Legislative Assembly of Ontario

The House resumed at 8 o’clock, p.m.

ESTIMATES, MINISTRY OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL

On vote 1501: (continued)

Mr. Chairman: Mr. Clerk, if nobody objects we will carry on. The member for Lakeshore.

Mr. P. D. Lawlor (Lakeshore): I hate to do this to you, Mr. Chairman. May we have a quorum, please?

Mr. B. Gilbertson (Algoma): They’re coming in all the time. Give us a minute.

Mr. Lawlor: You should have your people here and ready.

Clerk of the House: There is not a quorum here, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Lawlor: No quarter.

Mr. Chairman ordered that the bells be rung for four minutes.

Mr. Chairman: We now have a quorum.

Mr. J. H. Jessiman (Fort William): The member for Lakeshore has not much support here tonight.

Mr. J. A. Renwick (Riverdale): They know our position. We want you to know it.

Mr. Chairman: Order. The member for Lakeshore has the floor.

Mr. Lawlor: Mr. Chairman, as we got to the break, we had reached the estimate for the task force on policing estimate. In the break, I think I am quite free to say, the minister indicated he has a little red book over there which comments on each of the 170 recommendations under this vote and gives a summary of what has been achieved in each particular. Before 6 o’clock, our intention was to go over these one by one to find out what was going on. That might take a very considerable time indeed; so we decided that perhaps the best thing to do was to pull the odd rabbit out of the hat and test along the way as to what here and there has been achieved.

I would want to make one stipulation or one request. Perhaps you could let at least the Justice critics of the parties have a copy of that for future perusal and reference coming into the next session, if there is going to be a next session, rather than spend a great deal of time tonight, and also anyone else, of course, who wants a copy of it.

When I was speaking at the initiation of these estimates, I kind of got lost in my own tangle of words and didn’t give due credit as I was seeking to do, I don’t think, to the department in moving into certain central areas which struck me as perhaps the most crucial of all. The organizational problems --

Mr. J. M. Turner (Peterborough): Are you having some trouble?

Mr. Chairman: Could we have a little bit of order for the member for Lakeshore to have the floor?

Mr. Lawlor: I don’t mind heckling but the background noise is not a Greek chorus to my soliloquy.

Mr. Jessiman: It sure isn’t coming from the NDP members you have got supporting you.

Mr. E. J. Bounsall (Windsor West): Quality, not quantity.

Mr. Lawlor: Why don’t you go out and have a drink or something?

Mr. R. D. Kennedy (Peel South): You just invited us in.

Mr. Lawlor: I was trying to give the government credit, for a change.

Mr. J. F. Foulds (Port Arthur): It sounds like the chorus from Aristophanes. The Frogs.

Mr. Lawlor: In the area of regional government, or, for instance, the business of an amalgamation which vitally upsets the whole police operation and which works separately for police villages or has separate police forces in various areas is disruptive and has to be looked at as it is, one of the critical problems in an amalgamation of a city. It has happened two or three times in the last four or five years. Then the whole series of regional governments is most disruptive in one of its phases in the whole police operation.

True, in the long run it brings together a whole host of police forces under a central administration which seemingly should save us a bit of money. But looking at the estimates and seeing the amounts of money, I would like proven to me some day that in the case of policing alone, segmenting it out from everything else in establishing a regional government, there are cost benefit analyses that prove that in the end this is saving the people of that particular region money. The thesis is that it does.

The fact is, I suspect, somewhat different, that there is no saving. On the contrary, the costs are up. Why should that be? The thesis of regional government is precisely to get economies of scale, to take a big brush and go across the board. That’s the reason we established it and that’s the reason Smith recommended regional governments of all kinds nine years ago, but it has not come to effect that way. I think some time we should lock horns and get into that mare’s nest to find out just why it doesn’t.

It certainly doesn’t operate that way in education. We all know why, because we have set up a superstructure of administration that is paralyzing and overpowering. Therefore, if you get $25,000 or $30,000 administrators coming out of your ears, which is what happens all over the place, then of course you’re not going to save any money.

That is not true, as I see it, about the structure within the precinct. They don’t multiply themselves into innocuousness, such as good teachers being taken out of the classroom to sharpen pencils somewhere down the hall. This is the kind I of thing you’ve got in one area, but certainly I don’t think it’s duplicated in this area. At least, that’s not my sense of the thing. Perhaps the minister can inform me better, but of course if he were informing me better, he’d be informing against his own interests. I don’t particularly expect he will do that.

Let’s take the police in the community, R3.2. Each force, in the evaluation of an individual officer, places primary emphasis on demonstrated ability to resolve the high priority problems in his community. I said a few words earlier about not giving quantitative ratings to police officers, but some kind of assessment, along the lines of his demonstrated ability to resolve problems. This would simply be a report that he attended upon a particular cat fight on a certain afternoon and he tore the creatures apart, or in the evening it might have been husband and wife. What has happened on that particular recommendation?

Mr. Chairman: Mr. Minister, before you reply, the hon. member for Scarborough East would like the floor.

Hon. M. Birch (Provincial Secretary for Social Development): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to take this opportunity to welcome to the House, the best riding association of all of Ontario, the Progressive Conservative Riding Association for Scarborough East. Will you join with me in welcoming them to the House?

Mr. Chairman: The hon. minister.

Mr. Lawlor: I hope you’ve got a lot of childcare services.

Hon. J. T. Clement (Acting Solicitor General): Mr. Chairman the implementation of the recommendation known as R3.2, the role of the police, is currently under way. The OPC is providing stimulus to these approaches through experimental projects in personnel development. These are being conducted currently in Barrie, Halton and London. The implementation involves action by all of the police forces within the province. Police training programmes are being oriented so that the individual officers will be better equipped to fulfil their many roles.

A long-term study of police management information systems, which is currently being conducted by the Ontario Police Commission, will place police management information on a common basis, and provide essential data on police work load and resource development. Based on this data, police managers will be better able to plan their policing strategies to meet community needs. As I mentioned, Barrie, Halton region and London police forces are now involved in this project.

Mr. Lawlor: All right. I’m sorry I didn’t read this whole recommendation into the record. The evaluation of a police officer goes on giving weight to traditional measures of performance, such as clearance rates, arrests and warnings. Here’s where the weight falls, only to the extent that they reflect the operational priorities identified by the community. These, in other words, take a secondary role, whereas previously, and I’m sure today, and on into the future, the very thing they say ought not to count much, continues to count. What is the number of arrests you had, and what kind of warnings have you given? These seem to be more important than the wider, the more efficacious work a policeman does in the community at large.

What do you have to say about 3.4? It has to do with selective tactical programmes to be employed. I would like to get some teeth into this. Have you specific tactical programmes in mind? What are they? And, again, where are they operative? Are these the programmes that are in effect in Barrie, Halton and London? Just what are they? Let’s get the thing on the record.

“Selective tactical programmes will be employed where appropriate to improve the quality of police relations with those segments of the community that are most difficult to reach. Specifically, we place priority on programmes which bring police officers into direct and intimate contact with youth in their own settings, including street corners, schools and drop-in centres. In addition we urge steps to establish open communication with minority groups.”

Hon. Mr. Clement: This particular recommendation, Mr. Chairman, is already being implemented in varying degrees by various municipal forces and primarily by the Ontario Provincial Police, because they have standardization of control throughout the entire province and those areas where their force is being used. Many members of both the OPP and municipal forces are involved off duty with youth groups, and there are also several projects which ensure on-duty meetings.

I am advised that a pilot project of regular counselling is presently being used in a secondary school. A successful venture course could and should and hopefully will lead to an amplification of this particular type of programme.

Opening lines of communication with minority groups is often very difficult. The OPP has maintained, I suggest, very good liaison in relations with various ethnic media. The displays use the language of the predominant ethnic group in that community, or if it happens to be in a media-type thing, in that particular language that that particular ethnic newspaper attempts to serve.

There also is the realm of reserve policing into which the OPP has embarked. The member is aware of the creation of the native policing programme --

Mr. Lawlor: Yes, I will come to that in a minute; that is one of the questions.

Hon. Mr. Clement: -- which the Ontario Provincial Police has embarked upon. This type of programme is being tried on a community basis, by police living and working in a particular community as opposed to living in A, and travelling by car or some other means to B, and doing one’s duty in B, and then leaving that community when one goes off duty. And this is being tried with the native peoples programme, primarily by the Ontario Provincial police.

Mr. Lawlor: Maybe I didn’t hear you. The specific question. Has the OPP itself got a youth squad?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Not that I am aware of. I am not aware of any youth squad per se. I am aware that the OPP has utilized a youth bureau. If a particular type of offence or series of offences comes to their attention in a municipality and the OPP, for one reason or another have been involved, they have worked very closely with the youth bureau in that community if one exists.

Mr. Lawlor: Yes. In a way the OPP is a fairly floating type of force which covers very considerable territory, by and large; although throughout northern territory it has its separate and distinct detachments.

I don’t know if there would be any great virtue in it, although I am inclined for pure ideological reasons that it should form such a group and that they do operate, particularly in summer resort areas, where they have jurisdiction in some measure. If the OPP, the dominant body, working through the Ontario Police Commission, were cognizant of this and that it was an ongoing experimental project which they were focusing on, then perhaps it would infiltrate to a greater degree down -- if I may put it that way -- down below into the municipal police forces and would fructify there and come to some purpose.

Chiefs of police can dismiss that particular form of crime prevention. That’s where the preventive should really come into being among young people with the largest incidence of crime. People over 35 don’t commit many because they are rather minor crimes. We all know it’s the 20-and-under age group. The courts are overburdened with young people of this age.

As I argued this afternoon, it is partially because they have, by and large, very little money of their own. They rely upon moneys coming from other sources. To some degree, in many cases, they are alienated from their parents. They are finding it difficult to get work, particularly in Ontario at the moment. Our society also teaches them to seize all the kinds of fruits and goods they can, because they feel if others have them, they are equally entitled to them. They take advantage and land up in jail.

Most of them who get caught, if I may say so, are not too bright. As a matter of fact, I am convinced the criminal element, by and large, is a pretty stupid element in the population.

The top boys never get caught. They seem to be able to insulate themselves very well. They usually have to go after them on income tax charges, or falsification of that type of record, rather than a direct offence, for which they are the kingpins in the responsible element. This all says something about the operation of police forces.

Let us turn to another area which interests me. I refer to the testing, not only of new recruits to the police force, but those recruits who are placed within the 18-month probationary period recommended under this report. What form does that testing take? I know there are IQ tests. I’ve never had much faith in IQ tests at the best of times, probably because I got a very low rating -- somewhere around 60 I think.

Mr. Turner: Without even trying.

Mr. Lawlor: It was just a little worse than yours.

Mr. Turner: It couldn’t have been.

Mr. Lawlor: Thank you. Yours was 62, mine was 60. What other form of psychological testing has been used here? It also mentions engaging a full-time individual, through the commission, who would have the sole task, I suppose, to devise testing techniques and get them operational. Could you give us a picture of that?

Hon. Mr. Clement: First, I would like to make mention of your comment about the suggestion that the OPP should have a youth bureau. I was impressed this afternoon by the member for Lakeshore’s comments, by analogy, with police in the United Kingdom getting to know people on a beat. I think what you are really saying is that continuity of personnel in a particular area, where they become known to the community and accepted by the community, is a very important factor. It would seem to me that’s a problem in the Ontario Provincial Police, because of the rather transient nature of some of its operations; certainly not all. I’m not talking about road patrols, nor are you, but those other matters -- anti-gambling and offences that require the particular specialty of that branch.

Mr. Lawlor: Drugs too.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Probably, because of the transient nature of that type of officer, he would perhaps not be in a community long enough to develop any camaraderie or confidence in the minds of the young. Perhaps that is the rationale for not developing such a force, or bureau, within the Ontario Provincial Police.

Mr. Lawlor: Some thought should be given to it. That’s what I meant by the floating nature. You used terms that are a little different. In other words, what I am saying is that perhaps the OPP might give some leadership in this regard that would filter down. If they directed their attention -- I am doubtful you see. I am just putting forward -- highly tentatively, I wouldn’t press the issue -- they know their internal workings better than I ever hope to. Just how fluid the operation is, and how efficacious it might be -- but it is recommended strongly in the report.

I know it was one of the boons to the Lakeshore area. There were three or four officers working there with young people, and the whole tenor of that area changed. Now that they cut them off, there is a growing bitterness and a sense of discontent that used to exist before they were there. I find it most regrettable. It does more in terms of friendship to alleviate the crime problem where I come from, than any other single factor.

Why shouldn’t it have the same worth elsewhere? However, if they are not sufficiently rooted in any community, or the community is of such a kind that this isn’t an imminent problem, then it would not have the weight that I would try and give it.

Hon. Mr. Clement: With reference to your specific inquiry dealing with the recommendation under the personnel section, I think you said it was 2.3, which reads:

“Each police force, in consultation with the Ontario Police Commission, establish a basic intelligence measure to be used in the recruit selection process.”

Mr. Lawlor: May I interrupt you for a minute? That is the only one I could find. I just latched on to that particular one. I played down the intelligence quotient stuff. I want the wider things of which you speak in your opening statement as to what the qualifications would be and types of psychological testing that would go into the making of a police officer.

Hon. Mr. Clement: I am advised that now the Ontario Provincial Police, in addition to the IQ tests which we have referred to and for which the member for Lakeshore feels so badly in view of his score, which by the way impressed me -- I didn’t think you had done that well, but I think 60 is certainly nothing to be ashamed of.

Mr. Lawlor: Not in our family, it isn’t.

Hon. Mr. Clement: What is the norm? Ninety-two or something? I think that you done good. You seen your duty and you done it noble. And I think you are to be commended for that.

The general scholastic background obviously is considered also. That can give rise to certain problems. I think I am aware as much as the member for Lakeshore that standardization -- equating scholastic achievement in area (a) with that achieved by someone else in area (b) -- could give rise to some problems.

Psychological testing is another matter that has been considered. The OPC has undertaken a project on police recruit standards to assess and develop selection procedures. The recommended recruitment procedures were prepared for four different-sized forces, recognizing that the needs may be different depending on the size and the nature of the force, i.e., large forces; major urban and regional forces; other city forces, and town, township and rural forces. The recommendations covered the following areas: selective criteria in planning, recruiting, candidate screening and psychological testing.

Subsequent to an in-depth analysis of all the findings, the Ministry of the Solicitor General directed that a police recruiting guide be designed for purposes of disseminating the results of the study throughout the police community. It also directed that the Ontario Police Commission accept a supportive role in any necessary implementation of those particular recommendations.

We recognize there cannot be a rigidity, an inflexibility throughout the entire province. That is why I mentioned earlier the different-sized forces. The size of the force is very important. I am sure the geography of the area and the social and economic conditions vary from area to area.

Mr. Lawlor: What’s that got to do with it?

Hon. Mr. Clement: We just cannot have an inflexibility built into something. Although a man may be acceptable in a particular area because of his specialized background in that area, his knowledge of the area, that may not be an asset for him in another geographic region of this province.

Mr. Lawlor: The sadomasochistic complex is the same in Atikokan as it happens to be down in Point Pelee. I’m after the psychology involved. What form does it take? Do they ask them to take the Rorschach test? Or is this thing all done from the outside so that the very thing that you are seeking to eliminate, the rotten apple in the police barrel, namely the masochist -- the man who punishes himself by punishing others; that type of thing -- is eliminated from the force? The man who simply can’t help but abuse his authority. The man who overreaches. The man who likes to punch people in the face, who gets a form of enjoyment out of it. We have men like that; everybody admits him. We are attempting to eliminate them from the force. You’re screening them though numerous techniques. You talk of psychological testing in this regard. Of what does it consist? What’s it all about?

Hon. Mr. Clement: The Rorschach test does not form part of the psychological testing, so I’m advised.

Mr. Lawlor: What does? Blood tests?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Is that psychological to you?

Mr. Lawlor: No, but I thought maybe we were getting closer.

Hon. Mr. Clement: I didn’t like the way you were looking at my throat when I mentioned that.

Mr. Lawlor: It’s the nose bleed you had.

Hon. Mr. Clement: The changes that will form part of those tests will be permissive and not mandatory. Right now we use standard personality inventory tests. There are no Rorschachs, there are no Binet-Simon tests, as far as I’m aware. They are permissive to the local forces and not directed to the local forces, so we are infants in this particular facet of law enforcement.

I agree that it is a very important thing that people eventually he psychologically tested for this type of work. We will get deeper into that as experience gives us an opportunity.

Mr. Lawlor: Have you bred any industrial psychologists, as one of your papers said you were going to?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Not that I’m aware of. I’m sorry; we have apparently. I wasn’t aware that we had. We have hired an industrial psychologist.

Mr. Lawlor: Is he at the police college in Aylmer, or where is he?

Hon. Mr. Clement: He is at the OPP headquarters.

Mr. Lawlor: What on earth is he doing up there? Contemplating his navel?

Hon. Mr. Clement: I am advised that he evaluates these tests as they are received from the individual forces, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman: The member for York North (Mr. W. Hodgson) -- are you finished, Mr. Lawlor?

Mr. Lawlor: Not finished. Let’s take 5.1, recruit education:

“A basic police officer educational course be developed at the initiative of the Ontario Police Commission to cover subject matter such as the criminal justice system and its impact on society, plus elementary social and behavioural science.”

As far as I can see, very elementary indeed, my dear Watson. What are you doing about that one?

Hon. Mr. Clement: The Ontario Police Commission is presently examining these recommendations, in consultation with the Ministry of Colleges and Universities, with the view to establishing the full implications of implementation of all or any part or the recommendations forming 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4 and 6.1.

Mr. Lawlor: Nothing done with respect to the CAATs colleges as yet?

Hon. Mr. Clement: I beg your pardon.

Mr. Lawlor: Nothing achieved yet with CAATs colleges?

Hon. Mr. Clement: No, not with reference to that specific reference. It is later on in that, family recommendations being 5.1, 5.2. 5.3, 5.4 and 6.1, I should advise that the Ministry of College and Universities is reviewing the possibility of developing a plan for further police education. I can give you more specifics on that if you would like them.

Mr. Lawlor: Go ahead.

Mr. Renwick: Yes.

Hon. Mr. Clement: You didn’t believe me, eh?

Mr. Lawlor: We just thought we would call your bluff.

Hon. Mr. Clement: I am calling yours.

Mr. Lawlor: I’ll raise you.

Hon. Mr. Clement: At the present time, they are reviewing the possibility of developing a plan for police officer education in consultation with the colleges of applied arts and technology. Fourteen colleges of applied arts and technology are now offering two full time programmes in law and security administration. Programmes are also available in the continuing education divisions of several colleges.

A provincial consultative committee exists to advise on the co-ordination of these programmes from the provincial viewpoint. Membership includes the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police, the Police Association of Ontario, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the colleges of applied arts and technology committee of presidents, the Ministry of Colleges and Universities -- that’s the college affairs branch -- and the private sector.

I can say with some degree of knowledge that this course has grown like Topsy at Niagara College in Welland, the home of one of our colleagues here in the House this evening --

Mr. J. R. Smith (Hamilton Mountain): The finest.

Hon. Mr. Clement: -- and it is a very popular course. When the course first started there were only a nominal number of people in it -- perhaps five or six -- and I believe there are 70 or 80 enrolled in it this year. They were here as guests of the Legislature with their chief instructor some five or six weeks ago. Before I came to this Legislature, Mr. Chairman, I had the privilege of being on that committee and chairing it the year I was elected.

There is Niagara College and I think there was Mohawk and Seneca. Those are just two or three I can rattle off the top of my mind right now.

Mr. Lawlor: I will only press for two further answers, I think, Mr. Chairman, before I desist. Have you appointed a director of Ontario police personnel development?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Not yet.

Mr. Lawlor: Is it just my preternatural impatience or is it certain stagnations that I have accused these departments of in the past that are operating here? This report has been before you. I would have thought it was a critical move, an initial move, a forthright move and a relatively easy move to get that director appointed. He has a multitude of tasks to do. He is kind of a central figure in this report, yet not even that has been done. You have had months and months and months; this report was before us last year at this time and you haven’t got a director appointed. It is sure ossified.

I know with the new breath of life that only you, John Clement, can possibly breathe into this moribund ministry will the thing ever come to inflate, deflate, make a noise, do anything. But please move in this particular area. In other words, you are not getting anything done. It is all window dressing. These are very nice replies that you are giving me, much fluff and fluorescence, but there is no internal content to these replies at all.

Secondly, the other question, what about a national police college? What advances have been made? If you want the section, it is 10.4.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Mr. Chairman, this recommendation, that the Ministry of the Solicitor General use its good offices to support such a college or such a faculty or facility, has been studied very carefully. The Ontario Police Commission supports this concept. There are many advantages to senior officers moving across provincial boundaries and working together.

However, the commission intends to upgrade the curriculum of the one we already have here in Ontario, namely the police college at Aylmer. If a national police college is developed by some other level, or at some other place, we will support it from this end, I suppose, both psychologically and financially. Until such a facility comes into being, we do not feel it is incumbent upon this province, to create a national police college when we already have one at a provincial level. That is the present status.

As you know, there is a type of federal facility. I think the nearest federal one, perhaps the only one, is at Rockcliffe. Senior officers attend from various forces across Canada and learn certain advances in the field of policing. They attend that college, I believe, as guests of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. I have known officers who have, in fact, attended. I think some of the senior OPP men have attended that facility.

Mr. Lawlor: I’m going away from that report. I am not going to refer -- although I said I might earlier -- to the sections on native people, on Indians. I am coming back to this as my final question for the time being because you didn’t answer my rather sarcastic comments this afternoon about your paper on Indian policing services -- your pretence and fabrication that you were doing something new, when you weren’t doing anything new at all. It is almost like catching you out. I read this afternoon the section about your several major moves recently to improve Indian policing services. I had better read it:

“In late April, 1975, we established a group within the OPP specifically to provide and improve such services for our native people.”

-- which has already been, not mooted, but actually put in gear. It was formed, structured, given content a year ago by the minister before you. Then you go on:

“This move is in addition to all our other Indian policing activity.”

As an added grand gesture, over and above that, you got into something which has already been canvassed, and pretty well worked through, in previous years -- the fly-in patrols. This was your grandstanding move in the statement.

I want to go back to that rather simple sentence: “This move is in addition to all our other policing activity.” I thought these were your basic policing activities, the ones you are proposing now. What are all these other magnificent things you have been doing for the Indians down through the years?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Mr. Chairman, I hope the hon. member for Lakeshore can appreciate I was not present last year and did not have the advantage of being able to be present on that occasion.

Mr. Renwick: He is not going to be there next year. He has it beautifully arranged.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Maybe you’re right.

Mr. Lawlor: You have a staff with a certain amount of continuity.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Maybe you’re quite right.

Mr. J. E. Stokes (Thunder Bay): I think the member for Halton West (Mr. Kerr) just got you last year’s comments. He got them from the member for Bellwoods (Mr. Yaremko).

Mr. Renwick: It will be 1978 before we get an answer.

Hon. Mr. Clement: As I understand it, my predecessor last year, really, in effect, announced the implementation or the commencement of certain programmes. Now we have added to those programmes or, in fact, implemented them over the past year. I am advised that, while there have been police planes going in and out of certain areas, as they were required, certain policing functions by air are now being done on a regular basis. During the last year we have established offices at Grassy Narrows, Shoal Lake, Whitedog, Big Trout Lake and Sandy Lake.

Mr. Stokes: Not yet.

Hon. Mr. Clement: You are saying there are not offices in there?

Mr. Stokes: Not at Big Trout.

Hon. Mr. Clement: I am advised there are. You work on the wrong side of the lake. That is your problem.

Mr. Stokes: It is within the last two weeks then.

Hon. Mr. Clement: I am talking within the last two days, how does that grab you?

Mr. Lawlor: Two hours.

Hon. Mr. Clement: We can return to this one on the OPP vote. Maybe we can check up there. We’ll call them or something.

The new helicopters -- I think they are flying Jet Rangers now -- increase the search and fly-in capacity. As for the agreement with Ottawa for band constable financing, I executed such an agreement, I believe on Friday last.

Mr. Lawlor: That is the federal one?

Hon. Mr. Clement: That is the federal one.

Mr. Lawlor: What is the deal?

Hon. Mr. Clement: I believe the federal government gives 60 per cent and the province contributes 40 per cent to the cost of the band policing.

Mr. Renwick: Would you table that agreement?

Hon. Mr. Clement: When I get it back. I haven’t got it back signed. I was advised today that Mr. Buchanan is waiting to sign it. That was serious advice; I am not being facetious.

Mr. Renwick: No, I understand.

Hon. Mr. Clement: He was waiting to sign it. It was presented to me Friday morning last in the House and I signed it. As far as I know, it has gone on its way to Ottawa for signature by Mr. Buchanan.

Mr. Chairman: The member for York North.

Mr. W. Hodgson (York North): Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Lakeshore has motivated me to speak at this time. He mentioned that regional police forces were costing the taxpayer more money. I would like to speak on the regional police force in York, the area that I represent.

Four years ago in 1970 there were 14 different police forces. When regional government came into being on Jan. 1, there was one regional force. You can imagine the position that the police chief was placed in, having to take over the job of 14 police chiefs. He has had a lot of tough sledding in the region of York, bringing together the 14 municipalities as one force and he has done an excellent job. And I refer to Chief Bruce Crawford.

He was criticized for not doing enough. He was criticized for doing too much. In the old municipal police forces the way I saw it prior to this there were two different laws -- a law for friends and a law for outsiders. The local police force got into a lot of politics. I will defy anybody in this Legislature to say that in small local police forces there isn’t a lot of polities played.

Crawford came in and he was determined to do a good job in the region of York. And he has done a good job. That’s the proof of the pudding. Living beside a large metropolitan area such as Metropolitan Toronto, if we don’t have a strong police force in the region of York, crime seems to move up. Crime has been growing right across the province but last year York regional police were able to report that crime was down in the region of York. I think that speaks for itself of the job that Bruce Crawford and the regional police force are doing.

I would like to pay compliments to our government for what they have done for the police forces in the regions. This year the increase in per capita grants amounts to $1.2 million towards policing in the region of York. Three years ago the region of York thought they needed a more advanced and more updated communications system and they came down and saw the Solicitor General of the time and the Solicitor General advanced them a grant of $180,000 to improve their communications system. Our chief is very up to date, as I said before, about improving our communications system in the region of York, where we will have one of the most up-to-date regional communications systems in North America. And the reports I get bear it out.

About a year and a half ago they put their case before the Ontario Police Commission and also the Solicitor General at the time and we have been advanced another $85,000 as a test project. If it proves satisfactory, it will be within all regional police systems, I hope, in the future.

With those few remarks about our regional police system, I want to relay a nice telephone call I got yesterday morning from the sergeant of police with the OPP at Oak Ridges. He was apologizing to me and wanted me to convey his message to our Premier (Mr. Davis).

Last weekend the Premier and his wife got caught in the fog going on a trip in helicopter and they had to set down in the Oak Ridges area. Of course, the call came to the Oak Ridges detachment for help and they sent a car out. He was apologizing to me because he sent a Plymouth rather than a Buick, so I relayed the message to the Premier today. He said, “At that time, I wouldn’t have cared if I had to ride in a Jeep. All we wanted was to get where it was safe.”

With those few remarks, Mr. Chairman, I want to let the members of this House --

Mr. Lawlor: I wonder if he would have done that for a New Democrat?

Mr. W. Hodgson: -- know and have it on record --

Mr. Lawlor: I wonder if he would have done that for a New Democrat?

Mr. W. Hodgson: -- what the Solicitor General’s ministry and the Province of Ontario are doing. They are anxious to help the regional police forces throughout this province and will continue to do so.

Mr. Chairman: The member for Sudbury.

Mr. M. C. Germa (Sudbury): Mr. Chairman, I would like to explore with the minister a topic which I raised in question period today and that is the police commissions in these various municipalities. Through long experience on city council in the city of Sudbury, I know there has been continual frustration in that police commission budgets were not subject to scrutiny by the local elected members. Yet the minister, this afternoon in question period, indicated he did not want to remove some of the local autonomy which is embodied in the local police commission.

I would point out to the minister that the police commission is not there by the will of the people. It is an appointed and anointed body and is in no way subject to the will of the people or of the various area councils which are forced to pick up the tab for what I consider to be big spenders. I have long since --

Mr. Chairman: I must draw to the attention of the member for Sudbury this is not dealt with in this vote. What you are talking about is Ontario police commissions and it also comes under vote 1505.

Mr. R. F. Ruston (Essex-Kent): We have been on it all night.

Mr. Chairman: We have not been on police commissions all night.

Mr. Germa: I thought we were talking about police commissions. What I am going to refer to, Mr. Chairman, is that when there is a dispute between a local regional council and the police commission, who is the arbitrator? Who is the person who arbitrates? It is the Ontario Police Commission which decides what the budget is going to be.

Mr. Chairman: We will deal with that in vote 1503, Ontario police arbitration commission.

Mr. Germa: I have been led down the path. I thought we were talking about the Ontario Police Commission.

Mr. Chairman: No, we are talking about the task force at the present time; the task force report.

Mr. Lawlor: You can get back in by getting on to the task force.

Mr. Germa: Tell me how to do that.

Mr. Lawlor: There is a recommendation in here somewhere, I am sure.

Mr. Chairman: Did the member for Riverdale want to speak on this particular vote?

Mr. Renwick: No, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman: Shall vote 1501 carry?

Mr. Lawlor: I have a question on 1501. Where is the money voted in these estimates for royal commissions? I don’t see it anywhere else and I don’t see it in 1501. Who is paying Judge Morand for his services?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Royal commissions, I am advised, are not carried within the estimates before the House. It would be a supplementary estimate each particular time as required. In other words, we don’t budget X dollars for royal commissions.

Mr. Chairman: Does vote 1501 carry?

Mr. Lawlor: I am sorry. Let me pause on that for a minute. In past years you certainly have done so. There have been entries of that kind in other years.

The amounts of money involved in this brutality probe at the present time are astronomical. I am looking at an article in the Star of April 21: “Brutality probes run overtime as costs mount,” I thought some provision would have been made in the estimates with respect to this. It is going to go to $0.25 million, I suspect.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Mr. Chairman, I am advised that we go to Management Board at the end of the holding of the commission and obtain the funding in that way, by application to Management Board. I don’t know how I could come before this House, or any committee of it, and budget for a commission which is in the process of being conducted or about to embark, and give a guesstimate as to the length of the commission and the cost of the commission insofar as the number of witnesses and counsel required. There’s just no way that I could come forward and make that kind of projection with any degree of accuracy.

Mr. Lawlor: That’s the most fallacious statement you’ve made in the last three or four minutes, In your Attorney General’s estimates and in other estimates we’ve had before us, such as Correctional Services, there have been in past years on any number of occasions substantial sums voted for Niagara Escarpment inquiries or for Science Centre inquiries, and there’s always provision made for royal commissions. I’m not going to flay this horse at the moment, but the answer is certainly unsatisfactory.

It’s simply a matter of making some kind of guesstimate. You know there were 15 witnesses, they expected they would take one week a piece, they were running away over on it, they have 50 more people who have shown up from the outside, who voluntarily have submitted their complaints about the police in Metropolitan Toronto with respect to charges of beating people up and afflicting various forms of punishment upon them, extra-judicially.

I personally have had instances where people have come to me who have been to the commission, and have been tamed down flat. They were told: “No, we have an overburden of cases already. We don’t need yours on top of it.” They are, according to this article, trying to sift them out carefully as to which ones they’ll listen to before Judge Morand, and which ones they will not. So that even with the 50, over and above what they already have through the newspaper articles, they’re all being winnowed out. So the matter could have been predicted to go on for a certain definite length of time.

How you were to budget or make projections with respect to earlier royal commissions in the light of this particular one and the numerous times we’ve discussed them before in this House, particularly under AG, quite puzzles me. In other words, what I’m a little disconcerted about is your answer, not the fact that you didn’t do it.

Hon. Mr. Clement: I have just received some advice from one of my officials. I am advised if we have one already under way then we will insert a figure in there for the estimated cost. If it embarks during the course of the year, the Ministry of the Attorney General then bears the responsibility for the funding of that until the end of the fiscal year, when the balance of it will be paid by the ministry involved.

Mr. Lawlor: Oh, I see.

Hon. Mr. Clement: So that’s the explanation.

Mr. Lawlor: That is a much better explanation.

Hon. Mr. Clement: I thought I’d keep trying until I found one that you liked.

Mr. Lawlor: Sometimes you do a soft-shoe dance, you know.

Hon. Mr. Clement: I have a lot of hidden talents.

Mr. Lawlor: Yes, that’s right; a sort of Fred Astaire.

Mr. A. J. Roy (Ottawa East): And a high IQ.

Vote 1501 agreed to.

On vote 1502:

Mr. Lawlor: Vote 1502 has a number of fairly meaty items. First of all, the Centre of Forensic Sciences. I asked two questions earlier today. No. 1: Why so long in completing the place? Why the failure of time?

Mr. Renwick: And what does forensic mean?

Mr. Lawlor: Secondly, my friend Renwick wants to know what forensic means. I’m not humble enough to admit I don’t know. Thirdly, all these additional fully qualified staff will be necessary. This was said a year ago, this was said under John Yaremko, and now it’s being said again. Who are they? What are they? How much are they going to be paid? The amount of money involved here hasn’t jumped all that much. I’ll take that back, I won’t say it’s not all that much. Is $300,000 all that much? I don’t know. In any event, what have you in mind for the forensic tower?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Most of the equipment is coming, I am told, from the Ministry of Government Services. The hon. member for Lakeshore wanted to know today about some of the equipment that would be going in to this new location. We are going to require one card wheel, one recorder which is a replacement for a gas chromatograph -- you know what that is for -- one automatic tissue extractor, 10 breathalysers --

Mr. Foulds: One automatic what extractor?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Tissue extractor.

Mr. Stokes: That is a pair of tweezers, isn’t it?

Hon. Mr. Clement: -- seven slide warmers, for the biology section naturally, one high-speed centrifuge for the biology section --

Mr. Lawlor: How much does that cost?

Hon. Mr. Clement: It costs $3,000.

Mr. Lawlor: That is a cheap centrifuge.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Grab this one -- one electrophoresis equipment for blood grouping.

Mr. Lawlor: How much does that cost?

Hon. Mr. Clement: That’s a $2,000 piece of equipment. I just thought I would like to give you a little rundown on some of the equipment that is required. Government Services will be supplying equipment and the building together, for a total estimated cost of about $29 million.

Mr. Lawlor: You know that your assistant there gives you kind of an echo for effect.

Hon. Mr. Clement: He has got small hands.

Mr. Lawlor: You tend to die dolorously over there and then you come back with a whang.

Mr. Foulds: Somewhat like Johnny Ray.

Hon. Mr. Clement: He wants to make sure you are properly informed because he lives in your riding, he tells me.

Mr. Lawlor: Oh, I see.

Hon. Mr. Clement: He has a very high regard for you too.

Hon. A. Grossman (Provincial Secretary for Resources Development): You’d better be nice to him.

Mr. Lawlor: How about the experts? Who are you hiring?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Mr. Chairman, I am advised there will be a request for an addition to the complement this year of only one, who is classified as a scientist 4. Until the ministry actually is ensconced in the building, it will be wasteful indeed to hire staff until we can actually utilize them in the new physical setup. For the present time, they are only calling for an additional complement of one in that particular field.

Mr. Lawlor: What is the scientist for? What kind of a scientist?

Hon. Mr. Clement: A chemist.

Mr. Lawlor: Let me go back to the previous question. You mentioned a centrifuge for the separation of blood samples and things. None of the articles was of any great size. I would have thought you would have been using highly expensive electronic equipment of various kinds and that you might even possibly be installing laser beams in there for the analysis of material. Do we get anything like that?

That is highly expensive stuff. It costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. But considering your grandiose gestures and your statement that this is a magnificent, first-in-the-world type of thing, I would have suspected all kinds of equipment of an esoteric kind would be installed, rather than the kind of thing that you have mentioned to us here. Do you have wind tunnels? Do you test velocities? Have you got various types of ballistic ranges?

Hon. Mr. Clement: They have three more pieces of equipment that might interest the member for Lakeshore. A scanning electron microscope --

Mr. Lawlor: That might help. How much does it cost?

Hon. Mr. Clement: I will give you the three pieces and give you the total cost and we’ll take a look at them. If you want to know individually, I’ll find out, but I don’t know individually. I am told that the total cost of these three pieces of equipment is approximately $300,000.

The second one is a gas chromatograph mass spectrograph --

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Oh, that is the one we have been thinking of.

Hon. Mr. Clement: -- and the third one is a sound spectrograph, for the measurement of the voice -- inflections and so on of the voice.

Mr. Lawlor: Radar people; sonar.

Hon. Mr. Clement: The total cost is approximately $300,000 for this type of equipment.

Mr. Lawlor: I would be vitally interested in learning what the plans for the forensic centre are. I suppose we’ll get an invitation to attend the place when it opens in June and can ask some questions of the director and others at that particular time. But with all the talk I have come across here -- printed talk -- I am rather surprised that it is so diminutive in the long run, that there haven’t been the magnificent plans worked out, such as the range and type of expert who would be engaged and that you look forward to and envisage engaging once you have the facilities in train.

I thought you would be champing at the bit with a view to having this full thing operational and knowing precisely what it is that you need in terms of the best forensic science in the world today -- largely, I suspect, garnered from Washington and London and with a little very apperceptive German intelligence thrown into the whole thing. But, as I say, I can abide the visitation to the centre when it opens.

If anyone else wants to speak on 2, I wish to go on to 3, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman: Anyone on item 2? The member for Lakeshore on item 3.

Mr. Lawlor: Three is emergency measures. On the emergency measures, I think we may have a moment of dalliance now in the House and ask whether the hon. minister has poked his nose into the bunker up in Barrie to save his skin from frying when all the rest of us are suffering from atomic radiation? Have you been up there, or is it still operative? Are you one of the select few of those among us who are worth saving?

Mr. R. Haggerty (Welland South): He has a pass key.

Hon. Mr. Clement: No, I have never been up there. Apparently I am not one of the chosen few. I will be staying down here. You and I will probably still be in this House debating when the bomb goes off. No, I have not been up to the bunker in Barrie, or whatever it is that you call it.

Mr. Lawlor: The copper roof may save us.

Hon. Mr. Clement: I have not been invited to attend there, and perhaps that has some hidden meaning for both the hon. member and myself.

Mr. Lawlor: In the EMO, you suffered a severe cutback I believe around October, 1973, from the federal government. The federal government was doing some financing. Are they still contributing one-half? They were contributing at that time $3 million and cut it back to $1.5 million. What was the rationale for them doing that? Have they lost faith in the EMO operation?

After all, it is a kind of security operation with respect to internal quarrels and problems in this particular province, but I am sure there are similar organizations across the country. Nevertheless, they thought so little of it that they halved their budget. Then, at page 3 of Kerr’s statement, he makes mention of a study: “A report has recently been received by my ministry and is currently being analyzed.”

It is safe. This is the way various Solicitors General get off the hook from one estimate to another. The report is received. We wait with bated breath for the reception of these reports which we never receive, of course. The answer for years and years is, “We are waiting imminently, with bated breath, for the reception of the report. Therefore we can’t answer any questions for you.” Then, having received the report, the disclosure is always that the answer is currently being analyzed.

The next stage in the process of retrogression is to make it almost a piecemeal analysis of the same thing. We never come to grips with any issue. We never know what it’s about, and never perform our function. I am going to ask you to give us just a smidgen more information tonight than is normally your practice. Please don’t tell me it is being analyzed.

Hon. Mr. Clement: I am not going to tell you that it’s being analyzed. I assigned a piece of correspondence to your colleague from, I believe, Sudbury East (Mr. Martel) today. He made an inquiry on this particular subject, and I was hoping he’d be in the House tonight so I could hand him the letter which I have here with me. The federal government has withdrawn, or is withdrawing, its funding of the EMO programme at the end of fiscal 1975, and the province is withdrawing its support at the end of calendar 1975. I believe the funding, and I stand to be corrected, provided by the federal government in the past two or three years has been about $1.5 million or something in that neighbourhood.

Mr. Lawlor: Right.

Hon. Mr. Clement: It was designed initially, as the hon. member knows, primarily for purposes of wartime and peacetime calamity. I am sure if there was something of that nature in terms of a war situation, alternative programmes would have to be invoked immediately for very obvious reasons. It has been in effect, I forget, since 1961 or perhaps even earlier than that.

An hon. member: Earlier than that.

Hon. Mr. Clement: It was designed to meet a particular purpose that seemed to exist at that time.

Mr. Lawlor: What you are saying, in effect, is EMO is passing out of existence as far as you are concerned.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Yes.

Mr. Renwick: Mr. Chairman, if I could just pick this up, as the latest report I have from the Metropolitan Toronto department of emergency services -- unfortunately, it’s the 1972 report -- includes, as an appendix, a letter from the then Solicitor General, John Yaremko, Jan. 31, 1973, to the chairman of the executive committee of Metropolitan Toronto. And he stated in part -- this is your predecessor:

“In October, 1971, we issued a guide to effect effective planning for peacetime emergencies which was produced to assist all officials with responsibilities at the municipal level in the formulation of plans and procedures to deal with peacetime emergencies. We believe that it is important that each municipality should have such a plan ready to meet the stress of these peacetime emergencies in the most effective and coordinated way.

“It has been encouraging to see how much progress has been made in the development of these plans throughout the province and how these preparations have paid off in recent emergency situations such as the heavy flooding in Essex county and the large sulphuric acid spill from a train wreck in Pelham township in the region of Niagara.

“I would therefore ask for your cooperation and assistance in furthering the development of such plans and preparations in your area of responsibility.”

It would appear to me that if you’re phasing out the emergency measures item from this vote under public safety programmes, we should have a statement from the minister as to what the substitute programme is to provide for this area of public safety. In the very report to which I referred, which is dated in 1973, reference is made to the programme as follows:

“Our department will place increasing stress in dealing with disaster situations particularly related to the environment. Plans are being formulated for much more direct involvement in dealing with damage to the environment created by oil and chemical spillage, pollution of the air, pollution of our waters and the unnecessary fouling and injury to our park and waterway system in the Metropolitan Toronto area.”

It would appear to me, Mr. Chairman, that we should have a statement as to where that particular aspect of public safety is being picked up, if the emergency measures vote is being phased out of existence.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Yes, Mr. Chairman. The municipalities are at liberty to continue their own emergency measures programmes if they see fit. The decision in Queen’s Park was made on a financial basis only, in view of the decision made in Ottawa -- that is, the withdrawal of the funding for this particular programme. But if any community or municipality wishes to continue or to modify its EMO programme, it is at liberty to do so.

The unconditional grants to municipalities can be utilized, or a portion of them can be utilized, for this service. Insofar as what the alternative might be in the event of a major disaster, we did advise the public of this by way of a news release dated April 9, 1975. If the hon. member for Riverdale would like me to read it I’ll be glad to do so to advise him as to how the public was informed. That is, the lead ministry concept.

Mr. Renwick: I am interested in that, Mr. Chairman. But specifically it seems to me that this whole emergency measures organization at the municipal level, now at the regional level and at the county level, came from the top. It came from the federal government through the directives related to national defence. It came through the provincial government as part of the method by which this whole programme was implemented.

I can understand the phasing out of that part of the programme but I can’t understand if the immediate emergency response to environment hazards is going to be the responsibility of the municipalities, be they regions or counties or the Metropolitan Toronto area. Can this government simply say: “If the municipalities want to, they can carry on that part of the programme”?

It seems to me that the moment that you not only withdraw your financial support along with the federal government for this type of public safety programme that you’ve got to substitute something else for it. Otherwise you should give a very clear directive to the municipalities that what your predecessor said is no longer the case, and that you shirk the responsibility and shed and abdicate your responsibility with respect to any overall direction for the kind of environment hazards that your predecessor referred to, and which the director of emergency services for Metropolitan Toronto has dealt with in his report.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Mr. Chairman, I think the best way to clarify the hon. member’s question is to read the advice that went forward on April 9, 1975, to the public and to the municipalities in particular:

“A new lead ministry concept to develop procedures for joint action by Ontario government ministries during peacetime emergencies was announced here today. This concept calls for the development of task forces consisting of senior representatives of various provincial ministries involved in alleviating such emergencies as major floods, forest fires, air crashes, epidemics and similar disasters.

“As planned, the lead ministry concept will provide leadership to cohesively employ all available resources of several governmental bodies in any large-scale emergency to provide maximum assistance as efficiently as possible.

“At the same time, the allocation of lead ministries to help in emergencies will provide similar services as those formerly coordinated by the emergency measures branch. Therefore, it has been decided by the cabinet to gradually phase out the EMB over the course of the coming year.

“The viability of joint action by several government agencies has been proven in such recent emergencies as the Grand River flood and the massive forest fires near Kenora last summer. At such times, many ministries effectively work together to plan prompt, effective response; evacuate and care for local citizens, and protect against property damage.

“The concept could involve virtually any Ontario government ministry, depending upon the nature of the emergency. For instance, in planning for emergencies such as floods or forest fires, the lead ministry would properly be the Ministry of Natural Resources through its concern with conservation authorities and forests. The Ministry of Health would head up any necessary response to an epidemic or other health hazard of similar magnitude. Serious oil or chemical spills would be dealt with under the leadership of the Ministry of the Environment through their environmental branch and air and water management branches.

“If required, the provincial government could also call for the assistance of appropriate private agencies such as transportation companies or Ontario Hydro and of the Canadian armed forces.

“The Ontario Provincial Police, the office of the fire marshal and the chief coroner’s office will continue to provide emergency services through the Ministry of the Solicitor General.”

As far as Metropolitan Toronto is concerned, Mr. Chairman, it has been announced that the Metropolitan Toronto police will assume the role of the emergency services department in emergencies here in Metro.

Mr. Renwick: Well, Mr. Chairman, I have a marginal acquaintance with emergency action, and it appears to me that the identification of the emergency and the immediate response of an appropriate ministry of government leaves a time lag in dealing with the emergency that should not occur.

It’s obviously quite appropriate to say that the Ministry of Natural Resources will deal with a forest fire hazard that may be threatening a substantial part of the province. That is the kind of disasters that has continually occurred in the Province of Ontario; and the Ministry of Natural Resources, and before it the Department of Lands and Forests, had specialized equipment and specialized persons, and it was natural to assume that it was their responsibility and therefore they were the ones who made the response.

When you compare that with the recent report about the flooding in the Galt area, and you read that report, you find that there was nobody who was able to respond to the emergent situation which took place. Even his honour, the judge, who reported on that matter, had to use the kind of trite expression: “After all, this was an act of God,” so nobody could quite be blamed for not having responded quickly and promptly to the emergency.

It does seem to me that unless the Ministry of the Solicitor General, through the Ontario Police Commission, if that’s the appropriate agency, provides the immediate response and the direction, you cannot expect a series of diverse ministries to decide which one of them has the immediate response to make to the emergency. It’s quite true over a period of time it will get sorted out, but the fact of the matter is that at the time the emergency is occurring you cannot allow a lag of time as to which ministry’s responsibility it may happen to be.

In this decentralization or dispersal of this responsibility, the government appears to me to be abdicating its responsibility, not necessarily for the ultimate designation of a different ministry to deal with a particular form of emergency, but with its ability to cope immediately with that kind of a situation. Surely if we have a public safety programme in the Ministry of the Solicitor General and the former local concern, as was expressed by your predecessor, of the kinds of local peacetime emergencies that are involved, this ministry should take upon itself the responsibility of providing that kind of immediate initial response, rather than to try to say that somehow or other it’s going to be all fanned out and the results are going to be quite appropriate.

I go back to the forest fire one. Over many years the government has been involved in and has immediate responsibility through a particular ministry for that kind of threat. As for the flooding question, to my mind the reason why there was a judge appointed was that there were serious questions about the adequacy of the immediate response of government to that particular threat. It seems to me that somehow or other you’re leaving that kind of a vacuum for the initial response to these emergencies which may take place.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Mr. Chairman, the member’s concern is well founded in that he has pretty much described how, in fact, it will work, because the responsibility has been vested in this ministry prior to the phasing out of the programme. It will continue on this same basis in that a committee of cabinet, chaired by the Solicitor General, will make the decision immediately. The Solicitor General will chair that committee of the cabinet and designate the lead ministry.

In some cases, it will be very obvious. Those will require no waste of time. I don’t think that’s the kind of thing you’re talking about. It’s those cases where one ministry feels that it’s either its responsibility or another ministry’s and there is the time lag. The concept of the subcommittee of cabinet, chaired by the Solicitor General, is to take care of that very point that you make mention of, time being of the essence as it is in many of these things.

Mr. Renwick: Mr. Chairman, I don’t want to prolong this. I think these things are only important when the emergency occurs. It seems to me, if you are going to take that course, what you’ve got to do is to designate now by way of plan the known types of possible hazards which will occur in an emergent case in the province, and a reasonable number of them are known at this time, and designate the ministries now that have that prime responsibility and publish the information as to where the prime responsibility is. I think I’ve got somewhere a little booklet from one of the ministries about what telephone numbers various people can call across the province for various emergencies. Then I think you have to say residual ones are going to be the responsibility of the public safety programme and therefore the responsibility of the Solicitor General.

A little forethought in planning may avoid the kind of problem which seems to me to be a necessary consequence of your phasing out of this programme.

Mr. Chairman: The member for Welland South.

Mr. Haggerty: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Perhaps I’m one of the members who have been up to Camp Borden to look at the emergency measures headquarters located there. I believe there are facilities there for all the cabinet ministers in the Province of Ontario. For what purpose at that time I’m not quite clear, but I understand that it was to continue the operations of government, regardless of whether there was any population left, after an atomic fallout or a bomb dropped in Ontario.

Mr. F. Laughren (Nickel Belt): Whom would they govern?

Mr. Haggerty: I don’t know whom they would govern. I suppose that they would be governing to bargain with --

Mr. Laughren: With each other.

Mr. Haggerty: With each other, or trying to make a settlement then after the damage is done.

Mr. Laughren: What a cat fight that would be!

Mr. Haggerty: You are going to withdraw this service as an emergency measures organization in Ontario. Perhaps it’s through the federal government and then the provincial government not providing sufficient funds to continue with it. I think it has a purpose in the Province of Ontario.

I can recall a time when I was vice-chairman of that organization in the county of Welland. I recall at the time of the Bay of Pigs -- that was the Cuban crisis -- the alert was sent out throughout Ontario and perhaps throughout Canada and throughout the world that there was a possibility of another world war. So it has a purpose.

My main concern now is, if you’re going to dissolve the services of this organization, what are you going to do with existing equipment now located in a number of municipalities? It can be listed as property and equipment. A number of things are perhaps of some value.

The minister also mentioned mutual aid. This has always been in force in the region of Niagara. It provided a system of emergency assistance in a time of crisis such as local fire matters or other crisis that may crop up at any moment. Would firemen look after that need? If we withdraw that service, in the case of a civil emergency where do we look for assistance if we don’t have mutual aid in Ontario?

Through the emergency measures organization a programme was there in case of any emergency. You knew what department was to be in charge. You had your health units. You had your medical team available. A number of social agencies were active in the programme in case of emergencies. How are you going to continue with such a programme?

There is still the possibility of another world crisis. I wonder, perhaps, if we are not going to sell ourselves short by taking this action at both levels of government. That is like saying there is no need for it. What becomes of the alarm system now? In almost every municipality you can see yellow sirens located in four or five different locations throughout the municipality. If I can recall, it wasn’t too long ago the alarm system actually worked for the first time since it was inaugurated some 20 years ago by EMO. What happens to the alarm alert system? Who is going to control this if you remove the emergency measures organization from that authority? Would the minister like to comment on those matters I have raised?

Hon. Mr. Clement: It will be controlled for the federal government by Bell Canada.

Mr. Haggerty: Who is going to look after all the red telephones located in almost every key municipality in Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Clement: The federal government.

Mr. Haggerty: Is the province still going to be in partnership with them on this programme? Are they going to be keyed in on their programme at all?

Mr. Laughren: Who is going to get the revenue out of the sales tax on the phones?

Mr. Haggerty: Have you got a red phone in your office?

Hon. Mr. Clement: No, I don’t have a red phone in my office. The federal government will continue to operate this by itself. It’s continuing on the same basis as it has before. It’s a Bell operation. It’s paid for and subscribed for by the federal government. That will continue to operate.

Mr. J. E. Bullbrook (Sarnia): You are opting out?

Mr. Chairman: The member for Sudbury.

Mr. Germa: Mr. Chairman, to follow up on the member for Welland South, are you saying the military is going to take over control of our alarm system, or did you say that Bell Telephone is going to sound the alarm? Who makes the decision to push the button?

Hon. Mr. Clement: If you are talking about a war -- let’s say an atomic attack -- that would be a federal responsibility.

Interjection by an hon. member.

Hon. Mr. Clement: They would press the button, shout the alarm, or whatever is done. They will do that in the future as they would have done in the past. The system, as I was explaining to the member for Welland South, has been operated by Bell Canada for, and on behalf of, the federal government so that the nation could be alerted. That system will continue to operate. This has nothing to do with it; we play no role in that alarm system whatsoever.

Mr. Germa: Mr. Chairman, I am intrigued by the bunker in Barrie. Does the phasing out of EMO indicate that you are going to turn the key? Does this government feel so secure they do not need a shelter in order to save their tail sometime if things get too hot?

Hon. Mr. Clement: That shelter was provided by the federal government a number of years ago. As I understand it, and I stand to be corrected, the federal government some years ago decided, in the event of a war situation, that it would have to decentralize at Ottawa, and the provincial governments would have to decentralize in the various provincial capitals. The federal government in Ottawa provided a site at Camp Borden, in the Barrie area. That was to be the decentralization point for the government here at Queen’s Park. And, apparently -- this is long before my being around -- in the event of a war situation, the people here would deploy to that area in an attempt to continue to run the Province of Ontario from that particular point.

Now, I have never been there. I am told that it leaves a lot to be desired in that it’s being completely renovated or torn out, or something like that right now. So, I presume that it would be of little value to those who would use it at the present time if the emergency was created.

Mr. R. S. Smith (Nipissing): Which is it -- torn out or renovated?

Mr. Laughren: Did parliamentary assistants have a key?

Hon. Mr. Clement: I am told there is new radio equipment being installed at the present time.

An hon. member: That’s great.

Mr. Germa: If EMO is being phased out, are you saying that this bunker is not part of the EMO structure, that this will still function even without EMO?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Sure, yes. It has nothing to do with EMO.

Mr. Chairman: Does item 3 carry?

Mr. Lawlor: We won’t give up our Archie Bunker.

Mr. Germa: Another question, Mr. Chairman --

Mr. Bullbrook: I would like to ask a question, if I may.

Mr. Chairman: The member for Sudbury still has the floor.

Mr. Bullbrook: Oh, I’m sorry.

Mr. Germa: On another topic, I was wondering about the equipment. There are hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of equipment scattered across the province. I know in my own particular area we’ve put in three different radio communication systems in about 25 towns in the past 10 years. We have trucks; we have hundreds of blankets; we’ve got scores of tons of dried rations; we’ve got big pots and kettles, and a whole bunch of things that I think should be looked after. Who will take over this inventory and be responsible now that the thing is crumbling?

Hon. Mr. Clement: The equipment was initially purchased by a cost-sharing arrangement with the federal government, and so they have participated in the cost of that along with the province. At the present time the disposal of the equipment is being discussed with the federal emergency measures establishment so that a policy can be developed and utilized as quickly as possible for the disposal of the equipment that the member talks about.

Mr. Bullbrook: I just wanted, through you, Mr. Chairman, to have a dialogue for a moment with the acting Solicitor General, so disposed, about my own involvement with emergency measures. For the first seven years of my political life I had a card every year sent to me inviting me to come to see the involvement of EMO. I never had time or the inclination so to do.

What happened in 1971 was a really significant storm in Lake Huron. It began on a Friday night -- oh, about 11 o’clock -- and came from Michigan. Living close to the lake, I was quite personally aware of it.

About 2 o’clock in the morning I began to get telephone calls from people who were proximately affected and at 6 o’clock in the morning I took it upon myself to go out and have a look at it. And it was the beginning of a disaster, which your predecessors recognized as a disaster.

At about 8 o’clock I began to phone the emergency measures organization man in my town, whom I didn’t know personally. I couldn’t get them to answer until, eventually, about 9:10 o’clock, I was told by his wife that he was on his way to Loblaw’s with his daughter.

I wondered why he would have such a lack of consideration. I want you to know this, because this is the way it operates. This is the way it operates in a small city where you populate your whole hierarchy of involvement with your Tory hacks. This is the way it operates.

Mr. Gilbertson: Shame on you.

Mr. Bullbrook: You’ve never recognized it yourself, because of your own --

Mr. Renwick: I guess they are disbanding it, same as they are disbanding the Tory machine.

Mr. Bullbrook: -- I was going to say incestuous involvement, but you’re not involved yourself. But I phoned him at 9:10 and I asked if he might phone me at the mayor’s home as quickly as possible, because there was one house not only in imminent danger, but the house was beginning to fall into the lake. I then went down to my own law office, because of some selfish motivation on my part, and my law office was being drowned. It’s called 2 Ferry Dock Hill. It was being drowned by the water. As a matter of digression and possibly of no interest for you or my colleagues, we hired somebody to take out the important files.

Mr. Renwick: The wills box.

Mr. Bullbrook: The wills box, too, as a matter of fact. But, recognizing then a collateral responsibility as an MPP, I went back to my constituency’s progress. The house had fallen into the lake by that time.

Mr. Renwick: By that time, had he returned from Loblaw’s?

Mr. Bullbrook: Eventually, the mayor came back and said, “The EMO officer is back from Loblaw’s. He wants to talk to you.”

I just want you to know as a matter of interest that in my own personal vituperation I then let loose the next week on the EMO officer. The Sarnia Observer, a Thomson newspaper, wrote an editorial the week after, which I think led to a very decisive majority on my part, which said, in effect, that you can’t play political games with EMO.

I think now, in retrospect if I may say, that it was rather humorous. The whole thing was a charade really. Nothing but an opportunity to give somebody a job. If I might be permitted to say, Mr. Chairman, who has had the grace over the years of indulging me, so much of the minister’s portfolio has that about it. It was the opportunity of giving people a job. I don’t mean to offend, but this afternoon I asked you a question and you got completely the wrong answer. You have to get up in the House -- and you will get up in the House, knowing your particular integrity of purpose -- and say, “I misled the House. I had the wrong information. What I told the member for Sarnia was wrong, absolutely wrong; without equivocation it was wrong.” It just interweaves itself through the whole sphere of the minister’s portfolios.

The fact of the matter is that my colleagues to the left, whom I admire, respect and enjoy at times, recognize that you have too much to do. I interjected this afternoon and perhaps I should apologize for that. I believe that the minister fundamentally has the appropriate philosophy to be a good Solicitor General. I believe that he has the appropriate philosophy to be a good Attorney General. I believe that he has the fundamental sensibility towards the individual in the context of society and law and order and justice to be a good Provincial Secretary for Justice.

Hon. Mr. Clement: You can stop right there.

Mr. Bullbrook: But I don’t believe that you can be everything at the same time. I just don’t believe that. I just don’t believe that you should, for one moment, permit the Premier of Ontario to vest you with those responsibilities.

The fact of the matter is that the third responsibility is a responsibility that nobody has to claim because the fact is that there has been no propulsion of policy from the Justice portfolio since the former Attorney General of Ontario, Hon. Arthur Wishart, left. He was a magnificent individual as far as Justice was concerned. He gave us a vitality in this House that was indescribable. He made us recognize that Justice was a vital, viable portfolio that recognized the current need of the people.

I can recall sitting and debating with him. My colleague from Riverdale this afternoon mentioned, for example that great debate when we discussed the question of the imposition on the Ontario Police Commission. The chairman is here tonight and he will recall it, because he stayed with us during that debate to 2:30 or 2:45 in the morning. It was a very important debate. It was an essential debate. It was a philosophical debate, which I liked about you this afternoon. You understood exactly what the philosophy of the law and justice is.

I recognize, Mr. Chairman, we are just talking about law now; we are not talking about justice. But I want to say to you, if I could, my colleague from Riverdale this afternoon recalled that debate about the investiture in the Ontario Police Commission of the power to control the armament --

Mr. Chairman: Order. Would the member for Sarnia come back to item 3, please, emergency measures?

Mr. Bullbrook: Yes, sir. I recall distinctly that afternoon when the emergency measures officer came and we looked at the havoc that had been wrought in that area of Sarnia.

I said to him: “Sir, what are we going to do?”

He said: “I don’t know, I haven’t got the foggiest idea.”

The essence of what I am talking about is that there are times when there are emergencies; I recognize that fully. I am very interested in knowing, for example, were I to be re-elected, what am I to do next March if, God forbid, the same token of displeasure from someone descends upon us in Sarnia? Am I to phone you? Or am I to phone the hon. Minister of the Environment? Whom am I to phone? I would prefer to phone you. I will tell you the reason I would prefer to phone you: I truly believe that you recognize your obligations in this portfolio. I truly believe that since Arthur Wishart, you are the first minister who recognizes what is going on.

What you have got to do, to begin with, may I say, is strip yourself of the surplus of talent that you have got. You have to do that. Listen, I must say that I can’t do a job when you laugh. I can’t do a job. You must recognize I try to be serious in this respect -- that you spend too much money in administering your portfolio, when you recognize that the function of your portfolio is to serve the public both in the law enforcement end and in the administration of justice end.

You spend much too much money, there is no doubt, in the administration. You don’t need nearly the administration you have got. You can do away, right away, with the Provincial Secretariat for Justice. That would save millions of dollars right off the bat. You can turn around and say to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, “You must sit all year. No longer are the courts something that make themselves available just to you but to the public. How many more do we need? What is it going to cost?” These are the types of things that I invite your consideration of, along with emergency measures, which you have now recognized was a superfluous thing.

Collaterally, I ask you this: I ask you to respond generally, not on EMO or on the losing of houses along the beach in Sarnia, but really about what you are going to do in the Attorney General’s portfolio. I am really interested in this. You will recall that in winding up the reply to Her Honour’s Speech from the Throne, I spoke about your portfolio. You see, your portfolio --

Mr. Chairman: I will have to remind the member to get back to item 3, emergency measures.

Mr. Bullbrook: Yes. I recall very distinctly saying to that gentleman, at that time, “Eventually you will be out of business.” I said, “Sir, you will be out of business, because this is a redundancy; it is an anachronism; it has no place. We can no longer spend public funds on what you are doing, because you can’t respond to the public once every 730 days. You can’t do that, sir. A public servant’s response has to be a full-time response, just as the response of a member of the House has to be a full-time response.” In effect, in analogizing between EMO and the general responsibilities of this minister, this is what I am saying to him.

I am interested in this type of response from him. I am interested in inviting his response in saying, “Yes, we are going to do differently. We are going to recognize this portfolio from the point of view of the Solicitor General and not just play games with the public.” You see, the public -- they talked this afternoon about the cost of policing. I represented the Sarnia Police Association in 1965. Now somebody has to help me with the British reports that were available at that time about the police. This was the essence of my advocacy at that time. My colleague from Lakeshore talked this afternoon about the fact that the police had a unique position in society, that they couldn’t live as a normal human being can in the context of society, that they were always subject to these types of indentures on the side. They were subject to the social ramifications of the job.

I talked about that, and do you know what we got before a board of arbitration then? I think it was a 23 per cent rise that year. I remember Judge Fox. Do you remember Judge Fox from London? He was the chairman of the board; D. Park Jamieson, a great lawyer from Sarnia, represented the police commission and I had the great opportunity of representing the police association. We went up 21 per cent that year, and it began an evolution -- not here, but in Metro Toronto. When you do it in Sarnia, they say it must be better in Metro Toronto -- think of the responsibilities we have in Metro Toronto as compared with Sarnia.

What has happened with the police is that they have gotten out of kilter with the world. The police are overpaid. I don’t subscribe for one moment to the philosophy that you -- oh, I am sorry, it is not their philosophy, it’s your philosophy this afternoon -- that you must have a higher salary to attract better men. We attract good men now. The fact of the matter is we are paying policemen too much. Arbitration awards have been inconsistent with their position in society as a whole. There is no doubt about that.

My colleague from Riverdale is quite right about another thing: the superstructure of police forces in a paramilitary fashion has created some officers who don’t qualify for the job -- in my community, for example.

Mr. Chairman: The hon. member for Sarnia, order just for a minute. There are other members who wanted to talk on this vote. We deal with all this in vote 1503 and 1504. Don’t tell me this is emergency measures we are discussing now, because we are not.

Mr. Bullbrook: Then I apologize to you. I apologize, sir. I want to say in closing that I appreciate that you have given up the façade of spending money under emergency measures, because on balance we can ill afford it. I think on balance the people of Ontario would say that we can ill afford it. But in response to my question, would you say where I can go if I have problems? Do I have to go to my chief of police?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Mr. Chairman, the member for Sarnia made some very, very interesting observations. Those that were flattering, of course, I accepted without equivocation. Those which were critical I didn’t accept with as much seriousness.

He made reference to the fact, Mr. Chairman, that I may have misled the House this afternoon. He may well be right in view of some information which subsequently came to my attention this evening, and if I have I will so inform the House.

Mr. Bullbrook: I am sure you will, I am sure you will.

Hon. Mr. Clement: He may well have misled the House tonight inadvertently too. He made reference to the government -- which I happen to be part of -- hiring, I think you described them as Tory hacks for EMO personnel. The government of Ontario at no time has hired such people as emergency measures individuals in the various communities. They were hired by the municipalities themselves. So your observations may well be better directed to the town council which hired that particular individual at that particular time. If you have any difficulty down your way, don’t hesitate to call Queen’s Park switchboard and you’ll be directed immediately to the lead ministry, if there is one. If not, it will come directly into the Ministry of the Solicitor General.

In a lighter vein, I would like to ask, did you perchance have the will of the homeowner whose home you described as having fallen into the lake? If so, was it a worthwhile estate?

Mr. Bullbrook: No, I didn’t. Unfortunately I didn’t.

Hon. Mr. Clement: I see, all right, thank you.

Mr. Chairman: The member for Riverdale.

Mr. Renwick: On this particular vote, as the branch is going to be phased out of existence, how many jobs are going to be displaced and what is going to happen to the people who are presently holding those jobs? My second question is, would the minister explain to me what the reference to transfer payments -- municipal projects, $825,000 -- is in the standard accounts classification for this particular item?

Hon. Mr. Clement: The moneys shown as to be paid to the municipalities are those moneys to be paid phasing out the programme -- that is, the undertaking of the province or the commitment of the province to carry through to Dec. 31, 1975, when the provincial financial assistance to the programme will terminate. Insofar as individuals are concerned, I believe there are 33 provincial civil servants who will be affected by the phasing out of the programme. They’re being assigned to other duties right now, within the government service, and with the co-operation of the Civil Service Commission. Some of them must, through necessity stay on, in effect, for a week or two past Dec. 31, 1975, but the majority of them are being phased out over the next eight or nine months -- between now and the end of the year.

Mr. Renwick: Mr. Chairman, on that point, may I simply have the assurance of the minister that no person, in the employ of this branch, is going to lose his position or his employment or stiffer a stepdown in his employment because of the phasing out or the change in policy of the government about this branch?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Your hoped-for understanding is correctly stated, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman: Does item 3 carry?

The hon. member for Nipissing.

Mr. R. S. Smith: I just have one question of the minister. Some time ago, when the federal government pulled out of this programme, as I understand it the Solicitor General at that time, Mr. Yaremko, gave some kind of guarantee to all those people who were involved in this programme that this would not happen at the provincial level. Now we find that this, in fact, is happening. Could I have an explanation of that please?

Hon. Mr. Clement: The federal government reduced their programme by 50 per cent and, at the time to which the member for Nipissing makes reference, the undertaking given by my predecessor was to continue on for the balance of that year. In other words, the province would pick up the 50 per cent reduction that the federal government announced on that occasion. The then Solicitor General, in the person of Mr. John Yaremko, did not give any undertaking to continue the programme ad infinitum, at the expense of the taxpayers of this province, but he assured the people involved in the EMO programme that, in view of the withdrawal of 50 per cent of the funding by the federal government, the province would continue it for the end of that fiscal period.

Mr. R. S. Smith: Supplementary to that, Mr. Chairman, could I ask the Solicitor General if, in fact, there is some other programme which will take the place of this programme in those areas where there is an emergency situation? In my area, four years ago we had such a situation where the EMO moved in. They didn’t do that good a job because they couldn’t get the co-operation of the other ministries. That was really the biggest problem. But, in fact, what will take the place of EMO?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Mr. Chairman, the member for Riverdale asked this question during the absence of the member for Nipissing, temporarily, from the House. I wonder if I might send over the statement that I gave at that time. It may be of assistance. If it isn’t, I will undertake to respond.

Mr. Chairman: Does the member for Nipissing have any more questions? Is that a satisfactory answer?

Mr. R. S. Smith: Yes, Mr. Chairman, except that as I read this I notice that we are having another task force set up. Is that right? One more among 100 or 150. Really, we won’t know where to go for a task force. If we look under “task force” it might take us a week-and-a-half to find which one we should go to.

Hon. Mr. Clement: No, there is no task force being set up. The lead ministry concept described in that news release hopefully indicated to the public on April 9 this year and particularly to those affiliated with EMO across the province, what the alternative would be, namely the lead ministry concept.

As is indicated on page 2 of that release, if, for example, the problem or the emergency was created by a forest fire, it would seem perfectly natural that the Ministry of Natural Resources would carry the responsibility for the containment of that fire and the reduction of damage to persons and to property. If it was an acid or chemical spill or something of this kind, it would be somewhat natural that the matter would belong within the responsibility of the Ministry of the Environment, as the lead ministry.

The member for Riverdale pointed out in his observations that perhaps certain types of emergencies could be formulated or defined in advance -- those which are fairly common and within the realms of our day-to-day understanding -- and published in advance. We intend to do that.

For example, Environment will look after contingency plans for spills of oil and other hazardous materials. Health will deal with provision of portable power and lighting equipment for perimeter lighting at emergency hospitals and so on. Health will also look after off-site contingency plans for nuclear and heavy water plant problems. Natural Resources will look after fires, floods and so on down the line. Any others not specifically dealt with would come under the responsibility of the Solicitor General and the ministry would be designated by a committee chaired by the Solicitor General.

Mr. R. S. Smith: I would like to point out, Mr. Chairman, that the second paragraph says, “This concept calls for the development of a task force” and that’s the point I was trying to make.

I went through one of these emergency measures organization episodes and the problem was that there was no concept of togetherness in the ministries of this government. That really was the problem.

We don’t need an EMO, I grant you that. We don’t need leadership within one ministry but we need one person who is responsible for bringing all the ministries together to provide the services at the time they are needed. I would like to know who that one person will be and under which ministry he will come.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Mr. Chairman, that is why the order in council will designate if there is fire or flood, Natural Resources; if there is such and such, Environment. If the emergency doesn’t come into one of those categories which are already clearly defined, the Solicitor General will be seized with the responsibility for it.

I am oversimplifying it but I think that demonstrates the need to answer the member’s inquiry. This will be public knowledge; this will be made available. Every municipality, every official within the municipality will be apprised of this type of thing, just as they have been over the years. You phone EMO -- and your colleague from Sarnia detailed some difficulty he had -- and there isn’t this lack of coordination over who looks after what.

Mr. Bullbrook: There is, don’t be silly.

Hon. Mr. Clement: This is the sort of thing we are hoping to overcome. It has existed in the past, there is no question about it. If we define what the role of the various ministries is, related to the type of catastrophe or emergency we are talking about, I don’t know what else can be done.

Mr. R. S. Smith: Okay. Will there be one person designated in each ministry who will have responsibility to answer to that central ministry, whichever one it is that has the ultimate responsibility?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Yes.

Mr. R. S. Smith: Who will that person be? Will he be at the deputy minister level or at the ministerial level; where will he be?

Hon. Mr. Clement: He will be at the deputy minister level or assistant deputy minister level; somewhere in there, is my understanding.

Mr. Chairman: The member for Thunder Bay.

Mr. Stokes: Yes, I want to get into a somewhat different approach to emergency measures. During the estimates last year, I got engaged with your predecessor in a dialogue on search and rescue operations in northern Ontario. There is an excellent search and rescue operation of volunteers out of the city of Thunder Bay. I am told there is an excellent one working out of Sault Ste. Marie and there are several small communities in my riding which have them. There is one in Geraldton; there is one in Longlac.

They have been after me on numerous occasions to see if I couldn’t get some kind of commitment from the Solicitor General to assist them, not in a major way. All of their work is volunteer and most of their effort is coordinated with OPP officers in the area

If somebody is lost on a lake or if there’s extreme danger sometimes it is necessary to call in search aircraft from the armed forces and usually they have to be called in from Trenton. The thing is, as you can well appreciate, it involves considerable expense and time is of the essence. It’s really extremely difficult for the OPP, without being on the scene and without having advance notice of the nature of the emergency, to determine whether or not it should phone the Canadian Armed Forces in Trenton and say, “Please send up a helicopter or some kind of aircraft to undertake this search.”

The OPP, with its limited staff, does an excellent job of trying to coordinate this but there are certain things the OPP can’t do. There are certain things for which you have to rely on voluntary help to do, whether it be a downed aircraft, somebody who went out in a boat and failed to return or somebody who went hunting and failed to return.

If you listen to the radio reports in the area of the province I come from, I won’t say there is hardly a week but there is hardly a month goes by when there isn’t a call for all volunteers associated with a search and rescue group to assemble at OPP headquarters in the city of Thunder Bay or some such place like that. They do excellent work and they are to be commended for it, but does anybody in your ministry know of this work they do and would you be prepared to assist them in specific areas?

I am not talking about a large amount of money, a full-time staff or anything like that, but there are certain kinds of equipment which are absolutely essential to the success of their operations. Since, as I say, they are volunteers it is extremely difficult for them to do all of the things they would like to do without some kind of money. I am not talking about a lot of money. I am talking of, maybe, a minimal amount.

Your predecessor assured me he would look into that and he would come up with some kind of recommendations or some kind of suggestions. I can appreciate that probably you wouldn’t be aware of it, but will you undertake to do that, to see whether or not in some way you as a ministry can help these people who do such wonderful work in search and rescue operations, particularly in the north?

Hon. Mr. Clement: I am going to surprise the member. I am going to say no, I won’t undertake that but I might put forward an alternative which he might consider with his constituents in northwestern Ontario. I have taken part in search and rescue operations and I would like to say that I don’t personally favour providing seed money.

I would rather see, for example, that the resources of the province in terms of, say, OPP helicopters and/or aircraft from Natural Resources would be available to assist those volunteers from flying clubs or individuals operating on their own who are looking for a downed aircraft, for example. The reason I say that is, if you provide seed money and nobody is lost, what happens to the seed money? It really hasn’t been utilized, and I presume it would be carried over to the next year; and if it wasn’t sufficient to carry on the operations of that group the following year, then it would be little more than a drop in the bucket.

Air searches are extremely expensive and they require particular types of aircraft, depending on the nature of the terrain and the distance between the point where the aircraft took off -- or the helicopter, if it’s a chopper -- and where it’s anticipated it came down. Now, you may receive a message that the aircraft is in distress; he can give some approximate location. So there is no need to have trackers and everything in that area because you can pinpoint the area generally and you know where you are working.

On the other hand, if you are dealing with an aircraft that deviates from its flight plan, there may be thousands of square miles that really have to be done, not by helicopters but by armed forces planes flying in predetermined patterns; you just can’t go off in all directions. In a small search area, you can pretty well criss-cross and coordinate your search. In a large area, you are dissipating your aircraft, your fuel and your staff on those aircraft by flying all over the map. It has to be done by a searchmaster with a predetermined pattern in mind for the types of aircraft they are operating.

I would suggest to the hon. member dealing first with downed aircraft -- then there are the other situations, such as people lost in lakes and so on -- that he utilize the resources of the Ontario Provincial Police by communicating with them forthwith. Once they are provided with the information, they will have to then make an assessment as to whether their own helicopters can provide a search party or whether they should, in addition, call in Natural Resources aircraft and/or Canadian Armed Forces aircraft. Again, it will have to be an ad hoc thing because the circumstances change.

In the case of people lost on a lake -- people who have been canoeing, boating or camping and have disappeared -- that is something I would have to consider. I just don’t know anything about that type of operation. I don’t know how one goes about it; whether one flies people in to search the ground or whether one sends them in by land. I just don’t know anything about it, so I’ll consider that part of it. Perhaps the member may advise me on that.

Mr. Stokes: Let me give you one example. When I mention minimal assistance I am not talking about giving them a budget and saying, “Go out and spend it.” For instance, in one particular area we have a group of divers who are prepared to go down if they see an overturned boat and it’s suspected the missing person is underwater some place. They will spend considerable time diving at their own expense. The thing is they have purchased all of their equipment on their own; and while it is sort of a hobby with them, it’s utilitarian in case of emergencies.

All I am talking about, for instance, is a tank of oxygen which I am told is quite expensive. If they spend 24 hours or 48 hours looking -- I don’t know how much this tank of oxygen is, but somebody from Long Lac said, “The next time you get talking about this in the Legislature, would you mind bringing it up?” All I am talking about is something as minimal as reimbursing them for a tank of oxygen or something of that nature.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Mr. Chairman, I think that is a fair request; we’ll take a look at that part. On the air search I won’t make a commitment for the reasons I have outlined.

Mr. Chairman: Shall item 3 carry? Carried.

Mr. Laughren: On item 4, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman: The member for Nickel Belt.

Mr. Laughren: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A year ago, when we were discussing these estimates in committee with the Solicitor General, who is now in limbo, we talked about fire protection for the unorganized communities in the province. The Solicitor General made a very clear statement or promise that there would be support forthcoming for the unorganized communities for fire assistance. The member for Thunder Bay reminds me that the Premier did the same thing when he was up in Thunder Bay.

Now, it was a year ago when the Solicitor General promised it and to this day we haven’t seen the legislation. I hope the acting Solicitor General realizes we’re not just talking about a fire truck here or a fire truck there. We’re talking about the whole provision of fire protection for small communities. By and large I’m talking about communities that are unorganized and have no municipal council whatsoever. I’m talking about communities where there is no fire protection at all, or where any fire protection, if there is any at all, is provided by the Ministry of Natural Resources.

Of course, the Ministry of Natural Resources’ fire-fighting capability is renowned in northern Ontario because of the reputation for always spraying the trees and letting the buildings burn. I think the people in those communities have suffered for too long under a Tory administration that has seen them suffer from a poor delivery of health services, transportation, recreation -- and fire protection is the final blow. We’re not just talking about the lives of people in those communities, we’re talking about the rates of insurance that they pay, we’re talking about the refusal of people in those communities to fix up their homes or to make their community a better place to live, and that’s one of the reasons that there is no fire protection available for them.

I think it’s time that the minister gave us a time frame in which he plans to provide assistance for fire protection for these communities, because the local community has no capacity whatsoever to raise taxes and therefore they cannot provide the service. I could list you any number of communities. Some communities have held raffles in order to buy an old fire truck that wouldn’t meet the regulations of any level of government. They have had raffles and dances to build a firehall. I can name you communities that have a firehall and no truck and another community which has a truck and no fireball. You know what happens in the wintertime at 30 below to a tank truck that’s full of water.

As a matter of fact, there was one community in Nickel Belt where they had a fire truck that went into the firehall all right, but the firehall was also the recreation hall and whenever there was a dance or a bingo meeting they had to move the fire truck out and the people would dance well into the morning while the tank truck froze outside. You must understand that there are no fire hydrants, because there’s no communal water supply in those communities. I think that the minister should not go the copout route by saying that they’re waiting for Bill 102 -- that infamous bill that died on the order paper, which would have provided some kind of municipal status to unorganized communities. It’s not good enough to say, “We’re waiting for that,” because that’s permissive legislation anyway and a lot of the communities won’t form community councils in order to be recognized under that bill.

Mr. R. S. Smith: It’s a lousy bill.

Mr. Laughren: It’s a lousy bill, that’s right. Would the minister tell us what he has in mind, and I would appreciate it very much if he was very specific, on the provision of assistance for unorganized communities to aid them in fire protection?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Mr. Chairman, the matter referred to by the member for Nickel Belt is one that has been before us on other occasions. The fire marshal is preparing to go forward with a pilot project for, I think it’s Nakina, Minaki and Nestor Falls as a first step to establishing an overall plan for the public fire protection in the unorganized areas. Did Bill 102 die on the order paper?

Mr. Stokes: Yes.

Hon. Mr. Clement: I had forgotten, but I remember the bill. That was going to provide a vehicle that would permit certain things to occur and, in the absence of that bill going onward or forward, then it is somewhat incumbent, I would suggest, on the fire marshal’s branch to develop an alternate plan. Because there are some 277 unorganized communities in northern Ontario, resources just wouldn’t permit him to go ahead with the whole 277 and he has, in his wisdom, selected those three areas to try a pilot project and, if successful, then to branch out eventually, hopefully to the majority of those areas.

Mr. Stokes: You said Nakina was one of them? Nakina and Nestor Falls?

Hon. Mr. Clement: No, I am sorry. It is Nestor Falls, Minaki, and I can’t pronounce this, perhaps the member can help me; I thought it was Nakina -- Dinorwic?

Mr. Stokes: Dinorwic, yes.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Dinorwic, those three areas. Hopefully, I can get back to you at the end of that pilot project to see what recommendations the fire marshal can make to you through me as to the expansion or the changing of the pilot project that he has undertaken. Apparently he has funding available to him for this project.

Mr. Laughren: Mr. Chairman, there are a couple of things that bother me about the minister’s response. One is the location of those pilot projects, and perhaps the member for Thunder Bay would like to comment when I finish. Perhaps he could tell us which particular member represents the riding in which those communities are located.

Mr. Stokes: Mr. Bernier, in case you are wondering.

Mr. Laughren: Well, that’s a fine way to play politics in the Province of Ontario, Mr. Minister. Also I would like to know why there are no communities in northeastern Ontario represented. Further, since this is the same kind of reply we received a year ago almost word for word, why do you not set yourself a goal of providing fire protection, not for all 277 if you think that’s too much at one gulp, but at least for all unorganized communities over a certain population, where you have a significant population to protect?

There is a greater danger of fire, I would think, according to the size of the community and surely it’s incumbent upon you to provide some kind of assistance or protection in those communities. As a matter of fact, the government discriminates against those communities. It prevents them even from buying used equipment.

There is a clearing house in the United States -- I believe it’s Chicago, although I am not sure of that -- that sells used fire trucks, and an unorganized community, through perhaps a community council or through a volunteer fire department, can attempt to purchase one of those but will not receive permission. I think it is the fire marshal’s office that provides permission to use them. So, not only do you prevent them from buying a piece of equipment, you don’t even provide any assistance for that, so why don’t you do at least some of those things?

Hon. Mr. Clement: Regarding the three municipalities I have named -- I know where Minaki is; I don’t know where the other two areas are located -- the fire marshal, in consultation with the Ministry of Treasury, Economics and Intergovernmental Affairs, selected these three communities because there was some very valid reason for it.

Mr. Laughren: What?

Hon. Mr. Clement: All right. Dinorwic has an estimated resident population of 296 and a potential summer population of over 400. It is approximately 10 square miles in area. Minaki has an estimated resident population of 275 and a potential summer population of close to 1,000. It has two motor hotels with accommodation for approximately 300 guests and Minaki Lodge, which is presently closed for reservations, as well as a community centre and a curling rink, Nestor Falls has a resident population of 320 and an estimated summer population of 850 and has approximately 450 buildings.

In August, 1973, the fire marshal prepared a study of fire protection needs in the unorganized areas of northern Ontario. The study suggested as a guideline that there be three standards of protection for communities of different population sizes. The first and most costly, since it requires a vehicle, is for communities of 300 and over; the second for communities of 100 to 300, and the third for communities with populations of less than 100. It was felt that the three pilot-project communities should be provided for within the first standard of protection.

Dinorwic and Minaki have resident populations slightly less than 300 but summer populations well in excess of the figure, and Dinorwic, with its large geographical area, requires a tank truck for adequate coverage. That is the one I said was 10 square miles and, as with Minaki, has a large building investment to be protected.

I am advised by the office of the fire marshal, with reference to the member’s question about equipment, that it is not economical to purchase equipment over 20 years of age. In many instances the hose is simply not usable. As you know, a programme was developed some years ago compelling the standardization of hose sizes. Some of these older types of vehicles have hose sixes and couplings that vary from that type of requirement.

If the member has any exposure to obtaining parts for older pieces of equipment -- antique cars or buying a wheel for a Chipmunk aircraft or something -- it is almost impossible to obtain those types of parts. When you get into these old fire trucks, reels and so on, it is impossible to service them in a responsible fashion financially. Hence, there is the hesitation to recommend the acquisition of older equipment.

Mr. Laughren: That could very well be. I don’t question the expertise of your officials in that regard. I am not terribly impressed by the communities you have given as an example as to why they were used in the pilot project. I could name you a community with only one entrance, and a railroad crossing cuts off that entrance on occasion -- and there is no fire protection for that community.

Hon. Mr. Clement: What would the hon. member seriously suggest?

Mr. Laughren: I am suggesting in a serious way that your ministry provide assistance for fire protection in those communities. At the present time they have no place to turn.

Hon. Mr. Clement: How?

Mr. Laughren: Why don’t you provide assistance to volunteer fire departments in those communities? I am talking about communities that have 500 to 600 people. In the summertime the population goes well over 1,000, and yet they have absolutely no protection whatsoever. I don’t see why you couldn’t provide assistance and make them eligible for assistance through the fire marshal’s office. I don’t see why that is not possible.

Hon. Mr. Clement: Perhaps at the conclusion of the pilot project the studies may well indicate that what you suggest is feasible. I suggest that before you can embark on such a programme, one has to determine a cost of operating such a programme; the number of bodies required; the types of equipment that would be required to meet the needs of a particular community. But it should not be done without a pilot project having spearheaded the whole thing. You may well end up with this type of fire protection for the types of communities you have described in your comments here this evening, but it can only be brought about if we can obtain the information.

Mr. Chairman: The hon. member for Nipissing.

Mr. R. S. Smith: Mr. Chairman, I have a few remarks to make on this. The minister has indicated that the three municipalities he is dealing with in his pilot project all have a year-round population of between 245 and 350, and summer residents of up to 800, 900 or 1,000. But in eastern Ontario there are many municipalities with a permanent population of between 800 and 1,000 people, and they do not have any fire protection whatsoever. They are next door to municipalities with fire protection, but because of the equipment that those municipalities have, they are not able to reach any kind of financial agreement with them to provide protection. That is the area that has to be looked at first, because they have large numbers of people. There is fire protection equipment available, if it were the right type.

I would suggest to you that the $150,000 announced by the Premier last week in Thunder Bay to deal with 277 municipalities is just so much garbage, because it is not going to deal with the situation whatsoever.

Mr. Laughren: All fluff and no stuff.

Mr. R. S. Smith: What we need is about 15 or 20 studies across the whole north to deal with the different situations from one municipality to the other, to find out if we can come up with some kind of uniform system that can be provided, perhaps on a three or four to one basis. That is to provide either the --

Mr. Chairman: Would the hon. member for Nipissing like to break his remarks now?

Mr. R. S. Smith: Yes, that’s fine.

Hon. Mr. Winkler moves the committee rise and report.

Motion agreed to.

The House resumed, Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Mr. Chairman: Mr. Speaker, the committee of the whole House begs to report certain resolutions and asks for leave to sit again.

Report agreed to.

Hon. E. A. Winkler (Chairman, Management Board of Cabinet): Mr. Speaker, before I move the adjournment of the House, we will proceed with these estimates again on Thursday, and I have supplied to the other members of the House a list of the estimates to be called for subsequent days.

Mr. J. R. Breithaupt (Kitchener): Before the adjournment, Mr. Speaker, I was just going to inquire if the government House leader could advise us if there would be any opportunity, in his expectation, to return to the budget debate and when that might proceed? Or will we be continuing with the estimates of both the Solicitor General and the Attorney General (Mr. Clement) Thursday afternoon and evening and also Friday morning in this current week?

Mr. Speaker: The member for Riverdale.

Mr. J. A. Renwick (Riverdale): Mr. Speaker, the comment that I wanted to make was I would like to have an assurance from the House leader that so long as these estimates of the Justice field are being dealt with in the House, the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations will not be dealt with in committee.

Hon. Mr. Winkler: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I have made that commitment to both of the parties. Unfortunately, probably the hon. member hasn’t had an opportunity to discuss that point. I certainly will do that. For the House leader of the Liberal Party, I might say we certainly now intend to proceed with the consideration of the estimates currently before us and then the Attorney General, and I think because of the desire of the Attorney General, in his conscientious way, to proceed with the full consideration of that area of estimates and his desire to stay in the House and discuss them fully, we’ll proceed with it that way for the balance of this week and then we will make arrangements for the budget debate, amiably, with the other parties after that.

Mr. J. E. Stokes (Thunder Bay): That is not exactly the way he put it today. He said he wanted to get out so he could get something done.

Hon. Mr. Winkler moves the adjournment of the House.

Motion agreed to.

The House adjourned at 10:30 o’clock, p.m.