers' aides could have been hired in this province if this government had not spent $11.3 million on advertising what a great job it thinks it's doing with our education system in Ontario. The reason I ask this question is that a parent in Harrow, a small town in my riding, wrote the following:

"We as parents need to take more interest and pay closer attention to the staffing issues, the supervision of the playground and what our children are learning at school. We as parents need to show our support to our teachers that are dealing with all these educational changes and understaffing and overcrowding of our classrooms."

She wrote this after her son showed up home on his first day in junior kindergarten. The serious problem was that the young lad walked out the front door of the school, walked home and wasn't even missed at school.

All that the parent knows for sure is that it happened because of an understaffing issue. "Somebody in the system did not do their job," the parent writes, "but it sure isn't the teachers."

The Minister of Education and this government would blame everyone but themselves. The real culprit is a funding formula that doesn't provide adequate resources to provide the staff our schools require.

Maureen Doll, the caring mother of this 4-year-old junior kindergarten student, concludes: "I do respect these teachers and I stand behind them 100%. I know that the teachers involved in this situation are there because they genuinely care for our children and not just for the paycheque."

Don't we all wish the Minister of Education felt the same concern for our children. The Premier should stop sacrificing the future of our province, stop wasting taxpayers' money on wasteful and useless advertisements and fund what is really important -

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you. Statements.

ONTARIO NORTHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

Mr Len Wood (Cochrane North): Yesterday my colleague Gilles Bisson and I raised with the Minister of Northern Development and Mines the fact that the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission will be cutting bus services between Hearst, Cochrane and Timmins.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist nor one of those highly paid spin doctors in the Premier's office to know that these cuts will hurt real people: seniors travelling back and forth from Timmins to Hearst for doctors' appointments; college and university students going home for the weekend; people with disabilities; people who cannot afford to own their own car.

The Minister of Northern Development does not understand this. He's got a chauffeur-driven limo to take him anywhere, but you and I know that there are a lot of people in Hearst, Timmins, Cochrane and Kapuskasing who have no access to a vehicle, let alone a chauffeur.

The minister also throws up his hands in resignation and says that the provincial government has nothing to do with it, that the ONTC has an independent board and a president. However, this government never takes responsibility for anything. They always want to blame somebody else. When you strip away $10 million from the ONTC, then walk away and say you have nothing to do with service cuts, it is a complete insult to the intelligence of the people of Cochrane North.

We need a Minister of Northern Development and Mines to speak out on behalf of northerners, to make sure that our interests and concerns are heard at the cabinet table. When the minister continually says that it is not his responsibility, I say that it is time we get rid of this minister and elect an NDP government.

CZECHOSLOVAKIA

Mr Steve Gilchrist (Scarborough East): On October 28, 1918, exactly 80 years ago today, a new nation was born on the European continent. As the Austro-Hungarian Empire disintegrated in the last days of World War I, the Czechoslovak Republic declared its independence.

For the people of the Czech lands of Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia, as well as Slovakia and Ruthenia, this event was a long time in coming. Under the leadership of a university professor, philosopher and politician named Tomas Masaryk, who was named the first president, the Czech and Slovak people succeeded in their struggle for independence from the empire.

The Czechoslovak Republic had a reputation for tolerance and accommodation. Minority groups, including Germans, Poles and Hungarians, were treated well. Between the First and Second World Wars, Czechoslovakia was one of the few genuine parliamentary democracies in Europe.

In World War II, parts of the republic were seized by neighbouring countries and the remainder was occupied by Germany some six months before the invasion of Poland.

Freed from German control, the Czechoslovak Republic regained nominal independence after the war, but only as part of the Soviet bloc. For four more decades, the brave people of this country were subjected to the oppressive control of a foreign power. Who can forget the brutal invasion by Soviet tanks in 1968 and the crushing of attempts to bring democracy back to the Czechs and Slovaks?

Nine years ago this winter, freedom from Communism was obtained, finally and bloodlessly. Playwright and dissident Vaclav Havel became president of the republic.

To my Czech friends, I congratulate you on the 80th anniversary of an independence that was won, then lost, and is now renewed for all time.

At zije Ceska Republika.

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mr Pat Hoy (Essex-Kent): I have been waiting since October 13 for a decision from the Minister of Health for Donald Letourneau. He needs neupogen to help him battle aggressive lung cancer.

Yesterday, in desperation, Linda Letourneau approached the Premier in London, where Donald is receiving chemotherapy today. Mike Harris would not look her in the eye or allow her to speak. She was circled and removed by staff so that she would not interrupt the government's "good news" tour. That tour is part of a $7.6-million health care advertising campaign to try and convince the public that our health care system is not lying in tatters. How can you be so callous as to ignore Donald Letourneau?

Last night on the CTV news neupogen was hailed as a miracle drug. CTV's Dale Goldhawk fought back against the government and won. After many refusals, the Ontario drug benefit plan is now paying for neupogen for his case.

How can you refuse Donald Letourneau? Mike Harris has spent $42 million on propaganda in two years. This is an insult to all who are suffering needlessly.

Linda faxed the Premier today, and I quote: "My beloved, frail husband lies in hospital battling a lung infection. I implore you, Mr Harris, as a fellow Canadian and human being, to reconsider neupogen."

Show some courage, Premier. Meet with Linda and tell her why you refuse to pay.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Ms Shelley Martel (Sudbury East): Yesterday the Harris government was told once again that it is breaking its own forest and environmental protection laws.

The Ontario Court of Appeal upheld a decision by the Divisional Court that logging plans approved by the Ministry of Natural Resources for the Temagami, Elk Lake and Upper Spanish forests violated provincial laws. The laws in question include the Crown Forest Sustainability Act, the Environmental Assessment Act and conditions of the class environmental assessment on timber management. The court has again ordered the MNR to fix the plans in one year's time. Logging will continue during that time.

But the court has also ordered the Harris government to pay all of the costs incurred by the environmental groups that brought the case forward. This clearly shows the court was very unhappy with this government's misuse of taxpayers' dollars and court time to try and justify breaking the law.

The money squandered by the Minister of Natural Resources should have been used to do the forest planning work properly in the first place. But this government is more interested in trying to dodge the law than it is in properly managing our forests.

The bigger issue now is how the MNR will amend these three logging plans and the dozens and dozens of others, prepared in 1996 and after, that are no doubt in violation of the laws too. Given that this government has laid off half its MNR staff, just who will do the work needed to bring logging plans into compliance?

It's clear this government has no regard for the health of our forests or the communities that depend on them. This government -

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you.

GREEK CELEBRATIONS

Mr Jim Brown (Scarborough West): Today Ontarians of Greek ancestry, and Greeks worldwide, observe Ochi Day. "Ochi" is Greek for "no." It was on October 28, 1940, that Greece said ochi to Mussolini's Fascist forces after his invasion from Albania. Greece said ochi because it would not give in to yet another invader and what that invader stood for.

The price that Greece paid for its ochi was as high as it was heroic. Today, all those Greek soldiers who died defending the land of Plato, Socrates, Aristotle and Alexander the Great are remembered and mourned by Greeks and by Canadians.

Greek culture and civilization form the foundation of our western culture, language and institutions. Our parliamentary tradition, which we observe even now in this House, and the very ideals of democracy which we are all entrusted to cherish and protect, are all descended from the genius of ancient Greece.

This is why Ontario and Canada share in the victory of the ochi of 1940. This is why we also participate in the mourning of those Greek soldiers, those modern Spartans who died in defence of the richness which is the glorious spirit of eternal Ellas, or Greece.

Long live Ellas.

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur): Today the people of Thunder Bay are graced with the presence of Mike Harris and Elizabeth Witmer as they engage in a campaign-style whistle-stop tour of the province.

While one is always pleased to get the attention of our government leaders, I can't help but be cynical about this gesture by the Premier, particularly as he launches another outrageous multi-million dollar advertising campaign - money that would be much better spent reversing the health care cuts in my community and northwestern Ontario.

If the Premier has any intentions of making this trip to the north anything more than a public relations exercise, I now call on him to include the following list in his announcements today: that he will cancel the upcoming cut of 15 beds to our acute care hospital; that he will provide for the long-term and chronic care beds that we need to at least put a dent in our unbelievably long waiting lists; that he will provide the often-promised $4 million to recruit specialists to our region; that he will provide the services and the beds we need in our psychiatric hospital so that people needing care are not thrown in jail instead; and that he rehires nurses laid off as a result of the cuts to our hospitals and allows our nurse practitioners access to long-promised funding.

This is a list that could go on and on. People in my part of the province are fed up with a government that makes announcements but doesn't release the funds, a government that has been responsible for an unconscionable decline in our health care standards, and a government that is more willing to spend millions of dollars on political propaganda than in caring for the people of this province.

SCHOOL CLOSURES

Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt): This morning at about 11 o'clock, I attended with my colleague from Fort York, Rosario Marchese, at the office of the Minister of Education with a group of parents from St Peter catholic school who wanted to deliver 500-plus letters signed by parents in that community objecting to the potential closure of that school.

We were dismayed to find out that under the new security rules that are being imposed in that minister's office, and I assume in other ministers' offices, had it not been for the intervention of ourselves as MPPs, only one parent would have been allowed to go up to the office to simply deliver those letters.

What I want to raise to the members' attention today is that this government is not only shutting down many of our schools but it is now continuing to put in place measures that will shut down any access to ministers that parents and the media and anyone else wants, to simply, as in this case, lodge with them the very strong disappointment, the very strong objections they have to the potential closure of that school.

I just could not believe that things have gotten so far in the Mike Harris world that ministers are afraid to actually allow parents up to the offices to be able to deliver mail. I just hope that is something the government takes into account and changes its position on.

HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL DAY

Mr Ted Chudleigh (Halton North): I rise today to correct some misinformation regarding my private member's Bill 66, which would create a Holocaust Memorial Day in Ontario. Given the sensitive nature of this issue and the support received from all members of this House, I am deeply disappointed in the political games being played by the Liberal member for Downsview.

The bill now rests with the standing committee on social development. The member for Downsview, who is Chair of the standing committee on social development, issued a press release yesterday accusing the government of stalling Bill 66. This could not be further from the truth.

The government is prepared to discuss Bill 66 and all other bills on that order paper. In fact, as Chair of the committee on social development, the member for Downsview controls the committee agenda. Bill 66,

An Act to proclaim Holocaust Memorial Day...in Ontario, has not yet reached her committee's agenda. In fact, the member for Downsview, who is accusing the government members of dodging committee meetings, scheduled a meeting of the committee yesterday afternoon and did not have the decency to show up. Bill 66 was not on that agenda.

How can the government be stalling when the Chair of the committeedoes not

schedule a bill for discussion or bother to show up for the meeting? This action by the member for Downsview is political gamesmanship at its worst.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

Mr Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on administration of justice and move its adoption.

Clerk at the Table (Ms Lisa Freedman): Your committee begs to report the following bill, as amended:

Bill 25,

An Act to reduce red tape by amending or repealing certain Acts and by enacting two new Acts / Projet de loi 25, Loi visant à réduire les formalités administratives en modifiant ou abrogeant certaines lois et en édictant deux nouvelles lois.

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

Pursuant to the order of the House dated Tuesday June 23, 1998, the bill is ordered for third reading.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): I beg to inform the House that today the Clerk received the 10th report of the standing committee on government agencies. Pursuant to standing order 105(g)(9), the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES AMENDMENT ACT (CHILD WELFARE REFORM), 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA

LOI SUR LES SERVICES À L'ENFANCE ET À LA FAMILLE (RÉFORME DU BIEN-ÊTRE DE L'ENFANCE)

Mrs Ecker moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 73,

An Act to amend the Child and Family Services Act in order to better promote the best interests, protection and well being of children / Projet de loi 73, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les services à l'enfance et à la famille afin de mieux promouvoir l'intérêt véritable de l'enfant, sa protection et son bien-être.

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

FUEL AND GASOLINE TAX AMENDMENT ACT, 1998 / LOI DE 1998 MODIFIANT LA LOI DE LA TAXE SUR LES CARBURANTS ET LA / LOI DE LA TAXE SUR L'ESSENCE

Mr Hodgson moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 74,

An Act to amend the Fuel Tax Act and the Gasoline Tax Act / Projet de loi 74, Loi modifiant la Loi de la taxe sur les carburants et la Loi de la taxe sur l'essence.

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

Hon Chris Hodgson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Minister of Northern Development and Mines): The Fuel and Gasoline Tax Amendment Act delivers on commitments made in the 1997 and 1998 budgets to make fuel and gasoline tax rules fairer and more efficient. The bill will cut red tape by removing the barriers to marketing special products such as diesel and heating fuel refined from waste oil. It will also make the tax system fairer by improving the objections and appeals process.

Mr Speaker, the gasoline and fuel industry, as you and the rest of the members in the province know, keeps the Ontario economy moving. The Fuel and Gasoline Tax Amendment Act would make the tax system fairer for this important industry.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Community and Social Services): I rise today to introduce the Child and Family Services Amendment Act (Child Welfare Reform), 1998.

If passed, these changes will provide new rules to better protect children at risk of abuse and neglect. This means stronger tools for the courts, for professionals and for front-line workers to do their jobs.

These are the first major changes to child protection legislation in 10 years. The Child and Family Services Amendment Act is part of the government's comprehensive reform initiatives to improve Ontario's child protection system.

We know from the inquests into the deaths of children and from the report of the Ontario Child Mortality Task Force that children have been falling through the cracks. The purpose of today's amendments is to make it clear that our child protection legislation puts the best interests of the child first.

We have listened carefully to the advice we have received. Today's amendments are based on the following: 400 recommendations from six inquests into the deaths of children involved with children's aid societies in this province; 16 proposals for improvements to child protection from the Ontario Child Mortality Task Force report; recommendations from an expert panel of individuals involved in child protection and led by Judge Mary Jane Hatton; and extensive consultations with the child protection sector.

The proposed amendments focus on those areas most critical to protecting children better. I'd like to explain how.

First, the proposed amendments make it clear that the paramount purpose of the act is to promote the best interests, protection and well-being of children.

Second, the proposed amendments expand the grounds for finding a child in need of protection. They do this by reducing the threshold for the risk of harm so that children are protected earlier, by explicitly including neglect in the grounds for protection, and by lowering the threshold for emotional harm and the risk of emotional harm.

Third, the bill would encourage more and earlier reporting of suspected abuse and neglect of children. Current reporting requirements for the public and professionals are confusing. The proposed amendments would clarify when any individual should report that a child is or may be in need of protection. There would continue to be a penalty for professionals who fail to report, but the penalty would be expanded to include failure to report on a broader range of circumstances.

The fourth priority which is addressed in the bill is the need to improve "permanency planning" for children who are in the care of a children's aid society. The proposed amendments would encourage earlier and more decisive planning for children by reducing the length of time that a young child could be in a society's temporary care.

The fifth objective of the amendment is to ensure that children's aid societies can better access the information they need to fulfill their mandate of protection. Court processes would be streamlined and the grounds for obtaining information would be expanded.

Sixth, the amendments would permit evidence of a parent's or caregiver's past conduct towards any child, not just a child in the person's care, and that it be used in all child protection court proceedings.

Finally, this bill would require a review of the Child and Family Services Act at least every five years.

I would like to thank all the individuals involved in child protection who provided their advice and assistance in preparing these amendments. The members of the expert panel were particularly generous in the time they devoted to assisting my ministry staff, who also deserve recognition for their hard work. Special thanks is also due to the young people who were themselves taken into care and who offered their unique insights into the strengths and the weaknesses of the system.

As important as these proposed amendments are to strengthening child protection laws in Ontario, they are only part of the solution, the solution that is needed to fix the problems facing the system. Improving child protection outcomes also requires common tools for risk assessment, effective information systems, up-to-date staff training and resources for front-line workers.

Our step-by-step approach to child protection reform is addressing all of these issues. The common risk assessment system that we mandated for all societies last year is now in effect across the province, helping protection workers make better judgments about when a child is at risk. We are developing standards for how agencies handle cases of abuse and neglect, and the ministry will monitor them against those standards.

We have completed design work on a new information technology system that will link all children's aid societies together so that front-line workers can track high-risk families wherever they move and alert the system to past CAS involvement. The new database system will be in operation by spring.

Last year, we invested an additional $15 million in children's aid societies and we hired 220 additional front-line workers to support work on the new database and to improve staff training. Additional resources will be spent this year, next year and the year after that to hire more workers, to revitalize the foster care system and to improve staff training. In total, an additional $170 million will be invested to improve the system. We will also be introducing a new approach to funding children's aid societies that is equitable and better reflects workload and service needs.

These ongoing investments and improvements, combined with the amendments I have introduced today, would significantly strengthen our ability to protect vulnerable children in Ontario. They would provide children's aid societies and their workers with the tools and resources they need to ensure that the best interests, protection and well-being of children are always paramount, that protecting vulnerable children is their prime concern, first, last and always.

ACQUIRED BRAIN INJURIES

Hon Cameron Jackson (Minister of Long-Term Care, minister responsible for seniors): Today I am reporting back to this Legislature on a very important and moving meeting I attended yesterday with the Premier, the Minister of Health and the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. We met with Shawn Gallagher, Irene Meggitt and Guy Dane, people whose lives have been changed for the better because of this government's health care policies.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Order. Members, you'll get a chance to respond and I think that's when you should probably take your opportunity, please. Minister.

Hon Mr Jackson: We met at the Dale Brain Injury Services in London. The work of Dale Brain Injury Services and the way those services are expanding, is a clear and compelling example of the new philosophy that is guiding the evolution of Ontario's health services and, I might add, of our community-based continuing care services in particular. Dale is one of several agencies that responded to a very important challenge that was issued first in December 1995 by my colleague the Honourable Jim Wilson as Minister of Health.

Fulfilling a pre-election commitment from our Premier, he made a significant announcement that by the end of March 1999 we would repatriate all Ontarians who were receiving acquired brain injury services in the United States of America. As you well know, in the past, these Ontarians were classified as serious brain injury cases and were then sent away to facilities outside of our province and, in particular, outside of our country. Under the Mike Harris government, people with brain injuries are no longer being sent to the US.

Responding to our challenge, groups like Dale have sprung up across the province to provide these specialized services, groups like the Association for Persons with Physical Disabilities of Windsor and Essex County and Brain Injury Community Re-Entry in St Catharines, both of which I have visited, and Brain Injury Services of Hamilton, the Anagram Acquired Brain Injury Society in Niagara-on-the-Lake and the Mississauga, Toronto, and Thunder Bay programs.

Since announcing our plan, we've brought 55 of these Ontario women and men home to their families and to their communities and to participate in world-class ABI programs right here in our province. Today, our plan is on track and we are bringing the remaining 21 Ontarians home so that they will be here on time by March 1999.

Yesterday, we issued a request for proposals for more organizations to expand to provide places for these people with the opportunity for daily contact with their families, their friends and their communities. By March of next year, every single one of these special Ontarians will be back home.

At this time, I would like to thank my colleague the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs for her work on behalf of Dale and its participants, and the member for Wentworth North, who has been an outstanding defender of Ontarians who are receiving these programs outside of Canada.

Acquired brain injury participants reflect our commitment to expanding access to the whole range of continuing care services that are provided in the communities, like supportive housing, Meals on Wheels, Alzheimer's programs and, of course, the visiting nurses, physiotherapy and homemaking services provided by community care access centres across Ontario. Funding for these programs has increased by 40% in the last three years to levels in excess of $1.2 billion, and it is health care restructuring that has made this possible.

Expanded access to continuing care is a result of our efforts to reform health services. We knew when we began the process of health care reform that we were walking into a political lion's den. But we also knew that if we were successful, in addition to providing world-class hospital and clinical care, we would build a health services system that would provide appropriate care for every individual and deliver that care as close as possible to the individual's home.

We are providing care that is appropriate to the individual, care as close as possible to the individual's own home, friends, family and their community, and that principle applies whether the appropriate service is acute care provided in a hospital, visiting nursing services provided in a person's own home or the kind of ongoing continuing care that Dale provides.

The people I met yesterday were perfect examples, being repatriated from as far away as Pennsylvania, Indiana and Texas, not to mention one individual who was participating in our program from northern Ontario, but moved to London to be closer to his parents.

You know, as we celebrate the joy of these reunions, it is possible to lose sight of the obvious health benefits. Across Ontario, ABI participants are making tremendous progress that did not seem possible under the programs they were receiving in the United States. In part, it is a result of being closer to home. As well, the staff at our ABI centres must take credit for developing programs that are making a real difference in the lives of these Ontarians.

It is one more reminder of the strength of our health care system. As Cathy McNally, whose daughter was in San Marcos, Texas, summed it up much better than I could:

"When Irene joined Dale services she required lots of supports in all areas. After just one full year of full-time support, Irene has moved on to independent living in her own apartment, still with help and guidance on housekeeping. Irene knows she can call staff in any emergency 24 hours a day.

"I can't tell you what a relief it is to her dad and I to know that she is so happy in her new life and we know it only takes us two hours to see her instead of three days driving."

One participant's parents said they were proud of their health care system once again.

We're working very hard to build a health system in which people have names and families and friends, and a community that cares about them and respects them is restored in Ontario.

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor-Sandwich): We're pleased to see amendments come forward to the child protection act in Ontario. We have been asking for this since this government took office, and three and a half years later we see amendments that we don't know went far enough. We know that a window of opportunity for young people 16, 17 and 18 years old has been lost, because we don't believe that age group has been included in these changes, against the wishes of every group that has ever given consultation to this government.

I want this minister to walk the talk, and that means go to Management Board and, with $90 million that was announced in last spring's budget, ask for one cent of that $90 million to flow to 50 children's aid societies, because not one cent has been spent, and that was in last spring's budget. Some 50 children's aid societies have $100 million in contingency funds they require and that still has not come through the Management Board. I want the minister to walk the talk.

When you bring new risk-assessment tools to Ontario, it means more children in care. That means more services required. That means that children's mental health agencies need the support of the government to help the child protection workers intervene. That means the child protection workers need help to do their job.

When we see that last spring's budget hasn't resulted in one new cent of the $90 million that was announced, what does that say if we're bringing in new laws, because they don't have the resources to implement new laws?

We insist that this minister walk the talk. Don't come in here with kind words about amendments required when those same children's aids can't do the job today because today they don't have resources because this minister cannot get the announcement from a budget through Management Board and down to the children's aids where they need it.

There's $100 million in contingency funding that you have not paid from last year, never mind the new $90 million that was announced in last spring's budget; of the $100 million they're waiting for and $90 million announced in the budget, not one red cent. But I notice that this minister in particular is very adept at spending taxpayers' money on government propaganda ads.

ACQUIRED BRAIN INJURIES

Mr Gerard Kennedy (York South): We hear the minister of part of health care talk to us about a philosophy of this government. We've seen this philosophy in action today, and it's publicity over health care every single time.

Yesterday we had this minister carrying the briefcase for the Premier, who's cutting cake in London while the Hotel Dieu Hospital in St Catharines is being shut down. We have the audacity of a minister responsible for home care turning away patients all across the province and trotting out an announcement from 1995. Minister, you should be ashamed that announcement hasn't been completed by now.

In fact, when this minister talks to us about recognizing the names of the people who have been harmed by this government, we want to bring forward some names. We want to talk about Mr Ed Whitehill, who died in an emergency room hallway in Peterborough, who was not able to get the care he needed because this government has yanked $870 million out of hospitals.

We want to talk about Mrs Kaneshakumar, who died en route from Scarborough to Hamilton waiting to get a critical care bed, while nowhere in Toronto, the largest centre in the province, was such a bed available.

We want to talk to you about Shelley Lynn Penny, who is a brain injury victim in Thunder Bay and whose father, Miles Penny, has driven himself into the ground with anxiety trying to get basic services for his daughter, along with hundreds of patients around this province who are facing an infrastructure of health care that has been weakened and diluted.

Minister, to see you participate in London and to see the member from London defend the fact that you have taken out of London - $47 million more was cut out of London last year than has been brought back in. You rely on public relations and try and hide behind a three-year-old announcement that should have been enacted by now. You hide behind, quite frankly, the families of people who are desperate and anxious to have their very sick family members repatriated to this province. You hide behind public relations when what people really want and expect and have a right to demand is proper health care in this province and ministers who talk straight to them about it.

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES

Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-Woodbine): Certainly this response to the recommendations of the child mortality task force and the expert panel review has been expected, and I'm pleased to see the government bring forward legislation. I'd like to add my words of thanks to the people involved in the task force and the panel review for the hard work they have done.

I look forward to examining these amendments, Minister, to see if they address the true problems. I'm particularly interested in the area of the proposed amendments expanding the grounds for finding a child in need of protection. You will know that there have been many debates over the years about the balance to be struck between institutionalization and the supports that are needed to families to provide good parenting.

Minister, all the legislative changes in the world are not going to mean a thing when we look at your cuts to front-line services. You stood there and said there are 200 more staff. If you look at your cuts over the last three years, there are 455 net fewer permanent positions in children's aid front-line workers protecting our kids. You announced again today, with great foofaraw, your risk assessment model. In Ottawa-Carleton, where they are testing that model, the pilot project shows that while it may be a good model, it's taking six hours more per case to do it, and they will need 95% more staff to be able to implement that.

Minister, while caseloads are growing because of your cuts to social assistance, to health care, to education supports, more kids are being put at risk, more kids are in need of care and there are fewer staff to do it. So legislative change may be good, and we look forward to working with it, but put some money where your mouth is and really do something to protect the kids of this province.

ACQUIRED BRAIN INJURIES

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): I want to respond to the minister responsible for long-term care and I want to put into his announcement what he left out.

I also have visited the Dale Brain Injury Centre in London. When I was there, the staff and the executive director met me and they said, "We want to thank the NDP government for helping us to create and fund this centre." What you left out of your announcement is that the first patient who was brought home to Ontario suffering from acquired brain injury was in 1992, when Frances Lankin was the Minister of Health.

What you left out of your announcement was that the whole direction of bringing home patients who suffer from acquired brain injuries was begun under Frances Lankin and Ruth Grier, NDP ministers of health. You are trying to take credit for a program that was created and funded by the NDP government. Why didn't you put that in your announcement?

Speaker, I'll tell you why he didn't put it in his announcement: because this government doesn't have anything else it can take credit for in the health care field.

As we have seen over the last month or so, they announced $225 million to deal with the problem in emergency services. Nothing happened until we here in this Legislature exposed you and embarrassed you for doing nothing.

Then you announced $36 million to recruit and retain physicians in rural and northern Ontario in communities that are underserviced: $36 million, and what has happened? Nothing. It was a phony, empty announcement by your government.

Then there was $5 million to recruit nurse practitioners into communities that are underserviced. What has happened to the $5 million? Nothing. Another phony, empty announcement.

Then there was $60 million for mental health services. Dr Tyrone Turner goes on CBC Radio two days ago to point out that a year after you made the announcement, only $20 million of that has made its way into mental health services; $40 million your government refuses to find.

The reason this government is here trying to take credit for a program that was created and funded by the NDP government is because it's desperately seeking some way to avoid being identified as a government that issues phony, empty health care announcements.

At the end of the day, what it comes down to is this: This government has absolutely no problem finding $6 billion to finance its income tax scheme, an income tax scheme that at the end of the day is only going to benefit the wealthiest people in this province. But when it comes to mental health services, when it comes to emergency room services, when it comes to underserviced areas, this government -

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you.

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question, in the absence of the Premier and the Deputy Premier, is to the Chair of Management Board.

Last night, Ontarians were subjected to the latest in an extensive series of taxpayer-funded, self-serving Conservative Party propaganda pieces. Let me repeat that: taxpayer-funded, self-serving Conservative Party propaganda.

You've decided to waste four million taxpayer dollars on television ads that are designed specifically to cover up the fact that Mike Harris has broken his promise not to close Ontario hospitals. To call these ads an obscene waste of taxpayers' money is an understatement. To call them a scandalous misappropriation of taxpayers' money would be more appropriate.

Tell me, Minister, why didn't Mike Harris just steal the $4 million from taxpayers and put it directly into his campaign? Wouldn't that be the more honest thing to do?

Hon Chris Hodgson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Minister of Northern Development and Mines): This government, as the Leader of the Opposition is well aware, is making a lot of difficult decisions that had failed to be addressed in this province for over 10 years, and in particular in the health care field. The public has a right to be informed and a right to know. This government has a responsibility to inform the public. Overall, that's what government advertising does.

You can compare past government spending on advertising with our government spending on advertising. I think you will find they are comparable. Previous governments have done huge campaigns on programs such as Smile Ontario, which didn't eliminate one bit of fraud in the health care system, didn't improve the system.

Your government neglected to make the tough decisions to reform this health care system. All the experts talked about the need for it to be done. There's also a need to make sure the public is reassured about that and understands the direction that we're going.

Mr McGuinty: There is not a single educational aspect to that propaganda that you're showing on TV in Ontario. It is blatant, pure, unadulterated partisan propaganda. You are bringing this to new heights in Ontario.

Let's put this into some perspective here. You're going to spend more money in the next three weeks on advertising than any political party is allowed to spend during an entire election campaign. During the entire last provincial election campaign, your party spent $1.7 million on ads. During the next three weeks you're going to spend four million taxpayer dollars on propaganda.

It's an abuse of power. You know it, I know it, the people in this House know it, and everybody in Ontario knows it. When are you going to stop spending taxpayers' dollars? When are you going to send the bill to your party so they'll pick up the tab for this propaganda?

The province is going through some major changes. The health care field in particular is a sensitive issue for a lot of people. Government has the responsibility to inform people of the changes that are taking place, of the need for change and how it's going to be managed. This government has had the courage to address what people unanimously have said in the health care field, that there need to be reforms, that there need to be changes.

Mr McGuinty: It's very interesting how this minister, how this government is willing to have everyone else pay the price of protecting the public purse. They didn't hesitate to fire nurses, they didn't hesitate to fire teachers, you're not hesitating to fire civil servants, but when it comes to saving your own skin, hanging on to your own jobs, suddenly the sky is the limit.

What you are doing is unprecedented. Your current $4-million spending spree is just the latest. It comes on top of millions spent on education propaganda. It comes on top of millions spent on wasted welfare propaganda. It comes on top of millions wasted on business propaganda. In total so far, and it's early going yet, early days yet, you have wasted over $42 million worth of taxpayers' money in a desperate attempt to save your own skins. Minister, why should taxpayers be involved in this plot to fund your re-election campaign?

Hon Mr Hodgson: In his

preamble he talked about laying off nurses. I want to remind this House of the record of his party. They shut down 10,000 beds - those are front-line nursing jobs - but you didn't have the courage to reform the system and move it from acute to something more appropriate for an aging population. I'm not underestimating that this is a huge structural change, but it's one that's long overdue and should have been addressed almost a generation ago, and this government is taking steps to do it.

I think everyone in this House would agree that governments have a responsibility to communicate change. They also encourage communication from elected officials, and I would encourage the leader of the Liberal Party to communicate his priorities and his policies around health care.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): New question. Leader of the official opposition.

Mr McGuinty: Same minister, same topic. Minister, you're wasting $42 million of taxpayer dollars on PC Party propaganda. It doesn't matter how you slice it and how you dice it, that's what it's all about.

Let's understand what this would have meant in terms of health care dollars for patients: $42 million would have allowed you to hire almost 1,000 new nurses; $42 million would have allowed you to wipe out the entire deficit of the Ottawa Hospital, which right now stands at $41 million; $42 million would have allowed you to pay for your share of 40 MRIs desperately needed by communities right across this province; $42 million would have allowed you to pay for your full-year funding commitment to attract doctors to underserviced areas in communities right across the province.

How can you justify wasting taxpayer dollars that ought to be devoted to health care and putting them into your campaign to re-elect Mike Harris?

Hon Mr Hodgson: If he wants to compare our advertising record to his advertising record when his party was in power, I'm glad to do that. All governments advertise. Your government in the late 1980s and early 1990s, in two years spent $94 million - in those dollars in those years.

Governments advertise. We know that. There's nothing that I think is more important than communicating to the public about major changes that are taking place. If you want to have an honest debate about health care policy, I'd invite you to do that and tell us what the Liberal position is on health care reform and the need for this change.

Mr McGuinty: Let's understand what $42 million could have done for public education in Ontario. First of all, $42 million could have bought three million new spelling books that are desperately needed by Ontario children. It could have kept 161 schools open - 161 of the 600 that you have chosen to close. It could have been used to hire 840 new teachers to help keep class sizes down and to help our students get more assistance with their education. Finally, what it could have done, $42 million, is allow 24,096 adults to go back to school to an adult day program.

You tell me, Minister, where do you get off, where do you get the nerve to use education-paid taxpayer dollars that ought to be dedicated to education to plow into your bid to re-elect yourselves and Mike Harris's government?

Hon Mr Hodgson: The Leader of the Opposition I think would agree that they were changes that were necessary for Ontario, although publicly he states he's against every change that's proposed. What is your policy on this?

As well as that, for government advertising there is a role that we believe should be informing the public. There are major changes taking place; they should be informed of that. All governments have advertised. Our budget will compare with your government. In fact, these changes are well overdue and necessary.

Mr McGuinty: The minister likes to talk about changes that are necessary in Ontario. I can tell you, the only change that is necessary in this province is a change of government.

What you are doing with the taxpayers' $42 million is wrong and you know it, and you're not going to get away with it. If Bob Rae had wasted this much money, the Taxfighter would have been swinging from these chandeliers, and you know it. Tinpot dictators would blush at your use and abuse of taxpayer dollars for self-serving propaganda. What you're doing is scandalous and an obscenity. You are diverting money away that ought to be devoted to our patients and our students, and you're plowing that into a bid to re-elect your government.

Tell me once again, Minister, how you can possibly justify taking precious taxpayer dollars that ought to be spent on our patients and ought to be spent on our students to improve health care and to improve education, and what you're doing instead is sticking them into a fund to re-elect Mike Harris.

Hon Mr Hodgson: The Leader of the Opposition just wants to talk political rhetoric. He doesn't have any policies on anything, but he thinks the only change we need is a change in parties. That's what the public finds so cynical about your position.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Minister.

Hon Mr Hodgson: If you want to look at the facts around this issue, I think everyone recognizes there needs to be change and that we have to do it and do it well. This government has taken the tough decisions to bring about that necessary change on behalf of the taxpayers and the public in this province.

If you want to compare our record with the Liberal record, I'd be glad to do that. If you want to take a two-year period, you were spending $94 million on government-paid advertising. That's just in two years. Over the 10-year period, between the NDP and the Liberal governments you closed 10,000 hospital beds. That equates to 35 mid-sized hospitals. But you didn't reduce the bricks and mortar, the administration or find efficiencies and reinvest those dollars -

The Speaker: New question, leader of the third party.

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): In the absence of the Premier and the Deputy Premier and the Minister of Health, I feel I should address this question to the Minister of Long-Term Care. It is about your latest television propaganda. My question is very simple. Doesn't it bother you to make such an outrageous comparison, such a misleading comparison between the chaos that you've created in the health care system and the picture of a child removing a Band-Aid from their leg?

Doesn't it bother you to suggest that the people who died before they could be treated in Peterborough, before they could be treated in Wawa, before they could be treated in Scarborough - doesn't it bother you that you had nothing for those people who died? You had no time for them, no money for them, but you've got $4 million to spend on useless, disgusting television propaganda? Doesn't that bother you?

Hon Cameron Jackson (Minister of Long-Term Care, minister responsible for seniors): The member opposite knows full well, and in his earlier statements in this House he even made reference to the fact that he'd been touring around this province offering all sorts of commentary about his vision for health care in this province.

We know for a record of five years with your government just exactly what you accomplished. You have a very extensive record of closing hospital beds but not confronting the real issues or the fact that these half-empty hospitals still required expensive administration. You laid off all those nurses. People who required those beds, the longest waiting lists in this province, predominantly for cancer care and for cardiac care and dialysis - where was your commitment to ensure that some tough decisions were made and we expanded the expenditures in health care?

This government is very proud of the fact that it has been able to expand considerably the amount of funding for health care in this province to over $18.7 billion, a record for this province, a commitment we're prepared to make -

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Supplementary.

Mr Hampton: Minister, I hate to have to give you some history over and over again, but Cancer Care Ontario was started under an NDP government, the whole strategy around dialysis was started under the NDP government, the whole Cardiac Care Network was started under the NDP government. This is about your government spending millions of dollars on useless, disgusting, partisan, political propaganda while patients wait in hospitals and some of them die. That's what it's about.

Just the $4 million that you're spending on your latest television propaganda about health care could hire, full-time, 100 badly needed nurses. Those are the choices you're making. You lay off nurses, you refuse to hire the nurses who are needed, Yet you put $4 million into this disgusting television propaganda. I ask you again, doesn't that bother you? Doesn't it bother you that people are suffering and you're taking money out of health care to finance this disgusting television propaganda campaign?

Hon Mr Jackson: The member opposite is now trying to take credit for all the things that were started in this province. Even by his own admission earlier, he says he was at the program at Dale Brain Injury Services. Yesterday I paid tribute to the NDP government for beginning the services. What I said was that they started something that the Liberal government refused to do. Under the Liberals, under David Peterson's regime, over 200 acquired brain injury families were sent to the United States.

I have to tell you, leader of the third party, that if you were that anxious to go to Dale Brain Injury Services in the last little while to talk to those residents, did you look those residents in the face and tell them why you left 76 of them stranded in the United States when you were the government?

Not this government. We're bringing every single one of them back to this province. We're doing it because we're restructuring health care and we have the courage to do it.

Mr Hampton: I think I have struck a nerve here. The question is, how do you justify spending this money -

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop the clock. Leader of the third party.

Mr Hampton: As I started to say, I think I've struck a nerve. I've asked the minister twice now to justify the spending of $4 million on these outrageous propaganda ads, and we haven't received an answer from him yet.

Minister, if we go back just to September 1 - first to your education propaganda, now your health care propaganda and then your welfare propaganda that people are receiving in the mail - it's $10 million in less than two months. That's $10 million wasted on propaganda.

As I pointed out, adding it all together, it's at least 200 full-time nurses; adding it all together, it's close to 300 classroom teachers.

Once again, how do you justify closing schools, shutting down programs, laying off nurses, underfunding emergency rooms, underfunding mental health services, underfunding underserviced areas, while you spend this money on awful, terrible, ugly partisan political propaganda?

Hon Mr Jackson: I want to advise the leader of the third party that as he and members of his caucus run around the province trying to tell everybody how poor things are, whether it's in health care or any other aspect of life in this province, he should be reminded that this government has made a courageous commitment to expand health services, to make decisions your government and the previous NDP government didn't make.

Before everybody gets too sanctimonious in this legislative chamber about advertising, I want to remind the member opposite that I sat on that side of the House. I remember a very famous Smile Ontario program, where $10 million -

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Mr Jackson: Let's be clear: Government advertising wasn't begun in the last five months, five years or the last 50 years. But I want to remind the leader of the third party, as he smiles into the camera today on TV, that he reminds everyone of the Smile Ontario program of his former government, which spent $10 million. The Jobs Ontario program spent more money on advertising than it did on one single recipient in this province to help them find a job. We will be held accountable for restructuring health care in Ontario in spite of the false and misleading comments that people are making about that restructuring in this province.

CHILDREN'S TREATMENT CENTRES

Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-Woodbine): My question is to the Minister of Long-Term Care. I'm going to read to you from an October 5 letter from you to MPP Jim Flaherty about Grandview children's centre:

"As you know, I met with members of PACK" - that's the Grandview parents - "on August 24th."

Your letter goes to some considerable lengths to refute or explain away many of the parents' concerns. Minister, did you even listen to those parents at that meeting?

Hon Cameron Jackson (Minister of Long-Term Care, minister responsible for seniors): I want to confirm for the member opposite that I have consulted with people who were in attendance at that meeting, both ministry of long-term-care staff and my colleague the Minister of Community and Social Services, the member mentioned in the correspondence, and the concerns that have been expressed by those parents are well known to me. However, I believe the correspondence was in reference to the contract that was already sent and approved by the community care access centre in Durham for some of those services which they were providing.

Ms Lankin: No, Minister. In your letter, you said you met with the parents. Let me quote from the chair of the parents' group in her letter to you:

"You state in your letter that you met with members of PACK.... But, Mr Jackson, you were not there. You have never set foot in Grandview, nor have you ever met with any parents from PACK."

It's clear that you signed the letter. It's equally clear that you didn't read it, because that's not the only misstatement of fact in this letter. You also suggest that the review of the role of children's treatment centres is underway. You may be mistaken there because you listened to your colleague the Minister of Health, who said to me on June 18 in this House: "The review is underway.... This review is getting underway and we hope to complete it as quickly as possible." Another phony health care announcement. Five months later, the review hasn't started and you haven't even announced the terms of reference.

Kids and families are going without desperately needed services while you have continued the freeze on their budgets, while you await a review that you haven't even started and that's not likely to get started until January, and while your colleagues toss around this review like a political hot potato. Will you lift the freeze, Minister?

Hon Mr Jackson: First of all, I believe the member is struggling under a misapprehension about who is undertaking the review. I would be pleased to refer her next supplementary to the minister who is responsible for the review. I'm not responsible for the review. It's the Minister of Community and Social Services.

Ms Lankin: The freeze has been in place for over five years now, over three and a half of those years under your government. That freeze started under the NDP government for two years; three and a half years you've kept it in place. You're keeping them waiting out there for this phantom review which hasn't begun, which has been tossed from the Minister of Health to the minister responsible for children's issues to the minister responsible for community services, and the children's treatment centres are under your care, Minister.

The kids, the families, aren't getting the services they need. In Durham alone, the fastest growing population, biggest percentage of kids, an increase - 900 referrals last year. They're not getting the services. You brag about them discharging people from Grandview; 150 of the kids who have been discharged simply get no services.

Minister, please, I'm asking you, under your watch and your ministry, will you at least review lifting the freeze and giving an interim budget infusion while the review takes place? For the sake of the kids and the sake of the families, will you at least look at that?

Hon Mr Jackson: I indicated to refer the question to the minister responsible for the review, the Minister of Community and Social Services.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Minister.

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Community and Social Services): I would like to remind the honourable member that many of the services that these families receive come not only from long-term care; they also come from health and from the Ministry of Community and Social Services. All of the ministries have been working on this review of special-needs children. That review is underway. We will be meeting with parents to discuss the contents of that.

I would also like to remind the honourable member that, yes, there has been a freeze on these institutions because we need to review how best to serve the needs of those families. We have a number of reform initiatives underway to help support those families in a better way. They have special-needs children. That's why we have our reform underway in children's services in community and social services. That's why the Durham MPPs have met with these parents many times. That's why we are undertaking this review, so that we can serve the needs of those families much better than they are currently getting.

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): To the Chair of Management Board: Whenever my colleagues and I have asked questions about the future and status of local hospitals, the Premier and the Minister of Health have stated that these decisions were solely in the hands of the Health Services Restructuring Commission, or, as I call it, the hospital destruction commission. They have insisted that the commission is arm's length from the government, completely objective and totally autonomous, and that their decisions are final.

Today in Thunder Bay, as part of the political road show of Mike Harris paid for by the taxpayers of this province, and with an election just around the corner, Mike Harris ripped up the recommendations of the commission and announced a new and changed political solution for the hospitals in Thunder Bay.

Since we have exposed the fact that the commission is neither arm's length nor objective, and most certainly that its decisions are not final, may I assume that the Premier will elbow aside his commission and save the Hotel Dieu Hospital in St Catharines from the commission's swinging axe?

Hon Chris Hodgson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Minister of Northern Development and Mines): Maybe the member of the Liberal Party is not aware of the facts around this. The health care restructuring commission changed its direction; it's based on their direction that the announcements were made yesterday. I can send him over the advertising around it or the press releases. That's more of a need for information to go to the public.

The people of Thunder Bay should be congratulated on working through this process that's going to improve their health care services for the next millennium, and the health care restructuring commission should be congratulated on the work that they have carried out in that community.

Mr Bradley: All this time, while you have closed or forced to merge 42 hospitals in this province despite Mike Harris's assurance - and I quote it to you again; this is Mike Harris saying, "Certainly I can guarantee you it is not my plan to close hospitals" - the Premier and the health minister have pretended that the hospital restructuring was not to be a political exercise. Yet the finance minister, Ernie Eves, in his own constituency ordered the reopening of the hospital in Burk's Falls.

Will you assure the people of St Catharines and the Niagara region that the Hotel Dieu Hospital in St Catharines, which has provided outstanding medical service to patients in our community for half a century, will receive the same treatment as the closed hospital in Ernie Eves's riding? If not, would you tell the staff and directors of the Hotel Dieu Hospital what they should do with the congratulatory scroll which Mike Harris sent to the Hotel Dieu on the celebration of its 50th anniversary?

Hon Mr Hodgson: This is a rather sensitive issue to all members in this House. Let's get the facts clear on this. The Health Services Restructuring Commission makes recommendations. They have a 30-day process where the public in those areas can have comments and refine and suggest improvements. In Thunder Bay that's what happened.

In St Catharines - I know the member is concerned about this and so are a lot of the residents - there's a 30-day period from when they make their initial recommendations to when they make their final recommendations.

In Thunder Bay, the local people gathered around and came up with some ideas on how to improve it. I think it's something that all members of this House should be proud of.

In spite of the 10 to 15 years of inaction on behalf of this province, we're moving forward and putting the dollars to better use to serve patients in this province. In Thunder Bay that's a success story, and it wasn't always that way. If you talk to the people of Thunder Bay, there's a lot of acrimony in the community, as we looked at this for the last 10 years. Today and from here on, it's good news. They're working together to make a better health care system.

Mr Bradley: On a point of order, Speaker: I request unanimous consent for the minister to answer my question about Burk's Falls and comparing it to St Catharines.

The Speaker: Agreed? No. New question.

HOMELESSNESS

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Housing. Today the city of Toronto voted 53 to 1 to declare a state of emergency around the crisis of homelessness. Just in the past few days, two people have died here in the streets because of homelessness, yet your government does nothing.

Minister, will you join the Toronto city council and declare a state of emergency around the conditions of homelessness in this province?

Hon Al Leach (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): Mr Speaker, I'll refer this question to the Minister of Community and Social Services.

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Community and Social Services): As the honourable member knows, this government has done a great deal to support municipalities across this province as they deal with people who find themselves homeless. Because we recognize that this is a very serious issue, because we recognize that there are many individuals who find themselves homeless for many reasons, we do have a responsibility. That's one of the reasons why we support municipalities with 80% of the funding. I've communicated with Mayor Lastman that we will continue to put forward that funding as they find new hostel beds for those who find themselves homeless. We will continue to support.

We had a task force that consulted with municipalities, and the message we heard loudly and clearly was that a great deal of money was already being spent, but one of the problems was with the way it was being spent. Municipalities were having their hands tied. We can see here in Toronto the creativity, the innovation, the solutions that can be brought forward at the community level. Our responsibility is to help fund that and we are indeed doing that.

Mr Hampton: I see now why the Minister of Housing didn't answer, because this government frankly doesn't care about housing. That's why they've discontinued not-for-profit housing programs. That's why in fact all kinds of people who rely upon social assistance -

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Order. Third party.

Mr Hampton: Your government has made the plight of people who are struggling very hard to find housing that much more difficult. As for your boast about support to municipalities, municipalities frankly tell you there is no support.

Toronto is finding some creative solutions. They're actually taking vacant buildings and turning them over to provide shelter for the homeless. Your government has been busy shutting down hospitals and laying off people. You must have some vacant buildings that are available. Would you provide a list of the vacant buildings that you can make available so that people who don't have a home will at least have a roof over their head this winter? Can you do that, Minister?

Hon Mrs Ecker: I'll refer this to the Minister of Housing.

Hon Mr Leach: I would also say that we're working with the city of Toronto on this effort. As the Minister Community and Social Services said, we support the municipalities in their search to provide more housing for the homeless. As a matter of fact, we continue to pay 80% subsidy for every hostel that they find.

I don't think there's anybody more qualified to identify buildings that may be available in a municipality than the municipality itself. The city of Toronto, for example, is doing that. They're putting together a list of buildings within their community that may be appropriate for hostels over the period in question, and when they identify those buildings, and if they provide additional beds, this government will be there to provide the support that we've always provided, and that is to pay 80% of the cost of every bed that is found.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr Tom Froese (St Catharines-Brock): My question is for the Minister of Long-Term Care. There's a concern in St Catharines and Niagara-on-the-Lake and indeed all of the Niagara region about health care, and many were anxious about waiting for the report on hospitals. Yesterday, the Health Services Restructuring Commission recommended the closing of a hospital in St Catharines.

Minister, as you are responsible for long-term care, I would like you to tell me how long-term care services in St Catharines and Niagara are being improved on the one hand while on the other hand a hospital is being recommended for closure.

Hon Cameron Jackson (Minister of Long-Term Care, minister responsible for seniors): Thank you, to the member, for his question. I just want to put in context here that previous governments cut quite a few beds in the Niagara Peninsula, including in the St Catharines region. What we have to show for that is a bunch of empty beds and empty wards, and yet in spite of that fact today the restructuring commission has indicated that there should be an expansion of long-term-care beds.

That is a commitment that this government is already well in advance of with the restructuring commission, because we have allocated 646 new long-term-care beds to this region, 20% more than the restructuring commission has recommended.

Within the next two weeks, we'll be announcing the locations of the first 100 new long-term-care beds, the first for this region in 10 years. Last week, I announced the locations for 37 transitional beds. So we are building long-term-care beds for an aging society and in particular in the Niagara Peninsula, where they've been badly neglected for a decade.

Mr Froese: Thank you, Minister, for that great news. All of us in the Niagara region -

Interjections.

Mr Froese: Maybe the members on the other side of the House don't think it's important, but to the Niagara region it is important. We're looking forward to getting those first 100 new long-term-care beds.

Minister, community care is also a concern. My question to you is, what is the government doing in St Catharines and Niagara-on-the-Lake to build a more integrated community and family-based health care system?

Hon Mr Jackson: The Niagara region was one of the most discriminated against areas of Ontario in receiving its community-based services. Although two governments failed to recognize this, this government moved in less than three years to increase funding in this region by 77%. From $29 million, we're now spending $52 million on community care in the Niagara Peninsula.

On top of that, we've added additional community-based services of over $6 million for integrated programs like Meals on Wheels, Pleasant Manor care services, brain injury community re-entry programs, the Victorian Order of Nurses, the west Niagara community support services, March of Dimes, Alzheimer day programs. The list goes on and on.

This part of the province has the largest and fastest growing group of seniors in all of Canada. This government moved quickly, immediately, when it had its mandate to increase funding for badly needed services for the Niagara Peninsula, and we're proud of those expanded services.

TUITION FEES

Mr David Caplan (Oriole): My question is for the Minister of Education. Today we've heard that your government is spending $42 million on propaganda. That $42 million is almost as much as you've taken out of post-secondary student assistance programs.

In the gallery today is Chris Chmelyk, who has come all the way from Queen's University to get you to take notice of his situation. Chris wrote to you urgently. He's an engineering student at Queen's. He's going to have to leave school in January because of your tuition hikes, because you've saddled him with crushing debt.

Here's what he said to you. He can't qualify for OSAP because his parents' income is too high. His parents can only send him $200 a month. He has exhausted the lines of credit from the bank. There is no more money available for his education.

This is your legacy, Minister. This is what you've done to thousands of post-secondary students in Ontario with your cuts to student assistance. Chris Chmelyk and the rest of Ontario's students want an answer from you here today. Tell us today, Minister, why your government has decided to spend $42 million on advertising propaganda instead of investing that money in student assistance so that Chris and 500,000 -

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you.

Mr Caplan: - post-secondary students in Ontario can finish their education.

The Speaker: Come to order. Would the member for Quinte come to order as well.

Hon David Johnson (Minister of Education and Training): I would say, in connection with assistance to students, that the assistance to students this year through the provincial government will total $535 million.

Let's just check and see what assistance to students was during the Liberal years. It says here that the maximum amount of support during the Liberal years was about $300 million less. In terms of the total investment -

Interjections.

Hon David Johnson: They obviously don't want to hear this. In terms of the total investment in post-secondary education, this government, through tax expenditures and normal expenditures, has invested almost $3.3 billion in post-secondary education, which is over half a billion dollars more than the Liberals invested.

We're attempting to focus in areas of greatest need to our post-secondary students. That is our program.

Mr Caplan: I just say to the minister, any way you slice it, it's still baloney.

Minister, you've made student assistance harder to access. You haven't explained why you've chosen to spend $11 million on education propaganda instead of spending it on student assistance.

In the gallery today as well are members of the alma mater society. They've come to demand an answer from you about how your government is going to ease the debt burden on college and university students. You told them on July 23 that you would finally have a framework for changes to OSAP by September 30 this year. It's now the end of October and all we've seen is new spending on government propaganda advertising.

Stand in your place and tell us why you've sat back and watched the average student debt rise to a level of $25,000 because of your tuition hikes. Tell the AMS representatives why you made empty promises in July. These students are going to meet you outside of the House today to hear your explanation. I want to hear it right now, here in the House.

The Speaker: Member for Nepean, don't hold up a sign any more, please. Thank you.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean): The "Mom, send money" sign?

The Speaker: Member for Nepean.

Hon David Johnson: Maybe I would point out to the member for Oriole the views of the Canadian Federation of Students. The headline in this particular

article from the Canadian Federation of Students says, "Martin Fails Grade Over Student Debts." Paul Martin, federal Liberal; does that ring a bell? Do we know anybody else -

Interjections.

The Speaker: Minister.

Hon David Johnson: The sad reality is that 70% of student debt is from a federal loan. That's what we have to contend with. This government has taken this matter very seriously. I take very seriously the matter of this individual student.

That's why we have increased OSAP, Ontario student assistance, by 33%. During our term, we have instituted the Ontario student opportunity trust fund, some $600 million to assist students. We've insisted that 30% of any tuition increase, if an institution increases the tuition, be set aside to help those students who need that help. We've instituted the access to opportunities program to help students in those particular courses. We've increased funding to Ontario's universities that have increased access by some $29 million. On and on it goes. We've focused the need to the student -

The Speaker: New question.

VIOLENCE IN SCHOOLS

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): I have a question for the Minister of Education and Training, a very serious, grave matter. The Toronto Star recently in a survey showed that one out of five high school students in the greater Toronto area feels unsafe at school. Earlier, my leader asked the minister about a memo issued by his ministry to the new secondary school curriculum teams. The ministry directed the teams to remove education about violence prevention from curriculum documents that are actually used by teachers to develop lesson plans.

Minister, in light of the communities' concerns about violence among students, will you reverse your ministry's directive and ensure that curriculum policy documents in each subject area include education about violence prevention?

Hon David Johnson (Minister of Education and Training): I will assure the member opposite that there is a policy document governing violence in schools. It was actually created in 1994 by the NDP government. It is a document that guides this issue which is a most sensitive one. It's one that we need to spend a great deal of thought and effort in terms of addressing. This document is available and governs the conduct of all of our schools.

The school officials, as they have down through the ages, have determined that these documents, because they already exist, do not have to be duplicated in each and every curriculum. But I will also say that each of the curriculum teams has an expert in terms of violence as they create the new curriculum, and are aware of those kinds of issues as they are creating the curriculum.

Mr Wildman: The minister will know that the policy document he refers to is an important one but it does not deal with the curriculum. It doesn't deal with everyday teaching in the classroom on this issue.

Let's deal with the Violence-Free Schools Policy document that was developed after consultation with over 3,000 Ontarians by our government. That document recognized the need to involve the whole community in violence prevention. But the government's cuts to education have exacerbated youth violence. The cuts have taken away the supports that students need, like guidance counsellors and social workers in secondary schools.

The Violence-Free Schools Policy document requires the ministry to review the policy and procedures after three years. The document is now four years old. It should have been reviewed last year. Has your ministry reviewed this document? When will we see the proposals for its implementation in future?

Hon David Johnson: I'm happy to say that yes, indeed, the ministry has long ago started the review of this particular policy. We're working very diligently towards an update. I might call it a safe schools sort of approach. This is something this government is committed to. We've promised to do this. You can expect it in the not-too-distant future. It is a very high priority.

In terms of support within the classrooms for guidance teachers, for example, the amount of money within the funding formula has been increased so that there are more resources available for guidance counsellors and librarians and all the other people in that particular category, but it certainly includes guidance counsellors across Ontario.

These are all very important measures that this government considers a high priority and I hope we'll come forward in the very near future with that upgraded policy.

TEACHERS' WORK-TO-RULE

Mr Frank Klees (York-Mackenzie): My question is to the Minister of Education and relates to the serious effect that students are feeling as a result of work-to-rule by teachers in York region.

On October 5, I read into the record a petition that had been presented to me by two students, Moe Ajram and Kari Coish, the student council vice-president and president of the Dr G.W. Williams Secondary School in Aurora. That petition expressed the serious concerns of students who are being affected by the work-to-rule strategy of teachers in York region because they're being denied all extracurricular activities.

On Monday of this week those same students came back to see me and they're now concerned that work-to-rule is affecting them not only in extracurricular activities but in the classroom. Students are being told by teachers that they don't have the time to provide extra help when asked for explanations on lessons and results of tests are often delayed for days.

Minister, these students are looking to this government for some answers. They're looking to you as minister. What advice can you offer to students in my constituency being so affected?

Hon David Johnson (Minister of Education and Training): I share the concerns of these students and I would hope that each and every member of this House would share the concerns of these students. I have received letters from other students, and certainly there are newspaper articles. They express extreme disappointment with the withdrawal of teacher support for extracurricular activities.

Frankly, it's disappointing, it's unacceptable and it's very frustrating because these are activities that students need. These are very important in terms of their overall involvement within their schools in activities such as the Metro Bowl today. I see that the number of participants in the Metro Bowl has been reduced. It can be sports activities, science clubs, musical plays - many different activities that are most important.

I continue to believe in the professionalism of the teachers and I call on them to restore all of these extracurricular activities for the students who need them most urgently.

Mr Klees: The students who are affected by this work-to-rule strategy of the union leaders simply wish to participate in extracurricular activities. They simply want to get on with the education in the classroom. Their concern is not the content of the contracts under which the unions are negotiating or of their teachers' contracts. What they want to ensure is that their academic year is not at risk. They want to ensure that they can participate in sports. Many of these young people want to qualify for sports programs in universities.

This action right now of these teachers is in many cases going to jeopardize the academic year and is going to jeopardize the opportunity for these students to qualify for sports programs in universities. What can we do to support the students in the classroom so they can get on with their education?

Hon David Johnson: It is clearly unacceptable that students not receive the type of support they have received in the past, whether it be for extracurricular activities -

Interjections.

Hon David Johnson: I can hardly hear myself think, Mr Speaker.

The member has raised the issue of assignments, the marking of assignments and returning of assignments. The marking and returning of assignments would be a normal requirement of the activities within a school, and this may be a matter that should be raised with the local principal or the local school board representative and addressed because these are not voluntary activities. Marking and returning assignments are part of the job and the activities within a school.

I think we all need to call on those in the teaching profession - they're professionals - and ask them to put the students first, think of the students, get back to all of those extracurricular activities -

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Thank you.

HEALTH CARE FUNDING

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): My question is for the acting Deputy Premier. My leader, Dalton McGuinty, earlier today pointed out that your government has spent $42 million on government propaganda and your latest ads on health care propaganda are costing Ontarians $4 million.

I want to contrast that to the cuts. A constituent, Mr Saheed Mohammed, 68 years old, had heart surgery and was released from hospital a week later. That same evening he suffered chest pains and was rushed to the hospital he was released from. As a result of the emergency department being full, the gentleman was transferred to another hospital. Four hours later, he was en route back to the original hospital where he had the surgery and died on the way to the hospital.

The wife, Mrs Mohammed, clearly believes that her husband would be alive today if it wasn't for the fact that he was turned away from the original hospital due to overflow and the emergency department being in a situation where they could not take him.

Minister, according to Mrs Mohammed, your cuts killed her husband. Can you tell me how the $4 million that you're spending on government propaganda on health care is going to help Mrs Mohammed understand why her husband died as a result of your cuts?

Hon Chris Hodgson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet, Minister of Northern Development and Mines): The particular example that the member mentions: I think everyone would feel some concern about this tragic incident. I don't think that does anyone any benefit unless we learn that we have to reform the system and improve from that example. Our sympathies go out to the family and friends.

What we want to do with the reform is make it so these situations do not occur in this province. One occurrence like that is not acceptable to anyone. We also recognize that we have to go through change to find the dollars, to prioritize under the front-line services. Taking the Liberal approach of do nothing has put us in a situation where we've had to take some rapid action to improve the system.

The Speaker (Hon Chris Stockwell): Supplementary.

Mr John C. Cleary (Cornwall): Like my colleague from Hamilton East, my question is to the acting Premier and it's about the squandering of four million hard-earned taxpayers' dollars on propaganda.

In the greater Cornwall area we could have put that money to better use. In August your government finally announced after two and a half years that a Cornwall dialysis machine would be up and running in November. Here it is, the end of October, and there are a lot of questions that are not answered, such as when the facilities will be operational and what the hours will be. Many of the working-class people in my community want to know what hours this will be available to them.

Also, in the election campaign Mike Harris promised not to close any hospitals, but we had a casualty in our riding too. The residents are very worried that it will not result in improved health care and about the dollars that it will cost them for the new facilities.

My question is, what will the hours of service be for the new dialysis equipment in Cornwall and when will it be up and running?

Hon Mr Hodgson: It's a good question and I'll take it under advisement and inform the Minister of Health to get back to the member on the question.

I should point out to the Liberals on the other side that this government has increased overall health care spending in this province far in excess of what we campaigned on and what you campaigned on to meet the needs. The only government in Canada that has cut health care spending is your federal cousins in Ottawa.

But the point is that by restructuring this system, the changes that are necessary, the changes that this government information is trying to inform the public about - and this is the need for information - are those dialysis programs, those special programs, those community care programs. The dollars from that come from restructuring the acute care system.

That's why if your government had taken the action back in the 1980s when all the experts said we have a surplus of hospitals in this province, that we need more dollars out in the front-line services, then we wouldn't have that problem. The quicker we get through that, the better off our health care system will be in this province.

PETITIONS

MANDATORY INQUESTS

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and to the honourable Solicitor General.

"Whereas the Progressive Conservative government of Ontario has decided to scrap mandatory inquests as a result of fatalities in the mining and construction industries; and

"Whereas this unprecedented and callous decision sets workplace safety back 20 years;

"We, the undersigned, request that Solicitor General Bob Runciman, on behalf of all workers in the mining and construction industry, reverse his decision to remove mandatory inquests from the Coroners Act of Ontario."

Of course, I affix my signature to this United Steelworkers of America petition.

PORNOGRAPHY

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): I have a petition here signed by some 300 to 400 people and it concerns the issue of pornography. It says:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas children are exposed to pornography in variety stores and video retail outlets; and

"Whereas bylaws vary from city to city and have failed to protect minors from unwanted exposure to pornography;

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

"To enact legislation which will create uniform standards in Ontario to prevent minors from being exposed to pornography in retail establishments; prevent minors from entering establishments which rent or sell pornography; restrict the location of such establishments to non-residential areas."

I sign my name to this petition.

PALLIATIVE CARE

Mr Bob Wood (London South): I have a petition which reads as follows:

"Whereas most Ontario residents do not have adequate access to effective palliative care in time of need;

"Whereas meeting the needs of Ontarians of all ages for relief of preventable pain and suffering, as well as the provision of emotional and spiritual support, should be a priority to our health care system;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to resolve that a task force be appointed to develop a palliative care bill of rights that would ensure the best possible treatment, care, protection and support for Ontario citizens and their families in time of need.

"The task force should include palliative care experts in pain management, community palliative care and ethics in order to determine effective safeguards for the right to life and care of individuals who cannot or who can no longer decide issues of medical care for themselves.

"The appointed task force would provide interim reports to the government and the public and continue in existence to review the implementation of its recommendations."

Mr Howard Hampton (Rainy River): On a point of order, Speaker: I've just come from outside the chamber and security guards are trying to eject people who are here representing homeless organizations. Those people representing organizations that advocate for the homeless are here because the press might want to speak to them. Those can't be the rules of this Legislature that someone who comes here to address or ask questions about an important public policy is no longer allowed access to the media. Those can't be the rules.

My God, this is a place for public debate. It's a place to raise public questions and it's a place for people who are touched by those decisions or touched by those debates to have an opportunity to talk to the media. The security guards, who I assume report to you, are trying to force those people to leave, trying to limit their access to the media. Those can't be the rules around here.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): I have listened to you, leader, attentively, and this has nothing to do with procedures. I would suggest that you consult with the Speaker of the House, who is responsible for security. Please do. That's my ruling.

Mr Hampton: Speaker, I'm not questioning your ruling, but this certainly must be a point of democracy. This has to be a democratic institution.

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker: Order.

If you'd please follow my advice, I think that would be the wisest thing to do.

Member for Scarborough North.

Mr Alvin Curling (Scarborough North): I have a petition here that reads like this:

"Save the Dieu."

"The Health Services Restructuring Commission, HSRC, has given notice that it intends to direct the Hotel Dieu Hospital to close and to require" -

Mr Bud Wildman (Algoma): Those people pay for this place. We all do.

The Acting Speaker: Order. Member for Algoma, please.

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): On a point of order, Speaker: Perhaps the members opposite who haven't been here for a long time won't realize that this is the first time this has ever happened in this place. People are always -

The Acting Speaker: Order.

Mr Steve Gilchrist (Scarborough East): Every tour group is turned around on the staircase. It happens every day.

The Acting Speaker: Member for Scarborough East.

Member for Sault Ste Marie, this is not a point of order. Let's continue with the procedures. Please take your seat. This is petition time.

Member for Scarborough North.

HOSPITAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr Alvin Curling (Scarborough North): I've got a very serious petition before you. It says, "Save the Dieu."

"The Health Services Restructuring Commission has given notice that it intends to direct the Hotel Dieu Hospital to close and to require that the Religious Hospitallers of St Joseph cease to govern. If the proposed direction is made and implemented, then access to high-quality health care will be seriously undermined in Kingston and region.

"The sisters are recognized for their leadership in the health care community. They have developed the plan for and operated an efficient outpatient teaching hospital and have provided a high quality of patient care for 123 years from the same location. Their distinct values and philosophy, coupled with the sisters' tradition of compassionate care, must not disappear.

"The HSRC's proposed direction calls for the dismissal of the sisters from their role in the governance in outpatient health care at the Hotel Dieu Hospital. This is not in the best interests of the patients and families in this city and region. The people of Kingston deserve to have access to the kind of quality health care for which the sisters are well recognized.

"Those who must use public transportation to get to outpatient clinics will be seriously affected. Taxpayers should not have to shoulder any extra burden in paying for a new outpatient facility, when the Hotel Dieu site can accommodate the needs of the people of Kingston. Many downtown businesses will suffer greatly should the site be closed.

"The sisters of Hotel Dieu Hospital are asking you to help them in their response to the commission by signing this petition."

I also will put my name to this petition.

PROPERTY TAXATION

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre): I have the following petition:

"Whereas the Harris government's `downloading' to municipal taxpayers is directly responsible for the $36.3-million shortfall to the region of Hamilton-Wentworth; and

"Whereas the Harris government `downloading' is directly responsible for creating a property tax crisis in our region; and

"Whereas the Harris government, while boasting about its 30% tax cut which benefits mainly the wealthy, is making hard-working families, seniors, homeowners and businesses pay the price with outrageous property tax hikes and user fees for services; and

"Whereas city and regional councillors are being unfairly blamed and forced to explain these huge tax hikes, Hamiltonians know that what's really going on is that they are being forced to pay huge property tax increases to fund Harris's 30% tax giveaway to the rich; and

"Whereas homeowners, including seniors and low-income families, are facing huge property tax increases ranging from several hundred to thousands of dollars; and

"Whereas the Harris government `downloading' has led to huge property tax increases for business that will force many small and medium-sized businesses in Hamilton-Wentworth to close or leave the community, putting people out of work; and

"Whereas Hamilton-Wentworth region is proposing that the Harris government share in the costs of an expanded rebate program, worth about $3 million region-wide;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, demand that the Harris government immediately eliminate the $38-million downloading shortfall that is devastating and angering homeowners as well as killing business in Hamilton-Wentworth."

I continue to support my community by signing this petition.

PROTECTION FOR HEALTH CARE WORKERS

Mr Carl DeFaria (Mississauga East): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario which reads as follows:

"Whereas nurses in Ontario often experience coercion to participate in practices which directly contravene their deeply held ethical standards; and

"Whereas pharmacists in Ontario are often pressured to dispense and/or sell chemicals and/or devices contrary to their moral or religious beliefs; and

"Whereas public health workers in Ontario are expected to assist in providing controversial services and promoting controversial materials against their consciences; and

"Whereas physicians in Ontario often experience pressure to give referrals for medications, treatments and/or procedures which they believe to be gravely immoral; and

"Whereas competent health care workers and students in various health care disciplines in Ontario have often been denied training, employment, and advancement in their intended fields and suffered other forms of unjust discrimination because of the dictates of their consciences; and

"Whereas the health care workers experiencing such unjust discrimination have at present no practical and accessible legal means to protect themselves;

"We, the undersigned, urge the government of Ontario to enact legislation explicitly recognizing the freedom of conscience of health care workers, prohibiting coercion of and unjust discrimination against health care workers because of their refusal to participate in matters contrary to the dictates of their consciences and establishing penalties for such coercion and unjust discrimination."

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr Mario Sergio (Yorkview): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"We, the undersigned taxpayers, call on the government of Ontario to rethink its school reform policy.

"Your reform has thrown the education system into total chaos and the crisis your minister envisaged to create is much worse than expected.

"From kindergarten to adult education cuts have caused deep concern among parents, students, school boards and trustees.

"We call on the Premier of our province to reallocate some of the funding cuts and give us back an education system that gives our sons and daughters the best education for a good start in life."

I agree, and I will affix my signature to it.

PALLIATIVE CARE

Mr Bob Wood (London South): I have a petition signed by 17 people:

"Whereas most Ontario residents do not have adequate access to effective palliative care in time of need;

"Whereas meeting the needs of Ontarians of all ages for relief of preventable pain and suffering, as well as the provision of emotional and spiritual support, should be a priority to our health care system;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to resolve that a task force be appointed to develop a palliative care bill of rights that would ensure the best possible treatment, care, protection and support for Ontario citizens and their families in time of need.

"The task force should include palliative care experts in pain management, community palliative care and ethics in order to determine effective safeguards for the right to life and care of individuals who cannot or who can no longer decide issues of medical care for themselves.

"The appointed task force would provide interim reports to the government and the public and continue in existence to review the implementation of its recommendations."

HOTEL DIEU HOSPITAL

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): My petition reads as follows:

"Since the Hotel Dieu Hospital has played and continues to play a vital role in the delivery of health care services in St Catharines and the Niagara region;

"Since Hotel Dieu has modified its role over the years as part of a rationalization of medical services in St Catharines and has assumed the position of a regional health care facility in such areas as kidney dialysis and oncology;

"Since the Niagara region is experiencing underfunding in the health care field and requires more medical services and not fewer services;

"Since Niagara residents are required at present to travel outside of the Niagara region to receive many specialized services that could be provided in city hospitals and thereby not require local patients to make difficult and inconvenient trips down our highways to other centres;

"Since the Niagara hospital restructuring committee used a Toronto consulting firm to develop its recommendations and was forced to take into account a cut of $40 million in funding for Niagara hospitals when carrying out its study;

"Since the population of the Niagara region is older than that in most areas of the province and more elderly people tend to require more hospital services;

"We, the undersigned, request that the government of Ontario keep the election commitment of Premier Mike Harris not to close hospitals in our province, and we call upon the Premier to reject any recommendation to close Hotel Dieu Hospital in St Catharines."

I affix my signature as I'm in full agreement.

SCHOOL CLOSURES

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth): I have a petition from the riding of Perth to the Legislative Assembly:

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

"We, the undersigned students of rural Ontario, oppose the current Ministry of Education and Training funding formula in relation to rural boards. We believe that special consideration should be given to the fact that our population is spread over a wider geographical area. A blanket funding formula for such a large and diverse province as Ontario will not work for all its citizens equally."

I want to announce that the people in Stratford last night found out that indeed the funding formula is doing the job that it was intended to do.

DENTAL CARE

Mr Alvin Curling (Scarborough North): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario which reads:

"There is a new

schedule of dental services for children and people with disabilities. It was introduced by the government under the Ontario Works Act and the Ontario Disability Support Program Act.

"Whereas the new

schedule fails to meet the special needs of children and people with disabilities, reduces services, places barriers to accessible care, creates an environment of various different dental programs across Ontario; and

"Whereas the move away from an emphasis on prevention under the new dental

schedule brings significant health risks for children and people with disabilities, who are often the least able to practise good oral hygiene; and

"Whereas the new dental

schedule interferes with the patients' rights to consent to treatment by requiring administrators, and not patients or substitute decision-makers, to authorize and deny dental treatment; and

"Whereas there is no method for the patient to appeal a decision by a plan administrator to deny dental treatment; and

"Whereas pre-authorizations, called predeterminations in the new plan, will require that a higher level of confidential patient health information be disclosed to dental plan administrators; and

"Whereas the Ontario government has caused confusion among patients by introducing the plan without prior consultation and has not included any affected patient groups in consultations after releasing the new dental plan;

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

"Delay full implementation of the new dental plan until the requirement for predeterminations is removed, patient confidentiality is protected, the plan emphasizes prevention in oral health care, and the government consults directly with affected patients to ensure the new plan will meet the special needs of children and people with disabilities."

I will affix my signature to this petition, in agreement.

OPPOSITION DAY

FIREARMS CONTROL

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): I move opposition day motion number 3:

Whereas the Harris government has lowered the minimum age for hunting with a firearm to just 12 years of age; and

Whereas many police and victims' groups have strongly stated that putting guns in the hands of children as young as 12 threatens public safety; and

Whereas there has already been a fatal shooting involving a 13-year-old child since the Harris government lowered the age; and

Whereas the Ontario Liberal Party believes that it is more important to put books, not guns in the hands of children; and

Whereas the Harris government has also ignored police and victims' groups by fighting universal gun registration; and

Whereas universal gun registration is supported by the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police, CAVEAT, the Peel Regional Police Association, the Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police, the Ontario Coalition of Senior Citizens' Organizations, Halton Health Services, the Niagara Health Services Department, Interval House (Ottawa), municipal councils of Etobicoke, Gloucester, Goderich, Guelph, Nepean, Lindsay, Kitchener, Peterborough, Waterloo, Brampton, Oshawa, London; and

Whereas a recent Angus Reid poll showed that the following people supported universal gun registration: 86% of Ontarians, 54% of Ontario gun owners, 88% of the people in Toronto, 85% of the people in southern Ontario, 88% of the people in eastern Ontario, 76% of the people in northern Ontario, 88% of people living in urban Ontario, 75% of people living in rural Ontario, 89% of non-gun owners, 91% of female voters, 79% of male voters;

Be it resolved that the Harris government acknowledge the danger of allowing children to have access to guns by reversing its decision to put guns in the hands of children; and

Be it further resolved that the Harris government end its fight against universal gun registration by working with police and the federal government to fully implement the federal gun registration law in the province of Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): Mr McGuinty has moved opposition day motion number 3. Mr McGuinty.

Mr McGuinty: I am very pleased and proud to rise today in support of this opposition day motion. This motion is all about public safety. It's about protecting our children, protecting our citizens. It's about protecting every single member of the Ontario family. It's about protecting our communities.

It's important to understand what, quite simply put, this motion says. It says the government should work with police to implement universal gun registration, otherwise known as gun control, and it says that the government should listen to the police and victims' groups and just about everybody in Ontario, but especially mothers, who are telling us that we should take guns out of the hands of 12-year-olds.

Gun control is a hot topic. It's a topic a lot of politicians don't like to discuss. They're afraid of the political consequences. They're afraid of the gun lobby. They're afraid of a small, but vocal and highly motivated, interest group that wants to Americanize gun culture in Ontario.

Mike Harris and the NDP are terrified of this issue. They're afraid of the gun lobby. They're afraid to express the views of the overwhelming majority of Ontarians. Undoubtedly, as the result of the position that I am taking and that my party is taking, we will become the target of the gun lobby. That's a group that wants to Americanize gun culture in Ontario.

I want to make it perfectly clear: I'm going to talk about gun control. I support gun control. I'll be working with the police and the federal government to implement universal gun registration in Ontario. I believe that if you live in Ontario and you own a gun, it is not too much to ask that that gun be registered with the police. That's the message I intend to deliver everywhere I go in Ontario. I won't have one message for the gun lobby and another message for the rest of Ontario. I have just the one message: I support gun control.

If there are problems connected with the implementation, then it's important that we address those problems. But you either have to stand up in favour of the principle of gun control, as 86% of Ontarians do, or say you're against it. If you're against it, then stand up in this Legislature today and tell Ontarians that you are against gun control, that you stand against Ontario police in their efforts to make our streets and our homes safer, that you oppose gun control, notwithstanding the fact that the overwhelming majority of Ontarians - including, by the way, the majority of hunters, the majority of gun owners. Tell all of those people who support gun control that you stand against it.

Our police have asked for gun control. They say it's going to make their jobs safer. Surely everybody in this Legislature has read enough stories about police being injured or even killed in the line of duty. They are saying that it's important for them to know whether or not somebody has a gun inside their apartment or their house. I agree. I don't think it's too much to ask Ontarians that if they own a gun, they register that gun and supply that information to the police. I stand with the police on this issue. I intend to work to ensure that we implement gun control in Ontario.

Just to review the level of support for this, 86% of all the people in our province support registry. That support, as I read at the outset when I introduced the motion, spreads right across the province. The great majority, the overwhelming majority of people who live in the south of our province, in the east, in the north, in our rural and urban areas, all those people support gun control.

But polls aside, it's the right thing to do. From time to time in our history, we have an opportunity to decide which path we're going to walk down. We've got to decide when it comes to gun culture in Ontario whether we want to walk down the American path or we want to walk down a path that's unique to us. That's the Ontario path. I choose the Ontario path.

By fighting gun control, Mike Harris has been fighting our police. He's choosing the American path. He has been fighting victims' groups, people like Priscilla de Villiers who believe gun control is going to make our streets safer. He's decided to listen to the gun lobby.

For a guy who said he would never listen to the special interest groups and that he was there for the people, how is it that when 86% of Ontarians say, "Give us gun control; it's going to make our streets safer; it's better for our families," he suddenly decides that he's not going to pay attention, notwithstanding the fact that he claims now that he's going to listen, he's going to be more sensitive to the needs and the opinions of Ontarians?

Not many taxpayers know this, but we are spending thousands and thousands of dollars fighting gun control. First we decided to spend it in a case before the Alberta Court of Appeal. When the Alberta Court of Appeal - I'm not talking about the BC Court of Appeal or the Ontario Court of Appeal - ruled that gun control was constitutional, that it was lawful, what did Mike Harris do?

He encouraged the government of Alberta to pursue an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada and then he said, "By the way, we will send our lawyers to the Supreme Court of Canada to once again fight gun control," notwithstanding the fact that 86% of Ontarians and that Ontario police are begging for gun control. That's what he did.

Inquest after inquest, coroner's inquests, have called for quick and decisive implementation of gun licensing and registration in Ontario. Just so people understand how a coroner's inquest works, people are taken off the streets to sit on the jury and they are then provided with all kinds of information, expert and otherwise, that has to do with the incident they're reviewing - if it's a death, how that death came about - and asked what kind of recommendations they might come up with in the future in order to avoid that kind of tragedy from happening again.

Inquest after inquest has made it clear to the government of Ontario that they believe we should have gun control in our province. The 1991 inquest into the suicide of Jonathan Yeo, the man who killed Nina de Villiers and Karen Marquis, made it perfectly clear that gun control was essential to make our streets safer.

Mr Speaker, you'll be aware of the recent tragic murder of Brian Smith back in our neck of the woods in eastern Ontario, in Ottawa. The 1997 inquest into the murder of Brian Smith also provided by way of its recommendations that we implement gun control in Ontario.

Most recently, and this also happened in Ottawa, two children under the age of 10 were murdered by their father: the Kasonde children. The results of that inquest also contain recommendations that made it perfectly clear that it was essential for safety in Ontario, for the safety of our children and our families, that we have gun control implemented.

Who else favours gun registry? Just so this is on the record and so people understand, the Ontario chiefs of police do; the Canadian and Ontario associations of police boards; the Hamilton-Wentworth Police Service; the Peel Regional Police Association.

Police know the benefits of this legislation. You would think the law-and-order backbenchers of the Mike Harris government would understand that too. They talk the talk when it comes to addressing crime, which is a real issue in Ontario, no doubt about it, but they like to talk about super-jails, which is an American idea, they like to talk about boot camps, which is also an American idea, and they like to talk about their famous, or infamous, Crime Control Commission, this two-bit crime squad that they have cobbled together in an effort to lend the impression that somehow they are genuinely interested in attacking crime in the province of Ontario.

But 86% of Ontarians are directing this complaint to the crime commission and the government and they're saying, "Give us gun control." Why is it that the crime commission - I ask rhetorically, of course - can't step forward and say to the Premier, "We've listened to the people, we've listened to the police in Ontario, and we've decided to implement gun control"?

Mr Bob Wood (London South): What is your policy on crime?

Mr McGuinty: The member asks me what my policy is on crime. I'll tell you what it is. I'm in favour of gun control, I'm in favour of red light cameras, and I'm against putting guns in the hands of 12-year-olds. Public safety: That's what it's all about.

Let's understand what other groups are supportive of gun control in Ontario. First of all, Priscilla de Villiers, who heads up the group CAVEAT, has been asking this government time and time again to implement gun control. The Canadian Criminal Justice Association has spoken out in favour of gun control. So have the Canadian Bar Association, Halton Health Services and Niagara Health Services. Speak to doctors who serve time in our emergency wards in this province. They will tell you what it's like to put together somebody who has suffered from a gunshot wound and they will tell you how much they stand in favour of gun control in Ontario.

Of course I listed just some of the municipalities that have come out in favour of gun control right across this province. However, if you thought Mike Harris was a captive to the gun lobby on the issue of gun control, just look at what he did on the issue of putting guns into the hands of 12-year-olds.

I want to make it very clear that, unlike Mike Harris, Ontario Liberals do not believe that 12-year-olds should be playing with guns. I just cannot for the life of me understand how this government could possibly decide, as part of an important public policy initiative, that it was going to put guns in the hands of 12-year-olds. Hockey sticks, yes; basketballs, yes; laptop computers, yes. But guns in the hands of 12-year-olds, how is that in the interest of our children? How is that in the interest of public safety in Ontario? For the life of me, that escapes me entirely.

Everybody in this House knows that this is a bad idea, it's a stupid idea, it's a dangerous idea, and people are going to pay the price for it. Somebody is going to get hurt. Somebody is going to be shot. In fact, since the announcement of that policy change on the part of this government, there was a case in Ontario where young cousins were hunting together, a 13-year-old and a 17-year-old, and quite accidentally the younger cousin shot his older cousin. The older cousin died. It was an accident, it was painful, it was tragic, but maybe most importantly of all, it was predictable.

It is perfectly predictable that if you take guns and put them in the hands of 12-year-olds, something is going to happen, an accident is going to happen. Apparently we don't have enough accidents happening with adults and guns, so now we're going to extend that right and that privilege to children.

Children don't have the physical or intellectual capacity to handle guns. They don't have the emotional self-control to handle guns. There is something that happens to us as we mature as human beings. Ideally, after your teenage years, you develop greater emotional self-control. That's the time w