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

November 19, 2001

37th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2001-Nov-19 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 19 November 2001 Lundi 19 novembre 2001

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

KATELYN ABBOTT

DUKE OF EDINBURGH'S AWARDS

EDUCATION

CARLO CATTARELLO

MIKE WEIR

THEATRE IN SARNIA-LAMBTON

RAMADAN

CONSERVATIVE LEADERSHIP

HOME FOR AUTISTIC YOUTH

ESTIMATES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

TENANT PROTECTION

AMENDMENT ACT

(FAIRNESS IN RENT INCREASES), 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR LA PROTECTION

DES LOCATAIRES (AUGMENTATIONS

ÉQUITABLES DES LOYERS)

HERITAGE HUNTING

AND FISHING ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA CHASSE

ET LA PÊCHE PATRIMONIALES

VISITORS

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

ORAL QUESTIONS

FISCAL AND ECONOMIC POLICY

CHILD CARE

FISCAL AND ECONOMIC POLICY

CHILD CARE

EMERGENCY SERVICES

YOUTH CRIME PREVENTION

GOVERNMENT CONTRACT

GRAPE AND WINE INDUSTRY

ALGOMA STEEL

PAROLE SYSTEM

CONSUMER PROTECTION

CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETIES

PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY

LONG-TERM CARE

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

PETITIONS

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

LONG-TERM CARE

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

EDUCATION

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

TENANT PROTECTION

NURSES

BRAIN TUMOURS

CHILDREN'S MEDICAL SERVICES

TENANT PROTECTION

KIDNEY DISEASE

MEDICAL SCHOOL TUITION

HOMELESSNESS

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TIME ALLOCATION

Monday 19 November 2001 Lundi 19 novembre 2001

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

KATELYN ABBOTT

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): I am most proud to share a story about a very thoughtful and generous little

girl in my riding.

Katelyn Abbott is six years old and lives with her family in Sydenham, Ontario. Last spring, Katie's mother read her a story in the local newspaper about an

urgent need for a handicap lift in the local seniors' residence. Katie immediately decided that she wanted to donate her entire savings of $60.40 to this cause. The residents of the home were so

touched by her generous heart that Katie was asked to make her donation at a fundraising barbecue in the summer.

This was not the end of her efforts for this worthy cause. On September 26, Katie held a fundraiser in the staff room at her school, Loughborough Public School.

She baked treats and offered the staff a coffee break in return for a donation toward the handicap lift in the seniors' residence. She raised just over $145 and donated it to the elevator fund.

Katie's care and generosity have both heartened and inspired her community of Sydenham. Her thoughtfulness and generosity are a stellar example of the hope and

promise in the youth of our province, and I am sure that Katie would be the first to offer thanks as well to her family, teachers and the people of her community.

Congratulations, Katelyn Abbott. People like you make Ontario a great place to live.

DUKE OF EDINBURGH'S AWARDS

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I rise in the House today to pay tribute to the young people of my riding of Durham who have received Duke of

Edinburgh's Awards. As the members of the House may know, the Duke of Edinburgh's Awards challenge youth between the ages of 14 and 25 to meet high standards of community service, expedition,

skills development and physical fitness.

To receive a gold award, they must perform service to others. They must undertake an expedition of at least four days and follow a skills development program in

such areas as music, crafts, computers and collections. Finally, they must take

part in a physical activity where they demonstrate participation, effort and improvement.

On Saturday, October 20, Prince Philip presented seven young people from Blackstock in my riding with gold-level certificates. They are: Rachel Bergerson, Amanda

Bradburn, Monica Mason, Alex McLaughlin, Carla McLaughlin, Cameron Vernest and Miranda Wyllie. Greg Konderman, presently at the Royal Military College, also a constituent, received an award as

well.

In addition, I would like to thank and congratulate Shirley Turner and Jessie Gunter for their 25 years of volunteer leadership in the Duke of Edinburgh's Awards

program in the Blackstock area. They were also honoured with a special appreciation plaque from Prince Philip. Shirley Turner and Jessie Gunter have provided support and encouragement to more than

50 gold award winners and many other young people who have achieved the silver and bronze. I would like to take this opportunity to thank them for providing such dedication and leadership to the

young men and women who are the leaders of tomorrow.

EDUCATION

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): Last Thursday, Gerard Kennedy and I met with students, teachers, parents and local representatives from the

elementary and secondary school teachers' federations in Chatham-Kent Essex.

Students at the Leamington District Secondary School in the double cohort year are worried and they want answers today. Will there be enough places for all of

them? Will a grade 13 graduate enter post-secondary school ahead of a grade 12 graduate even if the grade 12 student has a slightly higher average?

Lambton Kent District School Board's grades 3 and 6 testing results are unfair. Board officials say 29 of its 53 schools had missing or incomplete tests, but

they were forwarded intact to the province's Education Quality and Accountability Office. How can the education minister allow incorrect data to be used?

As well, the government's one-size-fits-all funding formula does not provide for late busing services for students in rural Ontario who wish to participate in

after-school activities.

The flawed formula is driving school closures across Ontario. Community and rural schools are tied to the economic, cultural and social viability of the

community. They must be kept open. For this government to be wasting another $6 million on a phony survey campaign while students in overcrowded classrooms go without textbooks, education

assistants and guidance counsellors is absolutely irresponsible. This money should be put back into the classrooms. Our students should and must come first.

CARLO CATTARELLO

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): I have the pleasure today to honour a local citizen from the riding of Timmins-James Bay, none other than

Carlo Cattarello. Many people across the province would know Carlo because he's one of the individuals who worked for a number of years -- since the 1930s, in fact -- organizing minor hockey,

organizing boxing matches, organizing all kinds of sports across the communities of Timmins and Kapuskasing, where he was involved for many years.

Back in October of this year he was awarded the Order of Canada by none other than the Governor General herself. We had in the city of Timmins on Saturday an

event at 2 o'clock at the Shania Twain Centre where people from across the province, and in fact from across our country and across our communities, came together to honour Carlo for his many years

of service. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend because I was at another event on the same day. Large ridings make it difficult to attend all events at all times.

I want to use this opportunity to congratulate Carlo and his family for the many years of service he's given to the communities across the Timmins-James Bay

area, but as well to the many people who have benefited from the work of Carlo over the same number of years dating back to the 1930s. I think it's a rare occasion when we have an opportunity to

honour somebody who has made so many contributions to the province of Ontario such as Carlo has for a number of years.

So on behalf of all of those here in the Legislature, I want to extend my congratulations to Carlo on receiving the Order of Canada and wish him well in the many

years that I know he has in the future to work on many other projects for the citizens of the area.

MIKE WEIR

Mr Marcel Beaubien (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex): Today I would invite the members of the Legislature to join me in recognizing and extending our

congratulations to Lambton county's very own Mike Weir.

On November 4, Mike claimed his third PGA tour event in dramatic fashion at the tour championship in Houston, Texas. It was his first win on US soil. He did so

with a birdie in a four-man playoff over a field that featured the world's very best professional golfers. Mike's victory earned him $900,000 and increased his winnings to more than $2.7 million,

but more important, Mike showed the world that Canadians, and especially Ontarians, can compete at the highest levels of competition and win. Indeed, Mike's commitment to hard work, dedication and

excellence have served him well, while bringing honour and distinction to himself, his family, the people of Ontario and his many friends in Lambton county.

Mike would probably say the key to his success is hitting the ball straight. As a member who sits on this side of the House, I would say the key to this

government's success is telling it to the people of Ontario straight. Though we on this side of the House have been both praised and criticized for how we govern this province, we say that by

staying the course of tax cuts, creating new jobs and investing in world-class health care and education systems, the people of Ontario will continue living in a land of peace, prosperity and

purpose.

Finally, while Mike has enjoyed great success, he would probably tell you his best is yet to come. Likewise, for the people of Ontario and for this Progressive

Conservative government, we too believe our best is yet to come.

THEATRE IN SARNIA-LAMBTON

Ms Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): Sarnia-Lambton will be enjoying a special season in theatre in the spring. Theatre Sarnia and the

Imperial Theatre will host the Western Ontario Drama League in March 2002. As well, Sarnia Imperial Theatre will proudly host Theatre Ontario, featuring the four best plays in all of Ontario, to

take place in May 2002. This event is significant as it develops cultural tourism, provides economic benefits and gives the opportunity to people to be entertained and enjoy great theatre.

The Western Ontario Drama League was founded by D. Park Jamison in 1932. It plays a vital role in Ontario's theatre industry.

training and resources at a high level of excellence and professionalism.

Congratulations to Theatre Sarnia and the Imperial Theatre for hosting the Western Ontario Drama League and Theatre Ontario in May 2002. These premier festivals

are a valuable venue for showcasing great talent from the region and around the province.

RAMADAN

Mr Bob Wood (London West): As many members of this House will know, over one billion Muslims throughout the world will be observing a month of

fasting during Ramadan, which started November 16 this year. Muslims regard Ramadan as a spiritual tune-up, as a time for inner reflection, devotion to God and self-control.

The third pillar or religious obligation of Islam, fasting has many benefits, the most important of which is that it teaches self-control. Ramadan is also a time

of intensive worship, reading of the Koran, giving charity, purifying one's behaviour and doing good deeds. In fulfilling the teaching of their faith, they demonstrate to us a commitment to

righteousness and a compassion for the needy, qualities to which we can all aspire.

Ramadan will end with the celebration of the feast of Eid Al-Fitr in about one month's time. At that time, Muslims will gather for prayers and then exchange

presents and share alms with the needy so that all members of the community may be able to celebrate together.

Ramadan has been observed for many centuries, but the events of earlier this year remind us again of the importance of spiritual renewal for both Muslims and

non-Muslims.

I know I speak on behalf of all members of this House in extending greetings to the Muslim community of Ontario and in wishing them "Ramadan Kareem and Eid

Mubarak." These greetings, which in Arabic mean, "May you have a month of giving and a blessed feast," speak to the central meaning of Ramadan.

CONSERVATIVE LEADERSHIP

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): It was with great interest that we welcomed the former Treasurer, the Finance Minister, into the Tory

leadership race. We were interested to see how he's distinguishing himself from Mr Flaherty on the question of education tax credits. He's going to make regulations apply to these private schools

that Flaherty and his gang don't want.

But you know, if it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it's a duck. This policy just isn't going to fly. The only real leadership on the education tax

credit system is coming from Dalton McGuinty. We will scrap the private school voucher on education, and we will do that in about two years' time, when we come to office.

Why will we do that? Because it's just like everything else they're about: they do not have the interests of Ontario's working families at heart. They do not

have their priorities straight. They'd rather give tax cuts to corporations when the economy is falling than legitimate help to working families whose parents are in hospitals, whose kids need

textbooks. That's why they all look alike, they all sound alike, they all fly alike and, like the proverbial turkey, it's just not going to get off the ground.

HOME FOR AUTISTIC YOUTH

Mrs Tina R. Molinari (Thornhill): Yesterday I had the pleasure of attending the opening of the Heather and Martin Goose Home for Autistic Youth

in my riding of Thornhill. The home is part of the Reena Foundation, a non-profit social service agency located in Thornhill that is dedicated to integrating individuals who have developmental

disabilities into the mainstream of society.

Through the generosity of Heather and Martin Goose, Reena has opened a home for autistic youth. The Goose family charitably donated $100,000 to Reena for this

project. It was a great celebration yesterday, and the event was attended by many parents whose children will benefit from the home.

One of the parents described what a positive impact the home will have on her son and her family and thanked her MPP, Dave Tsubouchi, for all his support in

their efforts to find a placement for their son.

Reena is able to do great work in the community of Thornhill, and it's through the generous donations of people like Heather and Martin Goose and the time of the

volunteers who help out at Reena that the good work will continue.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Heather and Martin Goose for their contribution and the Reena Foundation for their tireless effort in consistently

seeking partnerships to improve the lives of our precious special residents.

ESTIMATES

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I beg to inform the House that pursuant to

section 30 of the Members' Integrity Act, I have today laid upon the

table a request from the member for Toronto Centre-Rosedale to the Honourable Coulter Osborne, Integrity Commission, for an opinion on whether the Honourable James Flaherty, Minister of Finance,

has contravened the act or Ontario parliamentary convention.

Standing order 62(

a) provides that "The standing committee on estimates shall present one report with respect to all of the estimates ... considered pursuant to

standing orders 59 and 61 no later than the third Thursday in November of each calendar year."

The House not having received A report from the standing committee on estimates for certain ministries on Thursday, November 8, 2001, as required by the standing

orders of this House, pursuant to standing order 62(b), the estimates before the committee of the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, the Ministry of Community and Social Services, the

Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities, the Ministry of Transportation, the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Ministry of

Intergovernmental Affairs are deemed to be passed by the committee and are deemed to be reported to and received by the House.

Accordingly, the estimates for 2001-02 of the following ministries were deemed to be passed by the standing committee on estimates and were deemed to be reported

to and received by the House:

Clerk at the Table (Ms Lisa Freedman): Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Recreation: 3801, ministry administration program, $4,563,100; 3802,

tourism program, $62,851,900; 3803, culture program, $140,745,800; 3804, sport and recreation program, $23,151,300; 3805, policy and agency partnerships program, $101,564,100; 3806, tourism,

culture and recreation capital program, $64 million.

Ministry of Community and Social Services: 701, ministry administration program, $27,930,800; 702, adults' and children's services program, $7,834,067,200.

Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities: 3001, ministry administration program, $9,790,000; 3002, post-secondary education program, $3,087,229,500 --

Interjections: Dispense.

The Speaker: Dispense? Agreed.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

TENANT PROTECTION

AMENDMENT ACT

(FAIRNESS IN RENT INCREASES), 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR LA PROTECTION

DES LOCATAIRES (AUGMENTATIONS

ÉQUITABLES DES LOYERS)

Mr Caplan moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 134,

An Act to amend the Tenant Protection Act, 1997 to ensure fairness to Ontario's tenants / Projet de loi 134, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1997 sur la

protection des locataires en vue d'assurer un traitement équitable des locataires de l'Ontario.

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

The member for a short statement?

Mr David Caplan (Don Valley East): My bill, if passed, would amend the Tenant Protection Act in two major ways. First, it would ensure that

rents are not increased beyond the guideline if there are outstanding work orders. Second, the bill would ensure that above-guideline rent increases are rolled back if the landlord either ceases to

incur the costs that justify the increase, either capital repairs or utilities, for example, or if a mutually agreed-upon rent increase meets those conditions.

This bill would provide fairness and balance for tenants to ensure they do not have to pay capital improvements, increases in utility costs and other such

increases in perpetuity.

My bill is the right step toward building some fairness back into the rental market for tenants in Ontario, who have been attacked on all sides by the

government, and I look forward to debating it here in the Legislature.

HERITAGE HUNTING

AND FISHING ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE 2001 SUR LA CHASSE

ET LA PÊCHE PATRIMONIALES

Mr Snobelen moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 135,

An Act to recognize Ontario's recreational hunting and fishing heritage and to establish the Fish and Wildlife Heritage Commission / Projet de loi

135, Loi visant à reconnaître le patrimoine de la chasse et de la pêche sportives en Ontario et à créer la Commission du patrimoine chasse et pêche.

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

The minister for a short statement?

Hon John Snobelen (Minister of Natural Resources): I know the opposition critics have already been briefed, so I will make a very brief

statement.

The Heritage Hunting and Fishing Act was a Blueprint promise by our party in 1999 to legally recognize the right of all Ontarians to hunt and fish. The

proposed new act does not change current laws that regulate hunting and fishing in Ontario and provide protection for fish and wildlife habitat.

We recognize that society values the principles of conservation, fair chase and humane dispatch, the consumption of harvest and safety. The government will

continue to set standards and policy to help ensure that hunting and fishing are managed in a sound, sustainable manner and in accordance with ethical and humane practices.

There is strong support for this legislation. The act, if passed, will mean that the proud and established tradition of recreational hunting and fishing will

be preserved in Ontario subject to law and regulations.

VISITORS

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I thought that you and the other

members of this assembly might wish to know that we have two very special guests sitting in the members' gallery. We have with us today Steve and Jane Kerper. Jane is the current president of the

Bayview Village Ratepayers' Association and Steve is a past president. I wanted to acknowledge their great work in the community and their presence here today.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

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

6:45 pm to 9:30 pm on Monday, November 19, Tuesday, November 20, and Wednesday, November 21, 2001, for the purpose of considering government business.

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

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

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1353 to 1358.

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

Ayes

Agostino, Dominic

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Beaubien, Marcel

Bradley, James J.

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Christopherson, David

Clark, Brad

Coburn, Brian

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Cordiano, Joseph

Crozier, Bruce

Cunningham, Dianne

Curling, Alvin

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hastings, John

Hoy, Pat

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Kells, Morley

Klees, Frank

Kwinter, Monte

Levac, David

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Murdoch, Bill

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Parsons, Ernie

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Ramsay, David

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Sergio, Mario

Snobelen, John

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stewart, R. Gary

Stockwell, Chris

Tilson, David

Tsubouchi, David H.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Wilson, Jim

Wood, Bob

Young, David

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

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

Hampton, Howard

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martin, Tony

Prue, Michael

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 68; the nays are 7.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

ORAL QUESTIONS

FISCAL AND ECONOMIC POLICY

Mr Gerry Phillips (Scarborough-Agincourt): To the Minister of Finance: in the past 24 hours, we've heard the troubling news. You're now saying

that the fiscal situation is dramatically worse than you thought just two weeks ago. I understand there's a $5-billion gap to close, according to the government, and you're looking at significant

reductions in support for education, community services and other things. The one thing that is going ahead full speed is your corporate tax cut, designed to cut taxes by $2.2 billion and,

importantly, to get them 25% below our competitors in the US.

My question is this: now that you've acknowledged the seriousness of our fiscal situation with this $5-billion gap, will you commit to at least review this

decision to proceed with this $2.2-billion corporate tax cut to get the corporate taxes 25% below the US?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): Our concern remains economic growth and prosperity in Ontario. It is because of

economic growth and prosperity in this province that we're able to fund the important social programs like health care, like education, at record levels in Ontario. The sine qua non is economic

growth. We've seen that in the province of Ontario. We've seen that through tax cuts, not only personal income tax cuts but corporate tax cuts, which encourage investment in this province, thereby

creating jobs.

Mr Phillips: You've indicated in the media that there clearly is enormous pressure on our support for public education. When you exclude

health spending, public education spending is over 40% of our Ontario budget, so if you do in fact have a $5-billion gap, public education is going to be under enormous pressure. At the same time,

in just six weeks you're planning to provide private schools in the province with the beginning of at least $300 million of public support.

My question is this: recognizing the seriousness of our fiscal situation, will you at least today agree to commit to review this decision to provide $300

million of public support for private schools?

Hon Mr Flaherty: The equity-in-education tax credit during the first fiscal year is $15 million. That's the cost in the first fiscal year in

which it's applicable.

With respect to health care spending, I'm glad the member opposite recognizes that we are spending record sums of money on health care in the province, having

moved from 38% of program spending in 1995 to 45% now, and moving forward year and year after that to a point where we may well be spending 60% of the program income on health care unless we get

some support in the partnership that we're supposed to have with the federal government in Ottawa. That's the key.

I read in the papers this morning about the large surplus, the $10-billion surplus, in Ottawa. I urge the member opposite to speak to his federal Liberal

counterparts and say to them, "If you're going to mandate national health care in this country, then surely you have to partner with the provinces and the territories and use some of your surplus

for that purpose."

Mr Phillips: Let me get this straight, Minister. You're prepared to take a hatchet to public education. You say you've got a $5-billion gap,

but you're not prepared to consider, to even look at, the possibility that you've made a mistake in getting corporate taxes 25% below the US and in providing at least $300 million -- and that's

your figure -- of public money to private schools.

I say this again, Minister: you've told us that the fiscal situation is dramatically worse than just two weeks ago. It is a significant problem, a $5-billion

gap. I say to you again, tell the people of Ontario why you're not even prepared to look at, to consider, the decision to cut corporate taxes 25% below the US and to proceed with a $300-million

plan to support private education when you already know public education is under the knife and under the gun. Why won't you commit to those reviews?

Hon Mr Flaherty: Tax reductions work to create jobs in the province of Ontario. That's been proven over the past six years, since the election

of the Mike Harris government in 1995.

I'm not surprised the member opposite and some of his colleagues don't understand that by reducing taxes, you create more economic activity. They mismanaged

the economy from 1985 to 1990, and we have to live with that mismanagement. Ask yourself opposite where we'd be today if we didn't have to spend $9 billion this year serving the public debt. That's

the problem with Liberal mismanagement and NDP mismanagement in the province from 1985 to 1995. We could use that $9 billion for health care, for education, for social services, but no; you say,

"Increase the public debt. Don't reduce taxes. Don't have that investment in the province. Don't have that increased revenue for Ontario." I tell you, it's been proven for the last six years that

tax cuts create jobs and they create more revenue for Ontario.

CHILD CARE

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): My question is to the Minister of Finance. Today in Ontario, the government

provides subsidies to help 7,000 families pay for child care. Without this support, these working families would not be able to afford quality child care for their children. The government also

provides wage subsidies for workers in child care facilities. This enables child care facilities to offer quality care at affordable rates.

Last week, Ontarians, particularly families with children, were shocked to read in a national paper about a leaked document where your government plans to

slash $200 million from the child care budget. That's a 37% cut in funding.

Minister, today in the gallery are many parents and caregivers who are concerned and worried about the support your government provides for child care. Will

you stand in your place today and guarantee you will not cut child care in the province of Ontario?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): To the Minister of Community and Social Services.

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for children, minister responsible for francophone

affairs): We recognize that for many Ontario families, child care is an important resource that lets them balance the problems of work and family. It's tremendously important for them. We

spend a terrific amount on child care, well in excess of the $500-million-plus that we spend in the institution-based child care system. We also spend a considerable amount on the Ontario child

care supplement for working families.

The member opposite talks about a document, one which I don't think she's read, from the substance of her question. It's a draft document with preliminary

options, discussion, with potential options, and one that was judged to be of such insignificant importance that it didn't reach my desk.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Minister, your government is no friend to child care in this province. Last year, you received $114 million from the federal

government in the early child development accord, and not one cent of it went to child care. Your government has funded child care at a rate 17% below what it was funded when you came to office.

Your government has refused to pay more pay equity adjustments for child care workers beyond 1998. Now the prospect that you would cut 45% from the child care budget strikes panic in the hearts of

families and their caregivers.

Will you guarantee today that you will not take one more cent away from the child care budget in this province?

Hon Mr Baird: I can certainly guarantee the member opposite that we'll continue to show a lot of leadership and a lot of support to children,

support and programs and services.

The member opposite talks about pay equity. This government spends more supporting pay equity than any government in Ontario's history. This government has

been a leader in that regard. We spend more supporting parents in their child care options than any government in Ontario's history. We're spending more on child care, in fact, than the honourable

member's party, in A Clear Vision for Ontario's Future, committed to spend.

The member opposite also talks about the federal support for early childhood development. The member opposite gave me some advice on what we should do with

that federal money. On May 1, she wrote me and said we should spend the money on autistic children, not on child care. If she has been so strong on that issue, maybe she should have exercised some

leadership before those decisions were made.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Minister, your priorities are crystal clear. Your ministry has initiated a plan to cut $200 million from child care, yet your

government has fast-tracked its plan to give corporations a $2.2-billion tax cut. Working families and children in Ontario will be made to pay for your corporate tax cuts. My office has been

deluged with letters, e-mails and phone calls from people who are indignant that this government would so callously consider pulling resources away from families and children to give to your

corporate friends.

All I'm asking from you today is a commitment that you will not pull one more cent away from the very few that you're providing already for child care in

Ontario.

Hon Mr Baird: The member opposite, the spokesman for her party, never lets the facts get in the way. This is another example of that today.

We're spending a record amount supporting child care. In fact, in this year's budget we've budgeted to spend more money than we spent last year. The member opposite didn't mention that. The member

opposite fails to look at the facts.

Interjection.

Hon Mr Baird: The member opposite doesn't want to hear the answer, so I won't bother.

FISCAL AND ECONOMIC POLICY

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Finance. We learned today that your government is examining the

details of cutting 5% from the health budget. But at the same time as you're cutting 5% from the health budget, you are reducing corporate taxes in this province by another $2.4 billion.

Can you tell the people of the province why reducing taxes for your corporate friends by another $2.4 billion is more important than the health care services

that people across Ontario need?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): Reducing taxes creates economic growth. Economic growth gives us additional revenue.

Additional revenue gives us the opportunity to fund important social services such as health care and education.

Mr Hampton: After all of the corporate tax cuts, after all of the income tax cuts for the well-off, after all of your gifts to your corporate

friends, one would think the economy would be incredibly buoyant; instead, it's headed in the other direction.

But I want to ask you about another element of this. At the same time that you're extending the $2.4 billion in corporate tax reductions, you're also going to

implement a further $1-billion reduction in income taxes this year, most of which is going to the well-off. At the same time you're doing that, schools across Ontario are closing libraries, being

forced to limit special education, closing community pools and generally telling children, "Sorry, we don't have money for more textbooks."

Can you tell us, please, why do your corporate friends and the well-off need another $3.4 billion altogether while you now go about cutting yet again the

schools and the education services our children need?

Hon Mr Flaherty: I'm so disappointed. It was only two or three weeks ago that the leader of the third party was advocating tax cuts. He was

advocating a reduction in the retail sales tax in Ontario, and now he's against tax cuts. Now he's saying, "Don't reduce the personal income taxes of hard-working families in Ontario. Don't reduce

the taxes on small and medium-sized business and, yes, larger business so they can invest more in the province and create more jobs in Ontario. Don't do that. Don't grow the economy in Ontario so

that we have more jobs and more wealth and a higher standard of living. Don't do those things. Do what we did: mismanage the economy. Grow the public debt. Create a deficit. Push taxes on to our

children and grandchildren."

That was the NDP and Liberal philosophy from 1985 to 1995. What a mess you left. Thank goodness Premier Harris and this party turned that around so that we

have a solid foundation now in Ontario; and yes, tax cuts are a very important part of the progress we've made in Ontario. We will stay the course.

Mr Hampton: Here we are now, headed into recession, and what is the response from this government? "Cut the very services that people across

this province need. Cut health care. Cut child care. Cut our schools and education. Cut the Ministry of the Environment." Minister, the reality of this situation is that your corporate friends

haven't had enough. Your well-off friends, in terms of income taxes, haven't had enough.

The priority ought to be for your government to fund the services that people need so that in these very difficult times they will not have to choose between

using the money to put food on the table or to pay for textbooks and school supplies for their children. Minister, don't you get it? Your corporate friends have had enough. Your high-income friends

have had enough. It's time now to look after the priorities of the average person across Ontario: their health care system, their schools, their libraries, the environment and the water they need

to have protected, and the child care services that working people across this province need if they're going to be able to go to work. Do you recognize that? Will you finally recognize that?

Hon Mr Flaherty: I know that the prescription of the member opposite to solve the challenges in Ontario is big government, big spending, big

taxes, big deficits -- pushing taxes on to our children and their children. That's all running deficits is. It's just pushing taxation on to the next generation. It's shameful for governments to do

that, quite frankly. It's not responsible for governments to do that. It's fiscal mismanagement. The Liberals did it from 1985 to 1990. You did it from 1990 to 1995. We were left with a mess in

1995, but thank goodness Premier Harris had the courage to make the difficult decisions to turn this province around so that we have a solid foundation now. I'll tell you, they were difficult

decisions. If they had been easy decisions, the Liberals and the NDP would have made them, and they didn't.

CHILD CARE

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): I want to ask the Minister of Community and Social Services why he is prepared to sacrifice the health

and well-being of our children on the altar of corporate taxes. Your own leaked document suggests that you were actually considering the absurd: huge cuts to Ontario's family resource centres and

regulated child care. And this is after the 15% cuts that your government has made to child care since you came into office in 1995.

Child care advocates have responded to this news with outrage, and they are here today to express that outrage. I don't know if the minister knows, but in the

city of Toronto alone there are up to 16,000 families on the waiting list for regulated child care. I am calling on you now to denounce this suggestion quickly and unequivocally. Reassure Ontario

families who now fear that their child care is at risk and guarantee to them that Ontario's regulated child care budget will be protected.

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for children, minister responsible for francophone

affairs): We recognize that child care is an important resource for families trying to balance off the needs of work and family. The member opposite discusses a document that was labelled

"draft," that was labelled "preliminary for discussion purposes," listing some potential options. The document in question did not even reach my desk because it was deemed that it wasn't of enough

merit to create a child benefit using those resources in question.

We're proud of the significant investments we've made in supporting the range of children's supports -- Healthy Babies, Healthy Children -- supporting young

children with autism, supporting children's treatment centres that provide services and supports to young children with diseases like spina bifida. We're very proud of those investments.

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): Will you denounce the leaked document and will you assure parents that the child care budget and family

resource budget in the province is protected? You know, Minister, that any further cuts to regulated child care or family resource programs will destroy these important services for children.

I have a package of letters from parents and staff who wrote to me this weekend to express their concerns. I'm going to send some to you. Let me read some of

the comments:

"I am appalled that your ministry would even contemplate cuts to the province's child care system.... Why are women and children always the first to suffer in

an attempt by your government to squeeze yet more money out of the most vulnerable members of our society and the dedicated workers who care for and educate young children?" Lee Gold of

Toronto.

A second one, from Debbie Babington of Toronto:

"Could this government be so driven by its commitment to corporate tax cuts that you would go to such extremes? Do you realize that when working mothers or

fathers don't have" -- child care they -- "have to quit their job?"

Your government has $2.3 billion for your friends in the corporate sector. Where is the money to protect and enhance regulated child care and family resource

programs in Ontario?

Hon Mr Baird: Let's look at the facts. Last year we spent $521 million supporting the very child care the member opposite talks about. What

did we put in the budget to spend this year? Not $521 million. Thank goodness we didn't fight to protect what we spent last year, because the Minister of Finance gave us $523 million. So when the

member opposite talks about a cut, the member opposite doesn't know what she talks about. That's in addition to the Ontario child care supplement for working families, where we're spending more

than $200 million to support parents in making their choices.

The NDP supports choice in child care as long as it's their choice. We trust families, we trust parents to make their own decisions on how they can fund child

care for their own children. The member opposite, when she was in government, chose to borrow tens of billions of dollars on the backs of the next generation. That led to less hope, less

opportunity and more despair in this province. We won't allow her and her party to turn back the clock.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): On a point of order, the Minister of Finance. Stop the clock.

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): I sit in the row ahead of the minister and I couldn't hear the answer to the

question.

The Speaker: Thank you very much. New question?

EMERGENCY SERVICES

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): This is for the associate Minister of Health. Minister, your government has tried to deny the problems

of emergency room overcrowding by simply burying the information about critical care bypasses. We now know that the situation is getting worse. Ambulances are being tied up even longer just trying

to get people into emergency rooms. People are still lying on stretchers in hallways and they're waiting even longer for a hospital bed. We learned this weekend that almost one quarter of

ambulances serving the city of Toronto are waiting more than an hour just to transfer their patients into the hospital's care. I'm sure you must understand that when paramedics are waiting in

hospital corridors and parking lots, they are not available to answer the next emergency call.

Ron Kelusky, the manager of the city's ambulance service, makes it absolutely clear once and for all. He says this is a capacity issue. That means hospital

beds, Minister.

Ontario has the lowest number of acute-care beds per capita in this country. Will you finally stop closing hospital beds and start opening the 1,600 acute-care

beds that Dalton McGuinty has been calling for?

Hon Helen Johns (Minister without Portfolio [Health and Long-Term Care]): Let me say that all of the health care partners are working together

to ensure that we have the best emergency services across Canada. Let me also say that Toronto has been working very hard with the Ministry of Health to ensure that we have emergency services in

the GTA. Our government has invested over $750 million since 1995 on initiatives that would improve emergency room access, and we've equipped hospitals better. We've also made substantial

commitments to ensuring that people move through the emergency rooms quickly and they have the ability to either move into acute-care beds or out into long-term-care facilities. This government has

made quite a commitment to ensuring that we have the best health care system in Canada.

Mrs McLeod: Minister, I'm afraid that answer means absolutely nothing to the parents of Joshua Fleuelling, who were here at the Legislature

today. They were here two years after their son died. They were here a year almost to the day, after the inquest into Joshua Fleuelling's death called on your government to stop closing hospital

beds.

The Fleuellings were here because they don't believe that you or your government have paid any attention at all to that inquest report; and they're right,

because you haven't stopped closing beds -- another 100 closed just last year. Hospitals in the Toronto area are operating at over 95% of their capacity.

Minister, you should know that Dr Michael Schull of Sunnybrook Hospital has done an intensive study into emergency room overcrowding, and his research puts the

responsibility directly on your government and the chaos of hospital restructuring. His research shows that emergency room overcrowding intensified when your government started restructuring

hospitals.

Minister, I say to you that the problem lies with the chaos of hospital restructuring. It lies with the 6,000 acute-care beds that your government has cut. It

lies with your refusal to provide adequate funding for hospitals or for long-term care or for home care. Will you face the realities of the health care needs of the people of this province, or will

you keep failing people like Joshua Fleuelling?

Hon Mrs Johns: Let me say that, of course, on the one-year anniversary of the inquest, we send our deepest sympathies out to the family. But

let me say that the solution to this lies in a multifaceted plan which this government is implementing.

We have, as you know, opened 20,000 long-term-care beds to make sure that people who come into emergency rooms who need to get out to a long-term-care facility

have that. We have opened 2,300 of those beds; 6,000 by the spring and 20,000 by 2004.

In addition, we have put $570 million since 1995 into initiatives to improve hospital ERs. In December 1999, we announced a $23-million, 10-point plan for

Toronto and the GTA to ensure that there was emergency room capacity, and this included 200 flex beds -- I don't know why it's not being recognized -- 12 flex ICU beds; enhancing discharge planning

in Toronto. We've done a lot of work. Do we need to do more? Absolutely. We continue to. This health care system will be the best in the world.

YOUTH CRIME PREVENTION

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): My question is for the Solicitor General. Minister, as everyone knows, we here in Ontario have the

best police around. In fact, everyone in this House will have a chance to thank them personally tomorrow when the Police Association of Ontario comes to Queen's Park to meet with MPPs.

It's often been said -- in fact you yourself, Minister, have said it many times -- that the police cannot do the job alone; they need the public's help. This

past summer you gave Crime Stoppers $200,000 for its after-hours operations. I'm wondering if you would tell this House how this morning you continued our government's commitment to helping the

police and Crime Stoppers in the area of youth crime.

Hon David Turnbull (Solicitor General): I thank the member for Scarborough Centre for this question. Crime prevention is indeed everybody's

business, particularly the question of reducing youth crime.

Today I was pleased to announce $200,000 of support for the expansion and enhancement of the student Crime Stoppers programs in schools all across Ontario. In

this program students are encouraged to support police by providing information to solve crimes by using the hotline. Schools are addressing the very important issues of bullying, drug use and

youth gangs.

Since 1997 our government has provided $1.7 million in grants for youth programs. In September of this year I provided $2 million for the youth crime and

violence initiative to enhance community safety.

Ms Mushinski: Thank you for that response, Minister. I know that the Harris government believes that all people should respect the law. What

other programs and initiatives are in place to help our police and to help young people avoid a life of crime?

Hon Mr Turnbull: This year adequacy standards were brought to bear so that every police service would have to have policies on the

investigation of youth crime. The OPP, as well as municipal police services, sponsors a number of community-based programs aimed at reducing youth crime.

My ministry, together with the Ministry of Education, has developed a provincial model for local police and school board protocols. This identifies 23 elements

which require effective police response in school-related incidents. These cover school reporting procedures, information-sharing and disclosure, policing interviews and reporting of suspected

child abuse. Of course, the justice partners in our various ministries are still advocating on behalf of the people of Ontario to have meaningful federal changes to the youth justice

legislation.

GOVERNMENT CONTRACT

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): My question is to the Minister of Labour. On Friday we learned that Glen Wright, chair of WSIB, a

government agency that reports to you, while serving as chair of the board also worked for over $100,000 in untendered government contracts through the Ministry of Health of former Minister of

Health Witmer.

Mr Wright was earning $123,000 in a part-time position. The integrity of the chair of the board and what it means to injured workers is extremely important. It

is not a political job. It cannot be defined by party politics; it cannot be partisan politics. We believe it is inappropriate for the chair of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board of Ontario

to be doing political work on behalf of the government of the day. I think the integrity of the board is at stake.

I ask you today, in view of that, will you do the appropriate thing and either ask Mr Wright to resign or fire him as chair of WSIB?

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): I think it's a quantum leap to suggest that the work that was being done was partisan political

work. What Mr Wright was doing was arbitrating a case between the Canadian Medical Protective Association and the OMA with respect to malpractice insurance. Now, be fair. In your wildest dreams,

how can somebody's arbitrating a case between the OMA and the medical protective association with respect to malpractice insurance be partisan political work? Give your head a shake. It's work that

is done every day by arbitrators. We didn't appoint him without recommendation. The appointment was requested by the Canadian Medical Protective Association and the OMA. They requested Mr Wright.

Mr Wright's contract to chair at the WSIB is done on a part-time basis. If anything you said in your question was accurate, you'd shock me. I'm not shocked.

Mr Agostino: I guess we're to believe that it's strictly a coincidence that a man who is a close friend of Premier Harris and a close

confidant of the Minister of Health at that time, Elizabeth Witmer, someone who will be working on Mrs Witmer's leadership campaign, just happened to be chosen, untendered, as the individual to

receive a $100,000 contract.

The appointment became full-time on October 1, 2001, and the salary went from $123,000 to $250,000. Mr Wright's job and consultant contract continued till

October 31. So for a one-month period, while being full-time chair of the board, he was still working as a consultant and, in this coincidence, happened to be chosen by the health ministry without

the health minister's involvement? That is ludicrous, Minister. Give your head a shake, because you're trying to defend the indefensible here.

The WSIB has to be free of political interference. The fact that Mr Wright, your appointment as chair of that board, is also doing political work puts in

question the integrity and the independence of the board. Again, Minister, will you do the right thing today? Will you fire Mr Wright as head of the WSIB and let him go on and do his free or paid

political work on behalf of the government of Ontario?

Hon Mr Stockwell: Mr Speaker, I'll remember not to use my more provocative comments in the first question, because they were used in the

supplementary by the member opposite.

The system is very clear. The two parties who were trying to negotiate an agreement agreed on Mr Wright. Mr Wright got appointed to a part-time job. What's

political about that? I don't understand. He is in that business. That's what he does for a living. He said, "I'm appointed to the chair. It's a part-time appointment." The request was made by the

two parties to put him in, and suddenly we've got another ORC brewing in Mr Agostino's mind.

There's nothing to this. It's another Agostino fantasy. It's another flight of fantasy on the member's part where he slams this place, he smears people who

associate with the government and he slanders individuals. Nothing to it. Typical attack by the member for Hamilton East. The best we should do is just ignore it, because even responding lends

credence to an absurd question.

GRAPE AND WINE INDUSTRY

Mr Bart Maves (Niagara Falls): My question is for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Minister, as you know, the grape and

wine industry is of vital importance to the province of Ontario and especially to the region of Niagara. We've done a lot as a government to help the grape and wine industry. We've brought in VQA

legislation, and we've brought in changes for direct delivery. I'm wondering what you're doing since you've become Minister of Agriculture to ensure that this vital contributor continues to create

jobs and economic growth in the future.

Hon Brian Coburn (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs): I'm pleased to report to you that our government has supported and will

continue to strongly support the grape and wine industry; in fact, it's an industry that generates $338 million in sales every year. With every $10 million in sales, that generates $14.8 million in

economic activity, so certainly this industry is an economic boon to our overall provincial economy.

Actually, we're working very hard to keep it robust. Just last week I was with my colleague the member from Erie-Lincoln and announced a $10-million investment

in this industry's comprehensive strategy for the future. It's called Poised for Greatness. That's a partnership with the wine and grape industry, a $20-million initiative and a strategy that will

put them in good stead on the world stage so that the best of our wine and grape industry can be put on the world stage.

Mr Maves: That type of investment is definitely appreciated down in the Niagara area of the province, and I'm sure it's appreciated in other

areas of the province that produce wine.

What kind of success and what kind of progress can we expect out of the industry now that this strategy is in place?

Hon Mr Coburn: Under that partnership with the Ontario Wine Council, the Vintners Quality Alliance Ontario and the Ontario Grape Growers'

Marketing Board, that strategy in the industry, they've set some pretty specific and ambitious goals. By the year 2020, the industry will be a $1.5-billion-a-year business, employing 13,500 people.

By the year 2020, of course, Ontario wines, red and white, will account for fully 60% of all premium wine purchased by Ontario consumers. In addition to that, more than 90% of grapes grown in

Ontario will be used to make premium Ontario wines deserving of the Vintners Quality Alliance designation.

These are ambitious goals. Our government has every confidence that this industry will achieve those goals.

ALGOMA STEEL

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I have a question for the Deputy Premier. Last week I met with steelworkers from Algoma Steel Inc and

people from Sault Ste Marie, who were very concerned about the restructuring of Algoma Steel. They desperately want both senior levels of government to come to the table and to get actively

involved in the restructuring of Algoma Steel.

Will you join with me today in asking the Prime Minister and the Premier to go to the table and to show confidence and commitment on the part of both senior

levels of government in Algoma Steel so that a successful restructuring can happen?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): As I imagine the member opposite knows, Ontario has been at the table during the

course of the discussions relating to Algoma Steel.

Our particular concern, which is quite rightly the concern of the province, relates to the pension liabilities and the ability of Algoma to fully fund the

pensions not only of retired persons but of persons about to retire or persons who would retire in the normal course after years of service at Algoma.

The Ministry of Finance -- and as minister, I have a direct concern with that issue -- has been at the table. As I'm sure the member opposite knows, the matter

is before the courts and many discussions have taken place. There has been, as I understand it, some significant progress, but we're not quite there yet in terms of all the necessary parties

agreeing to terms that would satisfy everyone.

Mr Hampton: The Deputy Premier would know that the pension issue is one issue that is important, but what's important for the community of

Sault Ste Marie and for the workers, and I might add for workers in other communities, is a successful restructuring of Algoma Steel. So far, the Liberals in Ottawa have been the invisible man on

this project, and I may say that the bondholders and the note holders have not heard either level of government come to the table and say clearly, "Algoma Steel will not be allowed to fail. You,

the bondholders and note holders, cannot put the company into bankruptcy and then pick up what is left." That's what is needed.

I'm asking you today to sign a letter with me asking the federal government to come directly to the restructuring table and for a commitment from your

government to go directly to the restructuring table as well so that that message of confidence and commitment in Algoma Steel will be received. Will you do that?

Hon Mr Flaherty: To be clear to the member opposite, the government of Ontario has been and remains at the table, particularly concerned with

the pension issue, as the province should be concerned with the welfare of persons who have earned an entitlement to pensions.

The second part about the federal government and the federal government's involvement: I'm certainly prepared to work with the member opposite to encourage the

federal government to be fully engaged in this process. It's very important for the people of Sault Ste Marie.

PAROLE SYSTEM

Mr Dave Levac (Brant): My question is for the Minister of Correctional Services. Minister, as you're aware, and we on this side are very

aware, the management of provincial parole and probation in Ontario is your job and your responsibility. Last week, three-time convicted pedophile Peter Whitmore was released from a provincial

correctional facility and placed on provincial parole. Why is it, then, that under your ministry and your watch Peter Whitmore managed to set up a temporary home only a few precious metres away

from a schoolyard and a daycare centre, a few metres away from children whom he is forbidden to be near? Why did you allow this to happen?

Hon Rob Sampson (Minister of Correctional Services): The member opposite should know, and I believe he does know and I'm surprised he's asking

the question, that the reason why we have very little control over offenders who are released from institutions in this province is because the federal Liberal legislation prohibits us from having

any further control over them.

Many times I have encouraged my colleague across the floor to stand with us in this House, and outside, as we petition the federal Liberal government to change

the rules that govern how inmates are treated once they're released from our institutions with their term not fully expired, and he has not been there. I've not heard one word of support from any

member of the Ontario Liberal caucus to support this government's stand, to tell the federal Liberal government to get rid of the discount law. If you're prepared to stand in your place in this

House right now today and say you're supporting that, please do so.

Mr Levac: I find it interesting that the minister does not want to take responsibility for it by saying that he does have an option, and that

option would be the entry plan which I asked him to do before he released Whitmore, to announce to the schools, to announce to anybody near that this man is going to be taking up residence, and you

didn't know that.

To make things even worse than they are, the Toronto Star today reported that parole officers are having a hard time doing their job. Your failure has resulted

in officers having the highest caseloads in our country. Of the 165 new people you promised, only one half of them have been hired. Parole officers are being assaulted and threatened in unworkable

conditions in their particular places of work and they're spending more than one-half hour a month on individuals they're supposed to be monitoring while they're in the communities. What's your

answer to these problems? Blame the federal government, blame the staff themselves and do everything except take responsibility yourself.

Will you stand up in your place today and say that you do have a problem with the working conditions and the fact that parole officers are overworked and

stressed? Will you pledge that you will never again, under your watch, allow this kind of situation to happen in our province?

Hon Mr Sampson: I'll pledge to the people in this House and the people watching here that the Mike Harris government will do everything it

possibly can to encourage the federal Liberal government to wake up and smell the coffee and change the laws of this country to allow us to have full control over individuals who are sentenced to

institutions in this province so that they serve their full term here, instead of handcuffing us like they currently do with their legislation.

I'll remind the member opposite that he voted against the pedophile legislation that we brought forward in this House. I'll remind that member that he voted

against any legislation that would have exposed pedophiles and their existence in this province. He voted against it, and now he has the audacity to stand in this House and say somehow he supports

that legislation. You should be ashamed of yourself.

CONSUMER PROTECTION

Mrs Tina R. Molinari (Thornhill): My question is for the Minister of Consumer and Business Services. With the failure of Canada 3000 airlines,

there has been a lot of concern about the people who have booked flights and paid for their flights. Some in fact are stranded around the world. Minister, could you tell me what protections are in

place for Ontario consumers facing this situation?

Hon Norman W. Sterling (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): Fortunately, Ontario residents who book their travel through a registered

travel agent have great protections when they're travelling abroad. There are three lines that a traveller can look to.

First, he or she should look to their credit card company. Many credit card companies guarantee that a service will be delivered, and therefore there is a real

chance of compensation directly from the credit card company for either a trip that has not been taken or a return trip that was not there to be taken.

The second line of defence is a travel agent. The travel agent is responsible compensating the traveller for any losses that they might have incurred as a

result of the sale of the ticket to them.

The third is the compensation fund, which presently has $22 million in it and is a backup to the aforementioned protections.

Mrs Molinari: Thank you, Minister, for that very informative response. I know the Travel Industry Council of Ontario is working very hard to

make sure every Ontario consumer affected by the bankruptcy of Canada 3000 is taken care of.

Last week I noticed on CBC Radio that there is some confusion surrounding Canada 3000 Holidays and the wholesale vacation package arm of Canada 3000. Could you

tell us what is happening with Canada 3000 Holidays?

Hon Mr Sterling: This is another arm or another business that was involved with offering holiday packages to many Canadians and many people in

Ontario. This was a separate company which only filed for bankruptcy this morning. Fortunately, the travel industry had withheld as much as $8 million as money in trust for many of the people who

had not gone on their vacations, these holiday packages. Therefore, they are in a very good position to compensate people for their losses when they are not going to be able to go on those

particular trips.

Our first priority was to get people back who were stranded abroad. Canada-wide, 240,000 of 290,000 people are back home. Now we must work on the other parts

of the puzzle. It's a very complicated puzzle, but we're happy in Ontario that we have these great protections for our travellers who book through our travel agents.

CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETIES

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): My question is for the Minister of Community and Social Services and it focuses on the

growing funding crisis in child welfare. To cite just a few examples, the children's aid society of the district of Sudbury and Manitoulin will end the current year with a deficit of $1.8 million.

The Algoma CAS is projecting a budget deficit of $1.5 million, and the deficit of the Thunder Bay Children's Aid Society will be in the range of $400,000. Indeed, 40 of the province's 51 CAS

branches are now running deficits, which may reach upwards of $100 million this year.

This number reflects the fact that many CAS expenditures like group care, legal costs, travel and other related expenses are not adequately reflected in the

minister's unworkable funding formula. Indeed, the plight of children's welfare in Ontario in light of today's sad but predictable news of across-the-board budget slashing makes me rather sick.

Minister, will you stand in your place today and assure this House that no children's aid society will be forced into debt this year and that you will cover

all the actual costs incurred by children's aid societies, which are committed to protecting our province's most vulnerable children?

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for children, minister responsible for francophone

affairs): Child welfare and child protection have been a tremendous priority for this government. As my predecessor, Janet Ecker worked tremendously hard on this issue. We've seen funding

increase by more than 115%. I am hard-pressed to look anywhere in the public sector, anywhere in Ontario, anywhere in Canada, which has seen a greater budget increase. It's an unprecedented

commitment and an unprecedented support.

What the member opposite is asking is that we say to all children's aid societies, "Spend whatever you like and send us the bill and we'll pay for it," which

is something no minister in any province in Canada has ever been able to do on any issue. I can tell the member opposite that earlier this year I sought an in-year budget increase of $123 million,

and the cabinet said yes. We've also committed to spend additional resources in this year's budget after that. Child welfare and child protection will continue to be a priority, and we'll continue

to devote the adequate and necessary resources to fulfill these important responsibilities to help children in need.

Mr Gravelle: Let me tell you the actual costs, Minister. Three years ago, your government promised a comprehensive review of the funding

formula to reflect new standards for front-line workers. This is not being done. This review is vital, and you know it is, as it will reveal that you're not covering the actual costs of care that

are mandated by legislation.

In my own riding, the children's aid society has three satellite offices: one in Nipigon, one in Geraldton and one in Marathon. In a district as large as ours,

I doubt that even you would argue against the need for these satellite operations. Yet you don't fund their operation, nor the operation of satellite offices across the province.

Minister, will you at least commit today to provide the needed and totally appropriate funds to cover these satellite offices, which are just so vital for our

large areas?

Hon Mr Baird: We're certainly prepared to look at any issue in terms of improving our child welfare and child protection system. We have made

unprecedented funding commitments to ensure that we do more to help young children, whether they're victims of sexual abuse, physical abuse or neglect. We've lowered the bar to give children's aid

societies across Ontario more powers and more ability to ensure that they can step in and intervene and help young children in need of protection.

The member opposite has some suggestions. I'd be very happy to look at them and to weigh them in the context of all the other tremendous priorities we have in

the children's services sector.

PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY

Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): My question is directed to the Minister of Energy, Science and Technology. The pharmaceutical industry has

played a very important role in research, development and innovation. Research and development products coming from that industry have been saving lives, enhancing our quality of life and extending

our life expectancy -- for example, the discovery of insulin not far from here; later, the discovery of penicillin and other antibiotics.

These discoveries have also assisted our farmers, improved the liveability of our livestock and increased production. But, Minister, what has their

contribution been to the economy of the province of Ontario?

Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Energy, Science and Technology): In the next 10 years there'll be a huge increase in demographics as well as

incredible advances in medical research, particularly pharmaceutical research. Pharmaceutical products are often the most cost-effective and humane ways of treating many illnesses.

Ontario needs to strive to be a global leader in drug discovery and development because this will lead to two important results. One is leading-edge jobs for

our people, and two, a healthier economy and healthier people in Ontario.

As part of that commitment, the Ontario government needs to reaffirm its commitment to patent rights in this province. I know that all of the Premiers in

Canada are working on a paper toward that. Premier Harris will present that to his colleagues in January. I certainly hope, as the minister responsible for R&D in the pharmaceutical sector,

along with my colleague Mr Runciman and others, that Ontario reaffirms its historic position with respect to patent rights, protecting high-quality jobs in this province.

Mr Galt: Thank you very much, Minister. There's no question that the pharmaceutical industry plays a very vital role for the people of Ontario

and particularly for livestock producers. Minister, it's extremely important that the pharmaceutical industry thrives and prospers in Ontario. As we look to the future, research and development in

the area of biotechnology is of the utmost importance.

Minister, how is Ontario ensuring that the pharmaceutical industry will continue to play an important role in health research and development and

innovation?

Hon Mr Wilson: In the year 2000 alone, the innovative pharmaceutical industry invested some $396.2 million in research and development in

Ontario, employed more than 9,000 people and injected $1.4 billion into Ontario's economy as a whole.

The Ontario government partners with the pharmaceutical industry in the areas of research and development through our Ontario Research and Development

Challenge Fund. We've partnered with universities, hospitals and the pharmaceutical sector in 24 different projects. Also, I recently created the Ontario BioCouncil, which is headed by Mr Joe

Rotman. That council will seek further ways to partner with the pharmaceutical industry so we can get our share of the worldwide research and development monies that are available and, second,

continue to create a strong economy in Ontario, particularly during this time of recession in the province. The R&D that's injected by the pharmaceutical industry will help recession-proof this

economy.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I have a question for the minister responsible for long-term care. This morning, nursing home workers,

represented by the Service Employees International Union, came to hold a press conference here to point out the deterioration in long-term care for Ontario's seniors. One of the issues they pointed

to was that in 1996 your government abandoned the minimum requirement for two and a quarter hours of nursing care per day for long-term-care patients in nursing homes. As a result of that reduction

in nursing care, frequently our seniors are suffering indignities such as lying for hours in their own urine or excrement and not being able to get the bath they need.

These workers asked a specific question: will you restore an acceptable minimum requirement of nursing care for seniors in nursing homes in Ontario?

Hon Helen Johns (Minister without Portfolio [Health and Long-Term Care]): Let me say that the commitment of this Mike Harris government to

long-term-care facilities and to long-term care is unprecedented. In the last number of years we have strengthened community care access centres by doubling the money that we spend on community

care access centres, giving a 72% increase in community funding. For the first time in some 10 or 15 years, this government has made a commitment to long-term-care beds in Ontario, promising that

20,000 beds be ready and available to seniors in this province by 2004; by 2006, another 16,000 beds.

We're doing everything to ensure that our communities have the services they need so that our seniors can get the best possible care, both in their community

and in the long-term-care facility that they choose, because those services are important to us, the Mike Harris government.

Mr Hampton: Minister, the reality out there is that you are cutting home care, and seniors across Ontario know it. You have announced new

long-term-care beds, but seniors aren't seeing them; there have simply been announcements.

But your own government-funded study done by PricewaterhouseCoopers earlier this year told you in no uncertain terms that Ontario is providing fewer hours of

nursing care in our nursing homes and homes for the aged than 10 comparable jurisdictions: Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Sweden, Finland, the Netherlands, Michigan, Maine, South Dakota -- even

Mississippi provides more hours of nursing care per patient than Ontario does. Studies in the United States have recommended as much as four and a half hours of nursing care per patient per day.

These workers are asking you merely to restore an acceptable level in Ontario. They suggest three and a half hours a day.

Do you want to be last, Minister, in all of the comparators, or are you prepared to give our seniors the hours of nursing care they need and deserve and that

all of the studies indicate they should have?

Hon Mrs Johns: I'm almost speechless, I have to tell you. What's happened here is that they had a $50-billion deficit and they didn't build

one new long-term-care bed in Ontario. They froze the per diem rate for community care and it was frozen under the NDP government in 1993. We increased the per diem from $79 to $84 in 1996. Where

were they?

In 10 years of the Liberal and NDP governments almost 10,000 hospital beds were taken out of this province, and yet there was no increase in services.

Why are you talking about seniors like this? This government has made commitments for 36,000 new beds for the people of the province of Ontario. We've also

made commitments for community services in the province. Let's get a reality check here. He says there are no long-term-care beds built: 2,800 are up and running. I've seen them. If you want to

come with me, come and see them: 6,000 by the spring; 20,000 by 2004; 36,000 by 2006. Mr Speaker, have him come with me, please.

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

Mr Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): I have a question for the Acting Premier, the Minister of Finance. Your government has given assurances to

various developers who own lands on the Oak Ridges moraine that they will be compensated with lands that are part of your provincially held Seaton lands, the north Pickering lands. This land swap

that you've committed to as a government is worth hundreds of millions of dollars in public land.

The question I have for you on behalf of the people of Ontario is, what are the criteria that you're using to swap this land, what are the principles, what

assurances do we have that the taxpayers will get value for money, and will you agree to having full public disclosure of all the terms and details of the most massive land swap in Ontario history?

Will you agree to the public disclosure of the land swap terms, details and criteria?

Hon Jim Flaherty (Deputy Premier, Minister of Finance): Municipalities, in making decisions on applications outside the moraine, are required

to conform with the provincial policy statement. The provincial policy statement directs development to existing settlement areas while protecting rural areas for uses such as agriculture.

The PPS is currently being reviewed as part of this government's Smart Growth initiative. This government's Smart Growth initiative, as you know, emphasizes

infilling, intensification and brownfield redevelopment -- in our view, the best strategy for encouraging and managing growth in the GTA and elsewhere in Ontario.

There were substantial discussions, as I'm sure the member opposite knows, between people involved in the development industry and the minister responsible

relating to the lands in the moraine that were potentially developable, and the lands in particular in the Seaton area around what may well be a future airport site. As a result of those

negotiations, an accord was reached, which is tremendous progress showing the willingness, I would think, on the part of all parties to work together toward a resolution of the issue in the best

interests of the environment.

PETITIONS

MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the citizens of Victoria county had no direct say in the creation of the new city of Kawartha Lakes; and

"Whereas the government by regulation and legislation forced the recent amalgamation, against the will of the obvious majority of the people; and

"Whereas the government has not delivered the promised streamlined, more efficient and accountable local government, nor the provision of better services at

reduced costs; and

"Whereas the promise of tax decreases has not been met, based on current assessments; and

"Whereas the expected transition costs to area taxpayers of this forced amalgamation have already exceeded the promised amount by over three times,

"Be it resolved that we, the undersigned, demand that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario immediately rescind this forced amalgamation order and return our

local municipal government back to the local citizens and their democratically elected officials in Victoria county and remove the bureaucratic, dictatorial, single-tier governance it has coerced

on all local citizens."

I affix my signature. I'm in complete agreement.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario government abandoned the minimum requirement for 2.25 hours per day of nursing care for seniors in nursing homes; and

"Whereas the Ontario government's own study in January 2001 showed Ontario's long-term-care residents receive less nursing, bathing and general care than

elderly people in comparable jurisdictions in Canada, the United States and Europe; and

"Whereas poor management of residents leads to excessive acute care hospital stays and added strain on staffing levels in long-term-care facilities; and

"Whereas Ontario long-term-care residents now receive an average of only 2.04 hours of care per day, well below the level of care of 4.2 hours even the state

of Mississippi provides; and

"Whereas US studies have indicated that total nursing care hours for long-term-care residents should be in the range of 4.55 total hours of care per resident

per day;

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

"We call on the government of Ontario to regulate a minimum requirement of at least 3.5 hours of nursing care per resident per day."

I have affixed my signature to this petition as well.

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario that reads as follows:

"Whereas the Criminal Code of Canada considers animal cruelty to be a property offence; and

"Whereas those who commit crimes against animals currently face light sentences upon conviction; and

"Whereas those who operate puppy mills should, upon conviction, face sentences that are appropriate for the torture and inhumane treatment they have inflicted

on puppies under their so-called care;

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

"That the Ontario provincial government petition the federal government to move forward with amendments to the cruelty of animal provisions in the Criminal

Code as soon as possible."

I'm pleased to affix my signature to this petition.

EDUCATION

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it reads as follows:

"Whereas the Ontario government wants to take an additional billion dollars out of the education system this year and every year; and

"Whereas the Ontario government has decided to hire uncertified teachers in kindergartens, libraries, for guidance, physical education, the arts, and

technology; and

"Whereas the Ontario government wishes to remove the right to negotiate working conditions; and

"Whereas the Ontario government will remove at least 10,000 teachers from classrooms across the province; and

"Whereas the Ontario government has become the sole decision-maker on class size, preparation time and the length of the school day; and

"Whereas the Ontario government proposes to take decision-making powers out of the hands of locally-elected community-minded trustees;

"We, the undersigned Ontario residents, strongly urge the government to repeal Bill 160 and create an accessible public consultative process for students,

parents, teachers and school board administrators to study alternate solutions that have universal appeal and will lead to an improved educational system."

Since I agree, I'm delighted to affix my signature to this petition.

ADOPTION DISCLOSURE

Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): I have more petitions supporting adoption disclosure reform in Ontario. This reads:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas in Ontario, adopted adults are denied a right available to all non-adoptees, that is, the unrestricted right to identifying information concerning

their family of origin;

"Whereas Canada has ratified standards of civil and human rights in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the UN

Convention on the Rights of the Child;

"Whereas these rights are denied to persons affected by the secrecy provisions in the adoption sections of the Child and Family Services Act and other acts of

the province of Ontario;

"Whereas research in other jurisdictions has demonstrated that disclosure does not cause harm, that access to such information is beneficial to adult adoptees,

adoptive parents and birth parents, and that birth parents rarely requested or were promised anonymity;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of Ontario to enact revision of the Child and Family Services Act and other acts to permit adult adoptees

unrestricted access to full personal identifying birth information; permit birth parents, grandparents and siblings access to the adopted person's amended birth certificate when the adopted person

reaches age 18; permit adoptive parents unrestricted access to identifying birth information of their minor children; allow adopted persons and birth relatives to file a contact veto restricting

contact by the searching party; and replace mandatory reunion counselling with optional counselling."

TENANT PROTECTION

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I was very privileged last week to have the Honourable Cam Jackson, minister responsible for seniors, in my riding.

This petition was presented to me while he was there.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas we the residents of 145 Liberty Street South in Bowmanville wish to continue to rent our apartments and are not interested in purchasing condominium

units; and

"Whereas we the residents of 145 Liberty Street South in Bowmanville have invested considerable amounts of money in decorating, upgrading their apartments;

and

"Whereas we the residents of 145 Liberty Street South in Bowmanville were of the understanding that this was a rental property, not a condominium;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to review this matter and request the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing

or any other relevant ministry investigate these concerns to ensure that the residents of 145 Liberty Street South can continue to rent their apartments."

I'm pleased to sign this on behalf of the residents as well as Wilma Paul, who presented the petition that day in Bowmanville.

NURSES

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the nurses of Ontario are seeking relief from heavy workloads, which have contributed to unsafe conditions for patients and have increased the risk of

injury to nurses; and

"Whereas there is a chronic nursing shortage in Ontario;

"Whereas the Ontario government has failed to live up to its commitment to provide safe, high-quality care for patients;

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

"We demand the Ontario government take positive action to ensure that our communities have enough nursing staff to provide patients with the care they need.

The Ontario government must:

"Ensure wages and benefits are competitive and value all nurses for their dedication and commitment; ensure there are full-time and regular part-time jobs

available for nurses in hospitals, nursing homes and the community; ensure government revenues fund health care, not tax cuts; ensure front-line nurses play a key role in health reform

decisions."

This petition contains an additional 334 signatures of concerned individuals. That brings the total number of signatures on this particular petition to 14,174.

In full agreement with their concerns, I again affix my signature to the petition.

BRAIN TUMOURS

Mr Bob Wood (London West): I have a petition signed by 685 people.

"Whereas early detection and treatment of brain tumours are vital to survive from this devastating disease;

"Whereas brain tumours strike people of all ages, from newborns to seniors, crossing all economic, social and ethnic boundaries and all walks of life;

"Whereas brain tumours are the most common cause of solid cancer in children; and

"Whereas brain tumour research, patient and family support services and awareness among the general public are essential to promote early detection and

treatment of brain tumours;

"We, the undersigned, therefore respectfully petition the Parliament of Ontario to pass a law proclaiming the month of October in each year as Brain Tumour

Awareness Month."

I will inform the petitioners that this petition has been granted by the Legislature.

CHILDREN'S MEDICAL SERVICES

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the recent events at the London Health Sciences Centre, where 18 programs have been lost due to funding shortages, and in particular, the Children's

Hospital of Western Ontario, cause us to be concerned that we may lose medical and surgical subspeciality pediatric services for ourselves and our children;

"Whereas southwestern Ontario is a vital region of the province of Ontario that requires urgent access to pediatric subspeciality services and to travel to

other children's health facilities in Ontario would result in serious personal hardship and risk to our children; further, that families would not be eligible for travel grants similar to those

provided in northern communities;

"Whereas we have greatly benefited from the expertise in pediatric care provided by Children's Hospital of Western Ontario over the years and we appreciate

that we may not be apprised of all the reasons for these physician losses; however, our children deserve to continue to receive the pediatric subspecialty care from the London Health Sciences

Centre and Children's Hospital of Western Ontario that our region has depended on for decades;

"Whereas the loss of these services will result in great hardship to the families and seriously endanger the health of our children, we look to you as leaders

to address this issue immediately and thoroughly. These times of great uncertainty about children's access to health care is a significant stress to ourselves and our families;

"Therefore, we the undersigned petition the Legislature of Ontario to demand that our government respond immediately to restore these critical services to the

citizens of southwestern Ontario."

This petition is signed by persons from Ridgetown, Merlin, Chatham, Tilbury and Thamesville, and I affix my name to it.

TENANT PROTECTION

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): To put on the record again the petition from the residents of 145 Liberty Street:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas we the residents of 145 Liberty Street South in Bowmanville wish to continue to rent our apartments and are not interested in purchasing condominium

units; and

"Whereas we the residents of 145 Liberty Street South in Bowmanville have invested considerable amounts of money in decorating, upgrading their apartments;

and

"Whereas we the residents of 145 Liberty Street South in Bowmanville were of the understanding that this was a rental property, not a condominium;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to review this matter and request the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing

or any other relevant ministry investigate these concerns to ensure that the residents of 145 Liberty Street South can continue to rent their apartments."

I'm pleased to sign this and support my constituents. By the way, these are all apartment tenants here, Wilma Paul and a number of others. I'm pleased to sign

on their behalf.

KIDNEY DISEASE

Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands): I have a petition here which is addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas we the undersigned residents of Ontario draw the attention of the Legislature to the following:

"Whereas kidney disease is a huge and growing problem in Canada; and

"Whereas real progress is being made in various ways of preventing and coping with kidney disease;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to encourage the Canadian Institutes of Health Research to explicitly include kidney

research as one of the institutes in its system, to be named the Institute of Kidney and Urinary Tract Diseases."

I agree with the petition and have signed it accordingly.

MEDICAL SCHOOL TUITION

Mr Pat Hoy (Chatham-Kent Essex): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas medical school tuition was deregulated by the Ontario government in 1998; and medical school tuition has and continues to increase in excess of 300%

such that at some universities tuition is now $14,000;

"Whereas the physicians most likely to practise in a rural area are originally from rural areas themselves; and

"Whereas unaffordable tuition disproportionately excludes medical students from rural communities;

"Be it resolved that Thunder Bay calls upon the Ontario government and the universities of Ontario to ensure that medical education be made financially

accessible to all qualified students; and

"Be it further resolved that Thunder Bay requests that medical tuition be capped and re-regulated at a level accessible to all Ontarians and that the Ontario

student assistance plan/Canada student loan program be adjusted in order to ensure that Ontarians from all communities are able to afford a medical school education."

This petition is signed by a number of residents from Leamington, and I, too, sign this petition.

HOMELESSNESS

Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands): Here is a petition to end homelessness in Ontario.

"To the Legislature of Ontario:

"Whereas the Ontario provincial government has totally withdrawn itself from building new social housing projects in this province, therefore endangering the

lives of the less fortunate and residents who can't afford paying the high-cost rent;

"Whereas the Ontario government should recognize that there is a serious shortage of affordable housing in this province;

"Whereas the Ontario government should recognize that the homeless situation in this province has reached a crisis proportion and that some measures have to be

taken to remedy the situation;

"Whereas the Ontario government should recognize that the hostel system wasn't meant to be for permanent housing but is for temporary shelters;

"Whereas the Ontario government should implement the 1% solution promoted by the Toronto disaster relief committee and restore the Rent Control Act which was

taken away by the current government;

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

"We are asking that the Legislature see that the government take actions to end the homeless situation in Ontario with any means that are at its

disposition."

I agree with it and have signed it accordingly.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TIME ALLOCATION

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): I move that pursuant to standing order 46 and notwithstanding any other

standing order or special order of the House relating to Bill 110,

An Act to promote quality in the classroom, when Bill 110 is next called as a government order, the Speaker shall put every

question necessary to dispose of the second reading stage of the bill without further debate or amendment, and at such time, the bill shall be ordered referred to the standing committee on general

government; and

That, notwithstanding standing order 28(h), no deferral of the second reading vote may be permitted; and

That the standing committee on general government shall be authorized to meet during its regularly scheduled meeting time, for one day in Toronto for public

hearings and for one day in Toronto for clause-by-clause consideration of the bill; and

That, at 4:30 pm on the day the committee is scheduled for clause-by-clause consideration, those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to

have been moved, and the Chair of the committee shall interrupt the proceedings and shall, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of

the bill and any amendments thereto. The committee shall be authorized to meet beyond its normal hour of adjournment until completion of clause-by-clause consideration. Any division required shall

be deferred until all remaining questions have been put and taken in succession, with one 20-minute waiting period allowed, pursuant to standing order 127(a); and

That the committee shall report the bill to the House on the first sessional day that reports from committees may be received following the completion of

clause-by-clause consideration and not later than December 6, 2001. In the event that the committee fails to report the bill on the date provided, the bill shall be deemed to have been passed by

the committee and shall be deemed to be reported to and received by the House; and

That, upon receiving the report of the standing committee on general government, the Speaker shall put the question for adoption of the report forthwith, and

at such time the bill shall be ordered for third reading; and

That, when the order for third reading is called, 90 minutes shall be allotted to the third reading stage of the bill, to be divided equally among all

recognized parties, and at the end of that time the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings and shall put every question necessary to dispose of this stage of the bill without further debate or

amendment; and

That the vote on third reading may, pursuant to standing order 28(h), be deferred until the next sessional day during the routine proceeding "deferred votes";

and

That, in the case of any division relating to any proceedings on the bill, the division bell shall be limited to five minutes.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Mrs Ecker has moved government motion 77.

Mr Frank Mazzilli (London-Fanshawe): I will be sharing my time with the member from Simcoe and the member for Oak Ridges.

It's a pleasure to speak on the motion for Bill 110, the Quality in the Classroom Act, 2001. The purpose of our education reform is obviously to set higher

standards for achievement in Ontario and to provide the tools and resources for student success.

Excellence in education starts in the classroom, with the best possible teachers. It's essential that they instill a love for lifelong learning in our students

as well as providing them with the tools to meet the challenges of changing jobs and new careers.

Ontario has many excellent teachers, and many of them recognize the need to keep their knowledge and skills current. They are actively involved in professional

development activities to build their qualifications and to develop new knowledge and skills. That is why our government has introduced a comprehensive teacher testing program to ensure that all

teachers, both new and experienced, have the capabilities to help our students succeed and achieve higher standards.

We continue to build on that commitment with Bill 110. It has two purposes. The first is, subject to the approval of Bill 110, that all new graduates of an

Ontario faculty of education and all teachers new to Ontario would be required to take the Ontario teacher qualifying test. Passing the test would be a requirement for becoming a member of the

Ontario College of Teachers and receiving a certificate of qualification from the college. The qualifying test would assess the readiness of teachers to start their professional lives and to ensure

that they have a minimum level of knowledge and skills to begin teaching in our schools. Its purpose and form would be similar to exams administered by other professional regulatory bodies, such as

the National Dental Hygiene Certification Board, and for other groups such as nurses and occupational therapists.

The ministry is taking a number of steps to ensure that the Ontario teacher qualifying test will be unique to Ontario as well as being fair, valid and

reliable. The development of the test is being supported by consultations with a broad range of educational stakeholders. We consulted with parents, students, principals, vice-principals, teachers,

trustees, deans of faculties of education and the Ontario College of Teachers. The ministry has established the Ontario Teacher Qualifying Test Advisory Committee to advise on test program issues.

It will provide the ministry with advice on test development and validation as well as the written materials to assist those teachers taking the tests. For example, there would be a brochure

describing the test program that would also include an application package with registration information, sample test questions and preparation test items.

It is important to note that Ontario is not the only jurisdiction to be moving in the direction of spelling out entrance-to-the-profession tests. In fact, the

ministry is drawing from the best experience of what other professions and jurisdictions are doing in this area. For example, the United Kingdom recently introduced a test for new applicants to the

teaching profession. In addition, France, Belgium and Switzerland use civil service exams to evaluate those who wish to teach. Most American states require their teacher candidates to pass one or

more certification exams before they become licensed to teach.

The proposed qualifying test in Bill 110 would have questions based on areas of knowledge and skills derived from the standards of practice from the teaching

profession established by the Ontario College of Teachers. The college is mandated by statute to establish standards of practice for all teachers in Ontario.

Once aspiring teachers have completed the qualifying test, the results would be available in four to six weeks. All test takers would be advised of their

personal score. The test provider would also advise the Ontario College of Teachers of a pass or fail result of each participant. Candidate teachers who meet all the requirements for certification,

including passing the qualifying test, would be placed on the college's register, which lists its members, their qualification and their status in the college. Finally, for 2002 and 2003 the

ministry will cover all costs associated with these tests.

In addition, Bill 110 provides for an appeal process to be available to all teachers who take the qualifying test. All appeals on test scores would be reviewed

individually on a case-by-case basis.

The qualifying test proposed by Bill 110 is an additional step being taken by this government to improve the quality of education in Ontario. In a rapidly

changing and increasingly competitive world, the need for quality assurance among all professionals, especially teachers, is imperative.

The second purpose of Bill 110 is to create a comprehensive personal appraisal system to evaluate teachers on their performance in the classroom. The new

provincial standards outlined in the legislation would ensure that principals and school boards regularly and consistently evaluate teachers' knowledge and skills.

Bill 80, which was passed in this Legislature last June, established a comprehensive framework for professional learning by Ontario teachers. Bill 80 requires

all teachers to participate in a series of professional development activities and courses in five-year cycles throughout their careers. Bill 110 would now establish the regulatory authority

necessary for the establishment of teachers' learning plans. These plans would be developed by teachers in consultation with their principals and would map out an action plan for professional

growth. Mandatory professional learning ensures that teachers' knowledge and skills are up to date.

Performance appraisals provide the necessary quality assurance that professionals' learning has become effective and that teachers in our classrooms are the

best that they can be. Equally important is the way Bill 110 would bring consistency to our teacher appraisals in reference to their frequency, timing, standards and methods. While many boards have

been developing excellent performance review practices, few school boards have policies and programs in place to help weak teachers meet the standards they need to achieve.

In addition, few boards currently have evaluation policies that recognize teacher excellence and identify possible mentors or exemplary teachers. These

findings reconfirm the value of Bill 110 and the need to provide consistent province-wide standards for teacher evaluation. The creation of such standards would clearly be a major factor in

ensuring that our teacher appraisal system is fair to all members of the profession no matter where they teach in Ontario.

These are the reasons that the bill would provide for every experienced teacher to have an evaluation year every three years, with at least two evaluations of

their classroom performance during that year.

Our government strongly believes in the involvement of parents in our children's education. Another important milestone in Bill 110 is that parents and

students will have input and be an integral part of a teacher's performance appraisal. Bill 110 would also provide regulatory authority for parent and pupil input; however, parental and pupil

comment would not be the sole factor in an unsatisfactory rating of a teacher.

The important aspect of a teacher appraisal system is to provide support and facilitate teacher improvement. The point of Bill 110 is not to dismiss teachers

but to ensure their teaching excellence. Bill 110 provides a very detailed and fair approach to teachers receiving a less than satisfactory rating, with a real emphasis on opportunities to help

strengthen a teacher's classroom skills. I believe that performance appraisal in Bill 110 is consistent and fair to teachers.

In closing my remarks, I would like to summarize the key features of the performance appraisal system that would be established by this legislation: regular

evaluation for all teachers; consistent standards for teachers' appraisals, including an objective rating system that will be used throughout the province; parental and student input into the

appraisal process; support for teachers who need to improve their performance; and the removal of low-performance teachers from the classroom.

Bill 110 is win-win legislation. With the passage of the Quality in the Classroom Act, 2001, parents will know that their children are being taught by teachers

who can be called upon to be the best they can be in the classroom. Taxpayers will know that they are achieving value for their education dollars, and all Ontarians will know that we are moving

closer to an education system that is firmly focused on quality, accountability and improved student achievement.

I just want to say that I have met in my constituency with members representing teachers and their unions and have listened to their concerns. I will say, as

you've heard through the speech, that there are many other professions that write exams of some sort. I can tell you that during my time as a police officer, on what is known as the breathalyser

testing program in Ontario, I had to write a yearly exam to requalify year after year. That test was administered by the Centre of Forensic Sciences attached to the Solicitor General's ministry.

Every year people came down from that ministry to ensure that your credentials were kept up for the purpose of providing breath samples.

I will tell you that I would have been the first one to say, "I don't want to do this." The reason is that every year it made you take out your notes and go

over some of the basic theories that you once learned. In

summary, you never had difficulty with the exam, but it did make you go over some of the theories that you were once taught, to the benefit

of the end user, the people you are trying to help. I think we all need to keep on top of our skills in today's environment, and I think the teacher testing program is not much different.

I do share the belief, as some of the representatives from the union pointed out, that there are individuals who will be made to do things that are mundane.

For example, if you are trying to teach someone high skills with computers and so on, there will be a few people way beyond whatever testing abilities anyone might be trying to achieve. But

certainly I think if you are going to err in making someone do something they know they can do, perhaps if it can be avoided, it would be best to do that. If it can't be done, I think that if 99%

of people taking that test benefit, that's a positive step also.

With that, I'll pass it on to the member for Oak Ridges.

The Speaker: It actually goes in rotation. The member for Hamilton East.

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): Although Oak Ridges is a great riding, I'm certainly not the member for that riding.

Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity. You'll have to pardon my voice. It's probably a pleasure to most members on the opposite side of the House that I'm

not really able to speak very loudly, as a result, I think, of a little bit too much yelling at the Tiger-Cats game in Winnipeg yesterday that unfortunately didn't go quite as well as I would have

liked it to go. But certainly it was an interesting experience spending an afternoon in Winnipeg Stadium with about 10 of us cheering for one team and about 29,500 cheering for the other. But I

want to congratulate the Tiger-Cats on a great season. They made us all proud in the city of Hamilton. I have no regret about losing my voice by cheering too loudly for the Cats yesterday.

Just a few minutes on what is in front of us today. What is in front of us, first of all -- let's understand so that the public knows -- is a time allocation

motion. What this means is that once again this government has decided they're going to cut off debate on a particular bill. This is Bill 110, the teacher testing bill. It has become unfortunately

much too common in this Legislature, on almost every bill, for this government to decide that after a few hours we've had enough debate and it's time to cut off debate and bring in something called

closure.

Just to understand that it is not the normal procedure in Legislatures across this country, I want to compare it, as an example, to the federal House, where

closure is hardly ever invoked. I met with the federal whip a couple of weeks ago and she mentioned to me that generally they come to an understanding. There's a sense of co-operation on bills and

the government does give the opposition plenty of opportunity for debate, and therefore the opposition uses that time and the government does not bring in closure.

That is not the case here. I think it is an affront to democracy when we continue to have bills in front of us that this government rams through with what we

call closure motions, which means essentially, "We've had a few hours. We don't really care what you have to say any more." We hardly bring the bills to committee. We just ram them through because,

"We have a majority government and we can do what we want." I think that is the arrogance of governing, the arrogance of a government that after six years in power believes they can do what they

want whenever they want and to heck with the public, to heck with the opposition. So certainly we will oppose this motion here today.

This bill itself, as we have mentioned, is a flawed piece of legislation to some degree. Much of what is in the bill has already been done.

What is interesting is that it excludes teachers in the private school system. Again, we understand that this government has decided they're going to give

funding to private schools in the province of Ontario, that they're going to extend at least $300 million a year that will come out of the public school system to private schools. But they have not

determined that they are going to apply the same standards to those teachers in those school systems. We think that is inappropriate, that is wrong, and again the double standard here is

astonishing in what this government has said.

When you look generally at education, they're putting a great deal of effort into this bill. I wish they would put as much effort into ensuring there is

adequate funding for our classrooms and for our kids.

I know in my own community, schools are being closed everywhere across the city of Hamilton. The Catholic board is now going through the process. The public

board recently closed Scott Park high school in my riding, again as a result of this flawed funding formula that you've implemented to force boards to close particularly schools in the inner city:

bigger, older schools. Because of the nature of those neighbourhoods, they're now no longer at 70% or 80% capacity; they may be at 50% capacity. Because of your funding formula, these schools are

being forced to be closed by the school boards. You are ripping the heart out of those communities by closing these schools, by forcing the boards to close these schools because of your flawed

funding formula, a formula that for the city of Hamilton now gives $1,100 less per student than when this government came to office in 1995.

I have schools in my riding where on days like today, where it's raining outside, it rains into the classroom because the roofs are so bad. The teachers have

to move the kids' desks so the kids don't get wet while they are sitting there in the classroom because of the fact that the roofs are leaking. That is the reality today of schools in my riding in

the city of Hamilton as a result of the neglect of this government.

I wish they would put more effort into those types of deals. I wish they would put more money as is necessary into infrastructure, to make sure that at least

we can fix roofs in schools, that at least it doesn't rain in the classroom when the kids are sitting there on a day like today.

As shocking as that is, that is the reality of what's happening. We have kids in basements of schools in some conditions that you wouldn't dare walk around in;

those kids are there because of the condition of those schools. That is the reality of what we see in Ontario today as a result of what this government has done to public education, and now they're

going to fund $300 million more toward private schools. I would suggest to the government that instead of wasting all your efforts on trying to fund private schools in Ontario, you put that $300

million toward public education in this province and put more emphasis on more textbooks, more computers, more teachers, small classrooms, more resources where it really helps the kids.

This bill in front of us feels good and sounds good in what this government is trying to do. It has loopholes; it has weaknesses in it. Frankly, it's already

been done to a great degree. Entry level testing we've proposed and we've supported and that is not something we have a problem with, but the rest of the bill to a great degree is flawed. We will

simply oppose this motion here today again, because this government is once again trying to ram legislation down the throats of Ontarians and the opposition here in the Legislature.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr David Christopherson): Further debate?

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): This is a closure motion as the previous speaker talked about. It's an effort to stop the debate. I guess

the government doesn't want to hear a lot of debate about teacher testing. That may be in part because people on this side won't be talking so much about teacher testing but more about the abysmal

state of education in Ontario. Maybe we'll be talking about what this bill includes and what it doesn't include. What it doesn't include is private school teachers. It only includes public school

teachers. This government will be spending $300 million a year giving money to people who choose to send their children to private schools. Those teachers will not be subject to this bill. They can

have any qualifications or no qualifications at all. They will not be subject to the bill, and they will not be tested.

They're doing it at the same time that the Minister of Education is spending about $700,000 -- at least that's the figure I remember -- on a survey to send to

all of the people in Ontario, asking them about schools, asking them all kinds of questions, but never coming right down to the nub of the questions: are the schools being adequately run, are there

sufficient textbooks, is there enough money in the system and are the schools open in the evening for people to make use of them? The questions that are really important to the community will not

be on that survey.

Instead, we are spending some time here debating whether or not teachers should be tested. One of the previous speakers said that as a policeman he was tested

once a year. I'm sure there are professions that do a little bit of testing from time to time: in his case, the Breathalyzer law or whether you knew the newest court precedents or the newest

chemicals that were added to the Breathalyzer to make sure it worked and whether you remembered it or didn't remember it. But I will tell you that education and teachers have a far greater range in

scope than a Breathalyzer test. They should be equated with the equivalent of lawyers. They should be equivalent to other professions where, once you've passed the examination and once you're there

and once you've proved you are competent to do the job, you are left to your own devices to do it. They should not be subject to testing, unless other professions are, and I include all of those

professions. If the government is very serious about testing teachers, they should also be serious about testing police officers, firefighters, politicians, plumbers and every other person you are

not passing bills to test.

One of the previous speakers started off his statement, "Education starts in the classroom with excellent teachers," and that's absolutely true. How do we get

excellent teachers? Do we get them by testing them? I think not. A good teacher is born to the profession, is trained into the profession. A good teacher is not someone who suddenly becomes good

because he or she must study every year or every three years to be teacher tested.

The problem with the education system in Ontario is that it has gone through tumultuous, traumatic times. It has gone through times that have made it

difficult, if not impossible, for teachers to do the kind of work they once did. You know, there was a time in this province -- I'll go back to the time of a good Conservative government; back to

the time, I guess, of Bill Davis -- when education was of paramount importance, was absolutely essential to the province of Ontario.

Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): Better.

Mr Prue: Better, OK. It was a time when money was spent on education, when universities were built; it was a time when teachers had respect in

the community; it was a time when there were adequate funds for libraries. It was a time when all of those things happened. I don't know what has happened with this government and that goal that we

had as a society to make sure that every child received the maximum benefit of an education; whatever he or she was best capable of doing, the educational programs were there for them. They were

building of the community colleges to make sure that every child had that oppor