Hansard Transcripts 1984-Oct-12 | Legislative Assembly of Ontario

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: Mr. Speaker, I rise to correct the record. Yesterday I was asked a question by the member for Beaches-Woodbine (Ms. Bryden). In my response I said the following:

"I remind the member opposite there is a provision for domestics in Bill 141, a bill we were unable to get through the House this spring that we plan to introduce this fall. If the members opposite truly wish to support the circumstances of the domestic worker, I suggest they take a look at Bill 141 again."

I was incorrect. While the bill could well benefit domestics in that it will address several issues related to women, it does not expressly refer to domestics. The amendment to the Employment Standards Act I was thinking about at the time in respect of Bill 141 was actually enacted by regulation; it is not in the bill. Meanwhile, Bill 101, which deals with the Workers' Compensation Act, does address another concern of domestics.

I regret my ill-advised remarks yesterday and extend a personal apology to the member for Beaches-Woodbine.

DEATH OF JEAN LYONS

Hon. Mr. Drea: Mr. Speaker, this morning I would like to draw to the attention of the House and make a few remarks concerning the passing earlier this month of someone who was well known to all of us, my executive assistant, Jean Lyons.

I say "well known to all of us" because for the last seven years or so the Legislature itself was one of her great loves. We had all seen her on the Treasury benches not just at the times when the Treasury benches are occupied fully during question period and sometimes during the votes but at 9:30, 10 o'clock and 10:30 on the Tuesday and Thursday nights when there is not very much going on.

But to her, of course, in the political mainstream of Ontario there was always something going on. This chamber, the committee rooms and the entire building, along with her family, her political activity and community work, were a very dominant factor in her day-to-day life.

For the last four years she had been terminally ill. Somehow, she lied very successfully to just about everybody that she had some form of remission. I can now say she never had a day of remission since 1980. There were days in which she came to work in absolutely excruciating pain because she felt that was what was expected of her and it was part of her contribution to society. She was a great comfort and a great inspiration to many who were informed that they had cancer.

Back in July on her last public occasion, which was the day the Lieutenant Governor (Mr. Aird) honoured a very distinguished public servant, Dr. James Band, with the publication of our book, Decades of Service, I know His Honour, even though she was very weak, was very moved by her exuberance for life and her determination to do things for other people.

Today we have an empty seat, symbolically on the Treasury benches. I think the thing Ms. Lyons would like to be remembered the most for were the many little things she did for very ordinary people. Notwithstanding the severity of her illness, she always had time for people, particularly for those who were not as fortunate. I think perhaps the greatest tribute to her is the fact that by herself she had to raise a family of four, long before the phrase "sole-support mother" was even in the language.

At a very early age she had to combat a terminal and very difficult illness. She never became mean, she never became hard and she had infinite compassion even for those who had minor troubles.

I think the one thing she would like recorded posthumously is that she did not like to lose, and she did not lose to cancer. In the end she beat the cancer; the cancer could not do any more. However, the price she paid to win was enormous because there was no body left. I think she would like it recorded that, even faced with cancer, she did not lose.

I think her very life symbolized what this Legislature in the final analysis is all about. She may have been a political person, but it is political persons who make up this Legislature.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Nixon: Mr. Speaker, I knew Ms. Lyons personally and well. For reasons already put forward by the minister, I will miss her very much also. She was a good politician. She was also an outstanding public servant and never hesitated to give the kind of assistance that was really helpful.

She will be missed in the public life of the province and certainly in the lives of all of us who as individuals in this House deal with the ministry. We certainly convey our sympathy to her family and all of her grieving friends.

10:10 a.m.

Mr. McClellan: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleagues, I would like to associate ourselves with the very thoughtful remarks of the minister. I know from personal experience what a kind and helpful person she was. She will be missed. We would like to extend our condolences to her family.

CONDITION OF LEGISLATIVE BUILDING

Mr. Mancini: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring to your attention a concern I have had for some time, and that is the care of these main parliament buildings. I have noticed since this new session we have new and blue lights in the buildings. I notice four big holes had to be bored to have these lights put in place.

Mr. Nixon: It is a very boring place.

Mr. Mancini: It is a very boring place. This is another example of how, when we just call somebody in whenever we want to put in an electrical plug, they do the work and it is done.

I have also noticed there is quite a bit of work going on at the north wing of the Legislature. I guess the repairs are needed. What concerns me is that this work is continuing on an ad hoc basis. Whenever something needs to be done on these main parliament buildings, someone issues the order to do it.

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure whether you give the orders. I am not sure whether it is the Board of Internal Economy, a civil servant or the Minister of Government Services (Mr. Ashe), but it seems we have several people giving orders for different work to be done on this building.

All the honourable members of the House know this is the year of the bicentennial. I am very sorry we did not use this opportunity to put together a nonpartisan committee to decide exactly how we are going to refurbish this building. All the members will agree it is in need of quite a bit of work.

Mr. Kerrio: New tenants is what it needs.

Mr. Mancini: It might get some new tenants, too.

Mr. Speaker, could you inform me and inform the House of the procedure before work is done on this historic building, before someone is allowed to come in and bore holes or cut some of the sandstone that we have as part of the face of the building? What are we going to do to preserve the historic nature of this building? What are we going to do as far as the complete refurbishing of the building is concerned?

Mr. Speaker: I would suggest it would be more appropriate for you to put a question to the Minister of Government Services at the appropriate time, but I just want to inform all members of the House there are no changes or renovations carried out either by the Office of the Assembly or by the Ministry of Government Services without consultation. There is a joint responsibility and we do work very closely together.

As I say, that question should be put to the minister.

Mr. Nixon: Mr. Speaker, just before you leave the topic I guess these new lights are supposed to cut the glare. I see the member for Elgin (Mr. McNeil) has brought his dark glasses. I am not sure whether it is because of the bright lights or another problem he is having this morning, but it is something that should concern us.

I want to bring to the attention of honourable members that the lights have a certain colour cast to them that makes the members of the Treasury benches actually look to have a deathly terminal pallor. It brings out all the suspicious and surreptitious lines on their faces that really bother us. I wonder whether we could bring back the rosy glow morticians use from time to time to improve the situation because they look bad and I think we should do something about it in the last few months they will be occupying those seats.

Hon. Mr. Ashe: Mr. Speaker, if I may: what we have been trying to do with the lights is put a little light on the opposition, particularly the official opposition. We were attempting to do that with great difficulty and we thought the lights would help. The pallor over there was rather distinct in its whiteness.

We think this is a plus. We know that sometimes over there they try to look up for some divine guidance, but it is only when one looks up higher that one gets more glare than before. Seriously, what we really attempted to do with the new lights, and I think with some success, was to provide a greater degree of foot-candle power and to give a greater spreading out of the light. I think it is fair to say that the previous lights were designed, frankly, to come to the lower benches to a greater degree. The intensity of light is now much more equal over the complete caucuses on both sides of the Legislature.

It is hard to tell in the short term, but I understand they also do not generate quite as much heat as the previous ones, again probably because they are farther removed from the bodies contained herein. I hope it helps the colour opposite.

ORAL QUESTIONS

DEATHS OF POLICEMEN

Mr. Breithaupt: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Solicitor General (Mr. G. W. Taylor), I have a question for the Provincial Secretary for Justice with respect to the report in the press today about the questions surrounding the death of Constable Jack Ross in the event in the Woodstock area last week.

Apparently, a statement has been issued by the commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police stating in part as follows from the quotation I have:

"Preliminary investigations suggest that Constable Jack Ross may have been hit by bullets from more than one source.

"At the moment, there is at best confusion as to the source of all the bullets. A number of shots were fired by this suspect and by the police... several shots were fired in a very short period of time in poor lighting conditions."

There may be other comments in the statement. I do not have those, but I had hoped the Solicitor General might have given some clarification of this revelation this morning. Would the Provincial Secretary for Justice be able to assist us with respect to the facts of an apparent inquest being ordered and with respect to what is being done to make sure this situation is thoroughly and carefully explained?

Hon. Mr. Walker: Mr. Speaker, I have not consulted with the Solicitor General on this question, but I am aware that an inquest has been called into the matter. Of course, as the honourable member would appreciate, the purpose of the inquest is to determine precisely the means by which the death has occurred. One would expect that this would be the kind of expression the inquest would provide in its report, precisely the kind of question the member is raising now.

I think it would be inappropriate for any of us to go further and attempt to assign the shots to a source. There was a mêlée at the time and a very difficult situation, a situation in which it is confusing at the moment where the shots may have emanated from. That being the case, the most appropriate forum in which to discuss this would undoubtedly be the coroner's inquest, which I understand will proceed very quickly. It is not going to take a significant amount of time to have the published report; it will be published, made public and available to everyone in very short order.

One of the concerns one might express in a case like this, though, is something that the Attorney General (Mr. McMurtry) and I have been commenting on, and that is the whole question of people being released on parole and on mandatory supervision. It is my understanding that in this particular case the individual who died in the incident -- not Constable Ross but rather the young man who was killed in that shootout -- had served 10 months of a 51-month sentence. Had he not been out on the streets in such short order, there might have been a totally different result today in respect of the tragedy that beset Constable Ross, who no doubt would have been alive today.

10:20 a.m.

Mr. Breithaupt: I appreciate the comments made by the provincial secretary in this very difficult situation. I would commend the opportunity for him to attempt to ensure that the inquest is dealt with as quickly as possible, so we will all be relieved to know exactly what the facts are no matter how the circumstances derived that occasioned the result.

MEDIA VIOLENCE

Mr. Nixon: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Attorney General.

I notice the Toronto Star of Thursday, October 11, has the headline "McMurtry Urges New Laws to Control Movie Violence." In the body of the article the Attorney General is quoted as saying, "The regulations are needed to limit the 'mindless frenzy of violence.'" I know the Toronto Star has a knee-jerk reaction whenever the Attorney General makes a comment like this; he did not get his nickname for nothing.

Mr. Bradley: Roy McHeadline.

Mr. Nixon: I notice also in the Attorney General's constituency report he tells his constituents he was active as long ago as 1976: "Roy, in a speech in Chatham, expressed his concern over the distribution of hard-core, pornographic material that glorified violence against women."

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: Read the rest of it. It is good stuff.

Mr. Nixon: I would like to read the whole thing, but I --

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Mr. Nixon: I just want to ask the Attorney General whether he recalls spending $2.2 million on the Royal Commission on Violence in the Communications Industry, chaired by the late Judy LaMarsh. The royal commission reported some years ago; I believe it was as much as eight years ago that the original report came in.

Does he not think, since he has been the chief law officer of the crown for lo these many years and since he was operative in establishing a royal commission on this matter, that he should do more than just come along and ride his teetering surfboard on the wave of public opinion as it moves back and forward and perhaps try to do something about a problem that has continued and is growing worse?

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: Mr. Speaker, my recollection is that that royal commission, which I must admit I supported completely, may have been established even before I became the Attorney General. I recommend that the honourable member go back and read some of the research that was done as a result of that royal commission.

In so far as the Toronto Star report is concerned, the statements attributed to me were totally accurate. While the expressions I made were expressions of sentiment, a deep-seated conviction I have held for many years, what the report did not say -- I recognize there are space limitations -- was that I also said the difficulty with this issue was that until not only was there the necessary collective political will on both sides of the border but also until we achieved a point where there was a collective will in the community itself, in society as a whole, to put an end to this nonsense, then government likely was not going to be able to do very much about it.

Instead of trying to make silly, petty little partisan points, I hope this side of the House will be concerned with one of the most pressing issues today, the glorification of mindless violence in the media, which as far as I am concerned has a direct influence on the increasing violence in the community. I would think the member would like to take that issue seriously and be part of the debate himself.

Mr. Nixon: Is the minister not aware that he is the chief law officer of the crown, not I? I am raising the matter in the Legislature because we have agreed, and my colleague the leader of this party has put forward his positive alternatives in these matters, which as yet have not been responded to by the government.

If in fact this is a mindless frenzy of violence, surely a matter such as this requires more than political posturing by the Attorney General. It requires the sort of leadership that a proper and effective law officer of the crown would bring forward, so this Legislature could take the necessary steps to counteract the situation the Attorney General has described.

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: When it comes to political leadership, I think I can demonstrate the hundreds of platforms where I have been talking about this issue since 1975-76, unlike the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Peterson), who waits until something becomes a little trendy and then jumps on the bandwagon for a while, waiting for the next little trendy train to come along rather than being involved in a meaningful public issue.

As I have said on countless platforms, this government cannot solve this situation and the government of Canada cannot solve this situation alone. First and foremost, it does require a massive political and collective will on the part of the community as a whole suddenly to say, "Look, we have had enough of this nonsense." Until the community is prepared to state that, then no government is going to be able to make much difference.

What I have been doing for nine years, and what the member has not been doing, is trying to provide some leadership to bring about this community will that is so vital if we are ever going to ameliorate this growing problem. I would hope that he would find the public is interested in this and that this is not just a bandwagon the members opposite jump on and off when they think it is politically appropriate.

Mr. Renwick: Mr. Speaker, it is with some temerity that I enter this particular exchange this morning. I would ask the Attorney General whether in pursuit of this collective will of the community he would disclose to the assembly exactly the result of the government polling of public opinion in this area at this particular time.

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: Mr. Speaker, I do not know. The Ministry of the Attorney General has yet to conduct its first public poll during my nine years. I am not quarrelling with the important consultation with the public of Ontario that is represented by polls -- I think part of the democratic system requires government to keep in touch with the feeling of the community -- but it just so happens that my ministry has never conducted a public opinion poll. In this particular area, I do not think one needs to conduct a public opinion poll to know the seriousness of this problem.

Mr. Renwick: You have just said that the community is not keeping pace with you.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: The community has not yet demonstrated a collective will in opposition to this because obviously the people who make these films for movie screens or television are very much aware, much more aware than the honourable member is, of what is going on in the community. Quite clearly, they are aware there is an incredibly broad and profitable market for violence as entertainment. Billions of dollars would not be spent on violence as entertainment unless there was not only a good deal of community tolerance and acceptance but also support for that form of entertainment.

That is why I say with respect, and in a nonpartisan way, that each and every member of this Legislature has a fundamental responsibility to do what we can as individuals to bring about some changes in these community attitudes as they relate to this high level of tolerance about what I consider to be a very unacceptable form of entertainment. We all as individuals have that responsibility of leadership to bring about these attitudinal changes. Until we do, government is not going to accomplish very much without that community support.

10:30 a.m.

Mr. Nixon: I wonder whether the minister could climb down from his political posturing and tell us what regulations he is going to bring before this House to control the matter. He sees it as a serious emergency, and we agree. He has indicated that he has been consistent in these matters. According to the headlines, I notice he is thinking of changing his mind on his approach to capital punishment.

In the past, he has attacked the federal government on all these matters, saying the responsibility lay exclusively there. Then the Leader of the Opposition brought forward our package, our alternatives, calling for the regulations that have not been forthcoming from the government. The report of a $2.2-million royal commission has been sitting on a dusty shelf for eight years. The minister has been the chief law officer of the crown for most of those years.

Mr. Speaker: Question, please.

Mr. Nixon: What is he going to do about it now that he sees it as an emergency?

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: We have been talking about this for nine years and for most of that time there has been silence on the other side. The member has heard what the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations (Mr. Elgie) had to say about what he intends to do with respect to amendments to the Theatres Act and our efforts provincially to regulate the dissemination of violent pornography.

We on this side of the House are committed to doing what we can, within our provincial jurisdiction, to eliminate this material, and we get very little support from across the aisle. We have a record. We do not hear the members across the floor stand up and say, "We support what the film review board is doing with respect to films." The member has heard our express intentions with respect to videotapes. I think we are doing evtrything possible within our jurisdiction to address this problem. I hope we might see a little leadership from the other side of the House.

EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR WOMEN

Mr. McClellan: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister responsible for Women's Issues. Just above the McHeadline in yesterday's Toronto Star referred to by the member for Brant-Oxford-Norfolk (Mr. Nixon), there was a joyful eulogy entitled "Women Are Slowly Closing Wage Gap, Study Says."

The Toronto Star went on to trumpet the joyous news that, "Women are slowly but steadily closing the gap between what they earn and what men earn...." The gap has narrowed from 58 cents on the dollar in 1967 to 64 cents for every dollar earned by a man in 1982.

May I ask the minister whether he shares the Toronto Star's satisfaction with that level of progress? What exactly are his feelings about that snail's pace?

Hon. Mr. Welch: Mr. Speaker, to put a positive light on it, one can rejoice at the fact that it is going in the right direction and that there is some evidence with respect to the closing of the gap. No one will be satisfied until such time as that gap is substantially closed.

The record for the public service should be clearly put. We are doing much better in the public service than is the private sector with respect to that. We are now at about 76 per cent. Generally speaking, it was my understanding that in the private sector it was 63 per cent. Who can really be satisfied with that? As the honourable member knows, a number of measures are under way now with respect to correcting that situation, and we have listed those programs as we attempt to provide some leadership.

Addressing the member's particular question, I think it is helpful to have some indication by way of objective study that there is some progress in closing the gap. I do not think we should take any particular satisfaction until such time as we see more substantial progress along that line. We will continue to provide the leadership we are doing as an employer in that regard.

Mr. McClellan: The minister referred to the objective evidence of the study. The evidence is that in the past 15 years the wage gap between men and women has gone up by six cents on the dollar. That is an average rate of progress of 0.4 cents per year. If we extrapolate that into the future, it will take 90 years, until the year 2074, to make up the 36 cents that remain between 64 cents and $1.

Is it perhaps the intention of the minister to celebrate this accomplishment on the occasion of Ontario's tricentennial? Or does he intend to accept his responsibilities as the minister responsible for these problems and take consequential action?

Hon. Mr. Welch: I would think we would all want to be associated with any policy and any program that would accelerate the rate at which this gap is closed. The member is a reasonable man and he understands there are a number of factors that will contribute to this and will help in this particular program.

Mr. McClellan: Do not call me "reasonable."

Mr. Foulds: Calling him "reasonable" is slanderous.

Hon. Miss Stephenson: Heavens, no. Call him anything else, but not "reasonable."

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Welch: He knows one of the problems that plagues this particular matter has been the occupational segregation according to which women have found themselves in so few of the job classifications. We have to see further steps taken for women to break themselves out of this segregation and to move into nontraditional occupations in the longer term. This gap will be closed quite substantially when women find themselves occupying what up to now have been considered nontraditional roles for women. This is something the Minister of Education (Miss Stephenson) and many others have been including in their comments and public remarks. It is something we have to understand. Indeed, this is being translated into the programs of these particular ministries; that is the longer term.

In the more immediate term, matters such as equal pay and related activities receive some attention as we think of equality of access and advancement within the place of employment; so there are many forces at work now that will contribute to the improvement of this situation.

In summary, we are not satisfied with the way it is now. Short-term and long-term initiatives have to be taken, and I am confident there is a public will to correct this inequality and this imbalance.

Mr. Nixon: Mr. Speaker, I was interested to hear that the minister is satisfied when the trend is in the right direction. What about the incidents where it is not in the right direction, as indicated in the report from the management information systems branch of the Ministry of Education, which shows that the number of women principals in elementary schools has actually dropped since 1972? As a matter of fact, the numbers are very low anyway, but they dropped by 3.6 per cent in that decade in spite of the fact that we have had a most estimable and capable woman at the head of that particular pyramid.

I would also point out that in almost every area of education women, who have in the past formed the basis of the working body, the people who face the children in the classroom and who do the real work, have always been either fully or partially barred from moving up into the areas of administration, where the big money and the real administrative responsibility are. I hope the minister will agree that it is not enough to have nailed his banner to the mast in the person of the Minister of Education and to leave the rest of it without some sort of program that is going to give other women a chance in education.

Hon. Mr. Welch: Mr. Speaker, so there is no misunderstanding, may I indicate right at the outset that both the Minister of Education and I in speaking to school board officials have indicated that we are not satisfied with the present situation; there is no question about that. A very large percentage of those who are employed by school boards are women, and they are quite qualified and competent.

In all fairness, we should point out that just during the past three years the participation of women in those courses that have to be taken to qualify for further advancement has increased from seven per cent to 35 per cent at the present time.

Mr. Nixon: You give them a certificate but you do not give them a job.

Hon. Miss Stephenson: They have to have the qualifications first.

10:40 a.m.

Hon. Mr. Welch: The point is that until such time as they have the qualifications we perhaps will allow that particular situation to continue, because those in charge of these programs can always use that as one of the excuses for there not being more involvement by women in those positions of responsibility.

We are not satisfied with this. We are engaged in a very active program of positive affirmative action in so far as the educational authorities are concerned. We have been to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario with the same view, and in the company of the Minister of Health (Mr. Norton) we will soon be talking to the hospitals.

The honourable member is quite right in drawing attention to the fact that we should expect to see more progress in that area. The Minister of Education and I have been very definite on that point. We are quite satisfied now that the requirements for these particular advancements are being acquired by more and more women.

Mr. McClellan: In the light of what the minister has described as objective evidence that the rate of progress is so minuscule as to require another 90 years under the present circumstances, would he not agree it would make sense for him to sit down with the Minister of Labour (Mr. Ramsay) next week and redraft Bill 141 to include meaningful equal pay for work of equal value provisions?

In addition, would the minister get serious about meaningful affirmative action programs in the private sector? Nobody should expect to wait until Ontario's tercentenary to achieve wage equality between men and women.

Hon. Mr. Welch: I do not subscribe to the view that it is going to take 90 years. As one looks back and thinks of how long it took to get to where we were about 10 years ago, and then looks at the progress in the last five to 10 years, the member should have a fair view of the rate of acceleration.

We are talking about very basic things, changing public attitudes, working on a number of programs that will raise the level of public awareness with respect to this. We are quite committed to affirmative action. I told the leader of the New Democratic Party a couple of days ago that I spent all summer meeting with presidents and chief executive officers to make it quite clear that to emulate the government's own record would show some significant progress with respect to this whole question of equality of access and advancement.

I want to assure the member there is a very strong commitment. I do not subscribe to the view that it is going to take another 90 years. I think we are seeing a whole new generation, a whole new attitudinal change with respect to women. We happen to believe a woman's place is where she wants to be and we should be removing any impediments that stand in the way of equality of opportunity in the work place and, indeed, in career advancement. This has been a longer term proposition.

I want the member to know I feel the people of this province understand that, because they know there are many influences that are brought to bear on this matter in the school, in the home and in society generally. There have been some remarkable changes and we will see the results of them in a much shorter period of time than the member suggests.

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT

Mr. Foulds: Mr. Speaker, I have a question of the Treasurer. He will recall saying in this Legislature on June 22 that his employment programs for youth would create a minimum of 100,000 jobs for the unemployed youth of this province by September 1 of this year.

If that is the case, can he explain why in June of this year there were 1,013,000 employed youths and in September of this year only 891,000 employed youths? In other words, there were 122,000 fewer young people working in the province in September of this year than in June. Can he explain what happened to the 100,000 jobs he was going to create for these people?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Mr. Speaker, those young people went back to school in September.

Mr. Foulds: The Treasurer made a commitment to create 100,000 jobs for the unemployed youth of this province. The fact is there are 122,000 fewer jobs in the province. What happened to the 100,000 jobs the Treasurer said his programs would create?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: I might remind the honourable member that a number of those programs, many of which the member himself supported, were summer employment programs. One of our most successful programs has been the Ontario youth employment program. That accounts for tens of thousands of those jobs. Those summer employment programs are pointed at making sure young people have jobs during the summer to enable them to go back to school in the fall. When the fall comes, those youngsters, many of whom now have some money and experience behind them, are much helped by those summer programs and are now back to school.

That portion of our program is the same as every year's programs; that is, for many years our summer Experience and Ontario youth employment programs have employed tens of thousands of young people during the summer, and then, happily, those young people go back to school in the fall.

What has happened to those jobs? They were created. The positions were created, the young people were employed and they went back to school in the fall, not having wasted a summer sitting at home watching television but having worked, thanks to the tens of thousands of jobs we created. The figure was indeed more than 100,000.

Mr. Nixon: Mr. Speaker, the minister is confusing me a little bit because there are 156,000 youth unemployed in the province now and there were only 151,000 unemployed in August. If they have gone back to school, where did these extra kids come from, particularly when he has this 10-point program that has been so heavily financed and ballyhooed by the minister and his cohorts around the province?

Would the minister not agree that the programs have not lived up to expectations, that the commitment of money and advertising has really resulted in nothing more than just the commitment of money and advertising and that we have more young people unemployed now than when he started this initiative?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Mr. Speaker, if the honourable member will recall, I was quite clear in my budget and subsequent to it in saying these new programs were not intended to solve the youth unemployment problem, or to solve it this summer.

Mr. Nixon: Yes, but at least they should help.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: If the member will look at our statistics, he will find that is exactly what happened.

Mr. Foulds: You cannot have it both ways.

Mr. Nixon: It is worse now than it was when you started.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: I am afraid the statistics would not support the member on that. The unemployment figures for young people this year are lower than those of last year and they are lower than they were last spring.

Mr. McClellan: Which hand are the statistics in?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: It is true.

Mr. Nixon: Not in June.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: If the member wants to pick one month and say --

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Might I point out that our long-term youth employment and training programs in the budget were pointed towards ensuring that we do not have the kinds of ups and downs that have been the history in the past. Our 100,000 jobs did help our young people this summer; the member knows that. They must have, or else the unemployment rate during the summer would not have fallen to 12.2 per cent from 17 per cent not that many months ago.

Mr. Nixon: Why did it go to 14.9 per cent this month?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: You will have a supplementary; you can ask that question.

Mr. Foulds: This is the first time I have heard that going back to school is the definition of a job creation program. The fact is that unemployment has decreased by exactly zero young people between September of last year and September of this year. Can the Treasurer explain why his May budget did absolutely nothing to create either short-term real jobs or long-term real jobs for young people?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: First, the average unemployment rate for young people last year was almost 18 per cent.

Mr. Foulds: Talk in absolute numbers.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Why does the member not let me answer? He asked his question; now I will give him an answer. He does not have to accept it.

The unemployment rate for September 1984 was 14.9 per cent, and that is several percentage points lower than it was three or four months ago. But let us not pretend that 14.9 per cent is low enough; it is not. We have a serious and ongoing problem with 156,000 young people who are unemployed; no one is denying that.

If the member wants to suggest that our programs -- which are pointed towards disadvantaged young people, which are giving them training, which are giving them opportunities they never had, which are giving them employment opportunities in the private sector, which are giving them counselling they never had and which are giving them opportunities to continue their education and to make up for courses they missed when they dropped out of high school -- are the wrong approach, then he many suggest that.

All I would offer is that it will be some time until those young people have benefited from that guidance, until they have benefited from that counselling, until they have benefited from the continuing education and training they are getting. It will be some time until that has happened and until we can assess whether our approach, which is to give disadvantaged young people education and training, is the right approach.

The approach of the member opposite, let us face it, would have been to take that money --

Mr. Foulds: It is your approach, and they are your words.

10:50 a.m.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: The member can make his speech later. His approach would have been to take that money, spend it to create a couple of thousand more jobs this summer and the young people would be back on unemployment next year. We disagree with that.

USE OF LANDFILL SITE

Mr. Kerrio: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of the Environment. I would like to ask about the proposed Runnymede Development Corp. plans for a large shopping centre and high-rise development in Scarborough, on top of the old waste dump in that area. It may contain toxic materials because of the problem that existed in the past when what went into those dumps was not really monitored.

It is the old Victoria Park dump at Gerrard and Victoria Park that closed in 1959. It may have been used to dump chemicals from the old munitions factories that existed in that area a good many years ago. The site is releasing methane gas, which is not unusual for those sites. I am more concerned about what might be buried in the toxic area.

Part of the 17-acre site will be excavated and the waste materials moved to the centre of the site. The buildings will be built primarily around the waste, which will be landscaped and planted in grass. I wonder why the minister allowed that project to go ahead on that site.

Hon. Mr. Brandt: Mr. Speaker, the Runnymede site has been carefully analysed by my ministry. I have to suggest to the member for Niagara Falls that, according to the best scientific information we have at the moment, the level of toxicity at that site is extremely low -- virtually negligible.

There are always elements of methane gas associated with garbage, as the member is well aware. That problem is being corrected as a result of some of the excavation that is being proposed for the site. There is no possibility of ultimate explosion or upset as a result of methane gas leakage at the site.

As well, my ministry has been co-operating with the city of Scarborough to give the neighbouring residents every assurance that the development will proceed in an orderly and appropriate fashion. I want to give the member every assurance that we have carefully analysed it. We are assured in our own minds that we are proceeding in a proper fashion.

Mr. Kerrio: I still have some concerns about the children and the people who might live in that area in the future. I hope we are not making the same mistake we made in the Malvern area in relation to the radioactive soil and all the consequences that developed from that.

There is an area I will question the minister about in my supplementary. It has to do with why no public hearings were held on that project and why petitions from the people in the area were ignored.

As the minister knows, there is already equipment on the site. We have not had the 25 years that is mandatory for those sites to be left undeveloped before we go ahead with developments. The minister knows the 25-year mandatory time is a very old bit of legislation. We are not really sure; it is a minimum time. The minister knows that time is not up until December of this year and yet that project is going ahead.

Mr. Speaker: Question, please.

Mr. Kerrio: Why did we not have public hearings and why is the project under way before the 25 years have elapsed?

Hon. Mr. Brandt: I am rather surprised the question was phrased in such a way as possibly to suggest that we have a comparison between the Runnymede development and the Malvern soil problem. As I am sure the member is aware, there is no evidence of that. Let us not develop any kind of question in the public mind that there is even a low level of radioactivity at that site. I want to put that part to rest only because the question was phrased in such a way as to include it.

With respect to the second part of the question, where the member raised the point about the public hearings, that is a municipal council decision. Under the Planning Act, it would be the requirement of the municipal council to determine whether it wanted to have public input, it is left to its jurisdiction. For this type of development, there is no requirement on our part to go through a public hearing process.

PESTICIDE SPRAYING

Mr. Swart: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture and Food. I am sure he will know that the federal Department of National Health and Welfare has said that Mesurol is a highly toxic substance and therefore has prohibited its use by fruit farmers in Canada for spray as a bird repellent. He also likely knows that after allegations were made that it was being used illegally in the Niagara Peninsula, there was a rather complete examination done by the federal department and it found those allegations to be totally incorrect in every instance.

Does the minister not agree there is a real danger to the public and in fact a real injustice being done to our producers in this province by permitting small fruits that have been sprayed with Mesurol to be imported from the United States and elsewhere, with only infrequent spot checks being done?

Will the minister tell this House what representations he has made to the federal government on this matter and what measures he has taken or proposes to take to stop all sales of such imports unless it is certified that Mesurol has not been used on them?

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: Mr. Speaker, the question raised by the honourable member is a very good one; it is a very valid point. I might say it is a broader issue involving more than just this particular substance. I can think of an instance going back two years ago when the levels of vomitoxins in Ontario wheat were a concern of the federal government of the day. Yet at that time, they were allowing baked goods to be imported into Canada from the United States which had been made from wheat with much higher levels of vomitoxins than we would have permitted to have been used here.

We have made representations to the federal government on this issue, and it is one that I will be taking up again with the new federal minister. We do not have the full authority in this area, of course, as the member is well aware, but it is a very valid point.

Mr. Swan: In fact, the minister does have authority in this area. He has the power to prohibit the sale of imported fruit, such as many California grapes that are coming in now and have been sprayed with Mesurol.

I remind him of regulation 332 of the Farm Products Grade and Sales Act, which is his legislation; it applies to such things as imported blueberries, grapes and cherries and says, "No person shall sell or offer for sale any produce that is affected as to be unfit for human consumption" --

Mr. Speaker: Order. I do not think this is an appropriate time to read the regulation. Place your question, please.

Mr. Swart: Perhaps you will let me read one more sentence, Mr. Speaker -- "or shows evidence of any foreign substance in an amount injurious to the public health" --

Mr. Speaker: Order. I am sure the minister is aware of the regulation. Please place your question.

Mr. Swart: What testing has his ministry done for Mesurol on imported small fruits on the shelves or elsewhere? Why does the minister not just prevent the sale of imported fruit on which a toxic chemical has been used that is banned in this nation so as to protect our citizens and at the same time give our producers an even break?

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: First of all, my information is that Mesurol is not registered for use on any crops in the state of California; so let us deal with that first of all.

Second, the staff of my ministry inspection branch has been working with the federal government. The member may be sure we will do everything within our power to ensure that unsafe foods as such are not sold in this province and we will do everything possible to ensure the federal government carries out its responsibilities in this area, which responsibilities in fact are far greater than ours.

Mr. McGuigan: Mr. Speaker, does the minister not realize the problem is not the problem that was outlined by the questioner? Last summer when the food and drug people did tests on imported fruits to determine whether they had been treated with Mesurol, at least when they came across the border there was no Mesurol on them. We do a great deal of testing with the food and drug people, and I am quite confident that those materials are not coming over on the food products, even though they may be used.

11 a.m.

Does the minister not realize that the problem with minor chemicals is that it costs millions of dollars to test them in Canada? That is where the problem lies. We need some federal-provincial money to go into testing programs to determine whether or not those materials are safe to be used in Canada. We suspect they are safe, but we do not know they are safe because we have different climatic conditions here. A material that is safe in the United States might not be safe here.

Would the minister co-operate with the federal people to have these minor chemicals tested? That is the real problem.

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: Mr. Speaker, first of all, as the honourable member is well aware, the co-operative efforts of this government and the federal government in the total area of agricultural research is a very long-standing relationship, and I think it has been a very productive relationship.

Second, I had a meeting a week ago today in Ottawa with the new Minister of Agriculture, the Honourable John Wise, at which time we discussed a wide range of issues. I was quite heartened by a statement Mr. Wise made at that time, indicating that to the extent he has any flexibility in his department with respect to availability of staff, his two priorities will be in the areas of inspection and research. The member may be sure we will take him up on that in this and other areas of agricultural research.

DEVELOPMENTALLY HANDICAPPED

Mr. Bradley: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Community and Social Services. I think the minister would perhaps agree with me that the measure of a society's compassion is usually its treatment of handicapped and disadvantaged individuals.

In the Niagara Peninsula it has been brought to my attention by parents and the associations for the mentally retarded that there are requirements before us for 16 children in the children's core residence, 20 adults waiting for the adult core residence program, 41 adults waiting for the adult group home and 15 adults waiting for an adult training home. In view of the fact that there is so much need by the mentally retarded people in the Niagara Peninsula at the present time, when is the minister going to provide the necessary funding to meet those genuine needs?

Hon. Mr. Drea: Mr. Speaker, I received a letter on this yesterday from the member. In fact, the last paragraph of his letter was his first sentence today.

We are looking at the provision of additional community facilities in the Niagara region, but I expect the member to provide a leadership role there -- and I am sure he is going to -- along with us.

One of the difficulties is not just the provision of a particular bed or a particular site, it is the duplication and the number of associations that have grown up there. We have been working as a ministry, trying to get some common approaches such as where the locations of a core residence will be and who will be in it. There is no one community that can supply the entire --

Mr. Mancini: That is your job.

Hon. Mr. Drea: No, it is not my job.

Mr. Speaker: Never mind the interjections, please.

Hon. Mr. Drea: We have a partnership with associations. They have a very big say. We do not tell them where their sites are going to be. We work together in developing them.

There is no question that there are additional community facilities required in the Niagara Peninsula. We want to work together with the associations, particularly for the more difficult or the more substantially handicapped cases. We will be doing that.

Mr. Bradley: Because the minister has drawn it into his answer, I will touch on that a little bit in my supplementary.

Is the minister using his desire to force the amalgamation of the associations for the mentally retarded as an excuse not to provide the funding that has been required for the last three, four or five years?

Does the minister not recognize that the enthusiasm for the program of deinstitutionalization, which I think everyone pretty well agreed was a good program, is waning because there are not these facilities in the community to meet those needs? Does the minister recognize there are parents who are now themselves growing elderly and who are fearful that when they pass on or become incapacitated because of serious illness there is not going to be a provision for their children, who themselves are becoming older and are into their 30s and 40s? Does he not recognize that only immediate funding from the ministry is going to solve an immediate concern these people have?

Hon. Mr. Drea: First, the member has things a little bit mixed up. We do not force any amalgamation.

Mr. Bradley: You are trying to.

Hon. Mr. Drea: We are not. We are asking them to look at it. When one is going to provide a core residence that no one community can put its people into, it has to be located somewhere. They have to come together on some things like this. We are not forcing them to do anything.

Mr. Bradley: That is not what they say.

Hon. Mr. Drea: That may very well be, but I am telling the member we are not forcing them.

Second, I am absolutely delighted the Liberal Party is now in favour of deinstitutionalization. I appreciate that very much.

Third, the people we are talking about are not deinstitutionalized people. They have not come out of institutions.

Mr. Bradley: I know that.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Drea: It is magnificent that the member knows that, but that is not what he said and we want to have the record straight.

They are not deinstitutionalized people. The point the member raised about parents becoming older is a very valid one. That concerns me a great deal. There are also some more substantially handicapped people who can now live in the community because of the development of more things by this ministry than before. That has also brought about a need for more facilities in the community.

I want to tell the member, just as we moved to meet demands in the greater Metropolitan Toronto area this year, we are looking at the Niagara Peninsula. There are going to have to be some choices made, particularly in the location. I am asking him, and I hope he will do it, to help provide some leadership.

Mr. Bradley: I am providing the leadership. I am saying provide funds. That is what leadership is all about.

Mr. Swart: Mr. Speaker, the minister will know that one of the community services for the handicapped which is a desperate need is a participation house. He also knows the capital money has been available for this for a long period of time. All that is required to get it under way is a commitment for the funding for the operation from his ministry.

Mr. Speaker: Question, please.

Mr. Swart: Can the minister tell us when that funding will be available? Will that be available next year?

Hon. Mr. Drea: First, that is not related to this question. The participation house has nothing to do with the developmentally handicapped and the provision of their services in the Niagara Peninsula. I will look into the matter for the member and try to be as helpful as I can.

SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS

Mr. Philip: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Revenue concerning the small business development corporation program he administers.

The minister will be aware that the Clarkson Gordon evaluation of small business development corporation programs states that the SBDC does not contain any reporting requirements for the small businesses involved and recommends an increase in the frequency of auditing small businesses. It also states that the frequency of audits is insufficient and a full audit cycle would take five to 12 years at current rates.

Will the minister tell the House what steps he has taken to correct this inefficiency in his ministry?

Hon. Mr. Gregory: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's question, and he is certainly quite correct in his reference to the report. I wish he had gone further and stated the very positive report that was submitted on behalf of SBDCs. He has touched on perhaps the one criticism that has been made by Clarkson Gordon. We in the ministry are reviewing this recommendation and will be coming forward with whatever changes are necessary.

11:10 a.m.

Mr. Philip: What the minister fails to say is that this report also says the degree of misuse cannot be estimated accurately. The report suggests that a broader and more frequent audit program be implemented and that, if the program has been abused, funds are likely to have long since disappeared before the first audit occurs.

Since the province already has $69 million invested in this program, is he now prepared to state that he will implement the recommendations of Clarkson Gordon before we have all kinds of money disappearing without knowing where this investment is disappearing to?

Hon. Mr. Gregory: Mr. Speaker, I am quite satisfied, as is the staff of my ministry, that the program is working extremely well. The degree of loss has been very minimal. I think the honourable member will recall that in the spring, when a question came up regarding a small business development corporation, I believe the members of the opposition were quite surprised -- they must have been surprised because they did not ask me any more questions -- with the speed at which the matter was rectified and government money was recovered.

It must be realized, of course, that the SBDC program deals with risk capital, and in dealing with risk capital we must expect some risk. Naturally, there are going to be some losses. The losses sustained by that program have been very minimal and I am quite excited by the results.

As to the direct question on whether we will increase the amount of auditing on the program, I am not prepared to say we will at the present time. We are certainly examining the report with a view to adopting recommendations as we see fit.

CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY

Mr. Nixon: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Community and Social Services about the reduction in certain programs in the Brantford and Brant county area pertaining to the children's aid society.

Is he aware that the spectrum of programs called PEPPI, which is directed to assisting young people with behavioural problems, is being phased out and a number of parents have objected strenuously? I know the minister will be receiving letters, if he has not already had them.

Is he aware that the budget of the children's aid society in Brantford and Brant county has been pretty well strapped because of increasing costs, in part associated with high levels of unemployment and economic difficulties that the area has experienced, and this has led to a phasing out of these programs which involve two full-time people, a number of part-time workers and a large number of volunteers?

Would the minister undertake to look into the matter with an eye to increasing the funding specifically directed towards these very precious programs which have been so useful in the community?

Hon. Mr. Drea: Mr. Speaker, I already have. There was a meeting, either yesterday or this morning, with the CAS to tell it additional moneys will be found for the programs. I think it was somewhat premature of anyone to say that the programs were going to be cut, and I know it appeared in the media. That was entirely premature. The question that was asked of the representative of the society was, "Why did you not come and see us? We do know your problems," particularly the ones that have been outlined by the honourable member. It is my understanding that the entire matter is now solved. The additional moneys are being found, so the programs they were concerned about will continue.

I think those programs and much of the work of the society --

Mr. Speaker: I think that really answered the question. Thank you.

Hon. Mr. Drea: -- are excellent.

TAX GRANTS FOR SENIORS

Mr. Di Santo: Mr. Speaker, I have a question of the Treasurer. Since the property tax credit and the sales tax credit for senior citizens have not been increased in the last four years, does he not think it is time they were upgraded, taking into account the cost of living increases in that time?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Mr. Speaker, it may well be. That is something I will be beginning to look at in the next few weeks as we begin the budget process for 1985. We are reviewing that with the various ministries right now.

In fairness, I should remind the honourable member that there are a number of other programs that effectively assist the same people and which have been enriched during that time. It is a matter of striking the appropriate balance between who needs the money and where we are going to be spending some of that money. In any event, we review that every year, and I will be paying particular attention to it this year.

Mr. Di Santo: I do not know about the other programs the minister is talking about, but I know this is a blatant injustice because it is the only program that affects a large sector of our population. It has not been touched at all until now. I hope the minister will come in with a revision of the program pretty soon.

I would like to ask the minister that when he is reviewing this program he also take into consideration the people who are not senior citizens but who are disabled and receiving Canada pension benefits and who will not be going back into the work force. Can they become part of the same program? If not, can he explain why they are excluded?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: As the member knows we took some steps in our recent budget to assist the disabled in the same area. I would remind him that in terms of property tax credits, one of the difficult jobs of government is to make the determination of who most needs government assistance.

The member and others have drawn to our attention the people in society who really should be well up on the priority list for any additional funds available for assisting them. Many of those people would not be among those one would want to list as beneficiaries of the property tax credit. The property tax credit does not always get those most in need, and the most in need are beneficiaries of other programs. We have chosen over the past few years to enrich the other programs instead of the property tax credit. The other programs seem to get those most in need most quickly.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

CHARTERED INDUSTRIAL DESIGNERS ACT

Mr. Cousens moved, seconded by Mr. Robinson, first reading of Bill Pr26, An Act respecting the Chartered Industrial Designers.

Motion agreed to.

11:20 a.m.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

House in committee of supply.

ESTIMATES, MINISTRY OF NORTHERN AFFAIRS

The Deputy Chairman: We are considering the estimates of the Ministry of Northern Affairs, page G68. Does the minister have an opening statement?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I do.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to present the 1984-85 estimates of the Ministry of Northern Affairs. I will be introducing to the House and to my critics in just a very few moments the names and titles of the various staff members I have with me. As we go through the review of these estimates, I am sure honourable members will want to know who my support staff are. I would like to identify them for the members.

I have with me my deputy minister, David Hobbs, who is now starting his third year as deputy minister. He was formerly an assistant deputy minister with the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and is one who is seen and heard extensively in northern Ontario.

Also with us in the gallery today are both of the assistant deputy ministers. Mr. Herb Aiken from Sault Ste. Marie is the assistant deputy minister for northeastern affairs and has an office in Sault Ste. Marie. Mr. Bill Lees is the assistant deputy minister for northwestern Ontario and --

Mr. Stokes: The minister should tell them we missed him and them at the opening in Schreiber. Hon.

Mr. Bernier: Yes, I know. I regret I was not there. Nevertheless, while Bill and I were here doing other things, our funds were busy at work in Schreiber. I think the honourable member recognizes the fact that the Ministry of Northern Affairs has in excess of $1 million in that project.

Mr. Stokes: Yes, I mentioned it.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Mr. Bill Lees, as I said a moment ago, is the assistant deputy minister for the northwest, with offices in Kenora and Thunder Bay. Mr. Dennis Tieman from the Toronto regional office is also with us; he is the executive director of finance. Ms. Sheila Willis is our very able director of information services and one who is also seen travelling every corner of northern Ontario and having heavy responsibilities for Ontario North Now. Mrs. Dorothy Templeton is also with us; she is the executive assistant to the deputy minister, David Hobbs. Mr. Bill Stevenson is new to our ministry.

The members will be interested to know that Mr. Andy Morpurgo, who has been with this government for some 25 years, retired last night at a very pleasant and warm farewell party given by the ministry, staff and his friends throughout the government.

Mr. Stokes: Why were we not invited?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I am sorry my friend was not invited. We received letters of congratulations and warm expressions of thanks from a number of mayors and reeves from right across northern Ontario, which Mr. Morpurgo had served so well over his 25 years with the Ontario government and the last few years with the Ministry of Northern Affairs.

Replacing Mr. Morpurgo as director of strategic planning will be Mr. Bill Stevenson. The members will get to know him. He was formerly with the Ministry of Energy and is in the gallery with us today to listen to the members' remarks and support for the Ministry of Northern Affairs as we go through these examinations.

It is fair to say that these estimates are special in a sense since they are the last that will be heard in this House by two of what I think are and were the ministry's most sincere and toughest critics. I will send a copy of my remarks over to them.

As I was saying, these are the last estimates that will be heard in this House by two of the ministry's toughest critics but best supporters. With the retirement from political life of the member for Lake Nipigon (Mr. Stokes) and the announced retirement of the member for Rainy River (Mr. T. P. Reid), I can honestly say the ministry is losing two people whose job it was to criticize the ministry but whose true calling was to support the north. In that, we shared a very common interest.

Both men knew the north very well and have consistently represented the concerns of northerners in their respective tidings with dedication and persistence. Although they have disagreed with some of our policies and measures from time to time, it is fair to say they have been straightforward in their support for the Ministry of Northern Affairs as a delivery agency and as an advocate for northern Ontario.

This is the eighth time I have presented the estimates of the Ministry of Northern Affairs. I have long ago stopped referring to us as a new ministry. Nevertheless, we are still young enough for me to give the members here today a kind of lifetime achievement report. In view of the departure of two of the ministry's original critics, this would be an appropriate way of summing up the ministry's activities over seven years to make it easier for them to memorize our accomplishments for later telling.

To do that, I will provide a sectoral description of the Ministry of Northern Affairs' programs and projects --

Mr. Stokes: For some strange reason, I get the distinct sense that the minister did not think I would be here today.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: No, I did not. I know that when the Ministry of Northern Affairs or anything about northern Ontario is discussed, the member for Lake Nipigon is always here. He is always making a contribution. I say that very sincerely.

I am giving honourable members the seven-year expenditure highlights as well as the estimates for next year's spending and accomplishments, but before I begin I want to give the members the bottom line.

By the end of the next fiscal year my ministry will have spent about $1 billion on northern Ontario programs. The investment of that money in the north has made a difference in the lives and wellbeing of many northerners.

Our largest program area, transportation, touches on the lives of nearly all northerners. The almost unimaginable vastness of the north, the distance between communities and the obstacles to travel presented by the climate and the geography provide major challenges to our system designers and the carriers. The automobile is still the chief means of transportation in the north, as it is in the south. The roads are our highest transportation priority and expense.

In seven years the ministry has spent about $500 million on the construction and rehabilitation of the King's highways, secondary highways and our northern priority roads. Next year's allocation for these roads is $64.6 million. This figure is a combined total of our northern roads budget and our northern priority roads budget, which comes under the transportation development portion of our northern economic development program.

This year, the northern roads budget was increased by $4.2 million. The members will notice a dropoff in the funding for the northern priority roads. This is simply because construction has been completed or nearly completed on a number of major roads including, as I have said in this House a number of times before: the Detour Lake road, the Manitou road and Highway 631 in the northeast. Let me assure the members that the ministry will respond to the need for future good northern priority roads projects as they arise from time to time.

Over seven years the ministry has funded the construction of 486 kilometres of new roads, secondary highways and northern priority roads in northern Ontario. We have also funded the reconstruction of 2,709 kilometres of these roads. We have provided funds for the construction of 51 bridges, 84 passing lanes and 12 laybys under our new program to improve the safety of hauling pulp wood on our northern roads.

I might mention that this new program of laybys is going over exceptionally well in the northwest, where we have a tremendous amount of pulpwood hauling, particularly on the main highways. It allows the pulp truckers to come off the highway, check their loads and their vehicles and make sure the tiedowns are in proper place for the safety of the travelling public.

The overall safety and conditions of our northern highway system are high, as high as any jurisdiction in Ontario. This is remarkable when one considers that there are more than 10,000 kilometres of King's and secondary highways in northern Ontario.

Our northern roads are vital not just to the residents of the north but also to the many tourists and travellers in the transcontinental rubber-tire traffic. Tourism, economic development and social patterns all depend on a safe and reliable road system for their existence and progress, and that is what this program attempts to provide.

Other roads we fund come under the heading of resource access roads to reach mature forest stands for logging or prospective mining sites.

In seven years, through our support for the ministry forest access program and the Canada-Ontario forest management program, we have helped fund the construction of 2,430 kilometres of forest access roads. We anticipate an additional 290 kilometres will be constructed under both programs in the 1984-85 fiscal year.

The construction of these roads has provided 22,733 man-years of employment over seven years. By providing access to mature and overmature timber stands, the forest access roads also help to stabilize employment in the forest industry by ensuring a steady wood supply for our many mills throughout the north.

Our expenditures on the ministry forest access program and the Canada-Ontario forest management program have been $64.6 million over seven years, and next year's expenditures are estimated at $13.8 million.

11:30 a.m.

Another program funded by the ministry that supports the construction of forest and mine access roads is the northern Ontario resource transportation committee, commonly known as NORT. NORT has been responsible in whole or part for the construction of 4,769 kilometres of roads in the north since 1977. NORT is also a funding agency for the construction of winter roads and skidoo trails in remote areas beyond the road network.

Since 1977, we have funded the construction of 3,395 kilometres of winter roads and 669 kilometres of winter trails, providing economic and social links to seven isolated northern communities: Sandy Lake, Round Lake, Deer Lake, Pikangikum and Fort Albany, Attawapiskat and Kashechewan in the northeast. This year NORT's budget is up by $500,000.

In other areas of transportation, my ministry provides support for the operating expenditures of some of the noncommercial carriers of the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission. These include norOntair, the passenger rail services in the northeast and the Chi-Cheemaun ferry, which operates from Tobermory to South Baymouth.

Some idea of the importance of these services to the people of the north can be had from looking at the ridership figures over seven years. For instance, norOntario has flown more than 12.8 million miles in seven years and has carried 716,975 passengers. When the ministry was formed, norOntario served 16 communities. Now it serves 21, and we will take delivery in two weeks' time of the first two Dash-8s, Canada's newest airplane.

In the area of rail, the ridership figures are also impressive. More than one million people have travelled the Northlander or the Northland train over the past seven years. An estimated 145,000 will use the services next year. In this area too, brand-new, made-in-Ontario equipment will soon be introduced when we take delivery of two new bilevel train sets, to be manufactured by the Urban Transportation Development Corp. in the Thunder Bay plant for 1986.

The ONTC ferry Chi-Cheemaun was busy as usual last summer. Over seven years, the Chi-Cheemaun has carried 1.6 million passengers and more than 500,000 vehicles. Next year we anticipate she will transport 240,000 passengers and 80,000 vehicles.

Our expenditures for all these passenger services over seven years has been $113.9 million, and we have allocated $25.3 million for next year.

The last element in our transportation program is our remote and community airport construction program. Since we took over the Ministry of Transportation and Communications "highways in the sky" program in 1977, 19 remote airports in northern Ontario have been brought into operation; one more will be added next year to serve a cumulative population of some 12,000 people.

We have also funded 16 municipal airport construction projects in the north since 1977, worth an estimated $23 million. Several projects are planned for next year at Marathon, Manitouwadge, Geraldton and Nestor Falls. We have allocated $145,000 for these airports.

Northern Ontario's strength lies in its people and its resources. Although much of my ministry's efforts are directed at reducing our dependence on those resources, none the less we regard creating resource-based industry and employment as an equally important task.

Thus in forestry, as I have mentioned, we have supported the development of hundreds of kilometres of forest access roads. Through the Canada-Ontario forest management program, we have also funded the expansion of nurseries in the north, the expansion of shipping and storage facilities for containerized seedlings and the upgrading of irrigation systems. These projects have increased seedling production in our northern nurseries by seven million over a few years.

One hundred additional nursery acres in northern Ontario are being irrigated as a result of MNA funding under the forest management program. Two irrigation systems have been improved at Swastika and Dryden. Five additional container greenhouses have been built, also at Dryden. Needless to say, these projects are adding to Ontario's regeneration program, providing jobs now and for the future.

In mining, the north's other great resource sector, the Ministry of Northern Affairs has played important roles in the development of two of the largest gold mines on this continent. We have funded the construction of the Detour Lake road, and we are co-ordinating an intergovernmental committee to ensure orderly and profitable growth in the Hemlo area for those communities affected by the current boom.

For years the Ministry of Northern Affairs has also supported a number of programs under the Ontario Geological Survey. Our expenditures for these programs have been in the order of $11.6 million. A more important figure is this one: since 1977, 212,000 claims have been staked in northern Ontario and more than eight million man-days of assessment work have been done.

In another important resource area, the Ministry of Northern Affairs has done much with the Ministry of Agriculture and Food to help develop northern farming. We have supported more than 20 different agricultural programs and projects, the latest being AgriNorth, a three-year, $10-million program of our two ministries that is expected to provide benefits to more than 3,500 of northern Ontario's approximately 4,000 farmers.

If the members have not seen our brochure, I will be glad to provide them with copies of it. It is well done and it is being well received right across northern Ontario. I might say the AgriNorth program was the agricultural component of the old program known as the northern Ontario rural development agreement. As members know, NORDA was funded 50:50 by the province and the federal government. It was exceptionally well received.

Mr. Stokes: That is not entirely true. Has the minister talked to the Dryden farmers?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Yes. They liked it. There are certain things we had to change in the approach. They wanted to do much of the work themselves, and we thought it should be contracted out. I think we got that straightened out.

Mr. Stokes: And the tile drainage?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Yes, that is going very well.

I also want to point out that we tried to renegotiate the NORDA program. The then minister suggested a three-month extension; he might even have considered a six-month extension, which obviously was not what we were looking for. We were looking for something with a much longer term. That was one of the reasons we had to go it alone in the AgriNorth program and in the northern Ontario regional economic development program, which I will come to.

I have not heard what the new federal government's position will be with respect to cost-sharing programs such as NORDA, Nordev and these other ones. We will be meeting with them in the next few months.

Mr. Kerrio: I heard them say, "Just name it and you have got it."

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Is that right? I think they will be very receptive to some of our suggestions. I think over there they think as we do now and they think like the rest of Canada.

Mr. Kerrio: A food terminal in Timmins?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Maybe.

Mr. Stokes: One thing about it is that the minister will not be able to kick them around any more.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: They will not need any kicking, because I think they will listen. That will be a change.

Finally, in the important area of energy and energy conservation, the Ministry of Northern Affairs has provided funds for 18 small-scale energy projects since 1977. The latest of these, called Heat Save North, is being launched today in New Liskeard. That is the reason my parliamentary assistant the member for Fort William (Mr. Hennessy) is not with us; he is representing me at that event.

I turn now to the ministry's efforts on behalf of northern Ontario tourism. The subject of many conferences, debates and newspaper articles, tourism in the north is not just an opportunity but a real challenge if we are to rescue many small towns from dependence on a single resource.

The Ministry of Northern Affairs works very closely with groups like the Northern Ontario Tourist Outfitters Association, Kenora District Camp Owners Association, the Ontario travel associations and municipal groups to tailor our tourism programs to their needs. We do not duplicate what the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation has to offer; rather, we try to fill in some of the gaps and address some special northern Ontario needs.

11:40 a.m.

For seven years we have provided funds for 44 capital facilities, including Minaki Lodge. If I might deviate for a moment, I would point out to members that if they are thinking about going to Minaki next year they should book now, because the occupancy rate for that great wilderness recreational convention centre in the month of August was 97 per cent. It was impossible to get into it. It will be a success story that will equal Ontario Place, mark my words. It is going over exceptionally well.

In fact, I was told just yesterday that in the second year of operation we may even show a profit, which we did not expect until the third or fourth year.

Mr. Stokes: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: Just to correct the record on a remark the minister just made, he said his parliamentary assistant the member for Fort William would be in New Liskeard today. I want to report to you that the honourable member is sitting in his seat. He is fogged in. The good people from New Liskeard will have to try to struggle along without him.

The Deputy Chairman: That is a legitimate point of order.

Mr. Hennessy: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: I went to the airport, waited an hour and we could not get out so I came back. I knew the member for Lake Nipigon would be here so I had to show up.

The Deputy Chairman: That is good clarification.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I knew my parliamentary assistant was making a very honest effort to fulfil his responsibilities, but the weather being what it is, I am sure he shares the problem that all of us share with respect to travelling in northern Ontario.

Mr. Kerrio: Were there any Canadians at Minaki?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Oh yes. I must tell him. I am so enthused about Minaki really. It is such a success story, it is unbelievable. Last year about seven per cent of the visitors to that great facility came from the United States. This year it was over 30 per cent, about 34 per cent. Some people from the United States were coming for as long as a whole month. Many stayed for two weeks and some were staying for a whole month. It gives us some idea that, with the exchange on the American dollar, it makes a very good holiday for them.

Mr. Stokes: How much did they make last year?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Profits? There was no profit last year. The projections were that there would not be a profit until the third or fourth year. This year they have projected there may be a slight profit.

Mr. Van Horne: Mr. Chairman, I would like to be recognized on an extension of the point raised by the New Democratic Party critic.

The Deputy Chairman: Is this like a point of order?

Mr. Van Horne: Point of information, point of view, whatever.

The Deputy Chairman: I am recognizing the member for London North.

Mr. Van Horne: The cost of Minaki has been bandied around and the minister was talking about its success. Has he a final dollar cost for Minaki?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Mr. Chairman, I do not have that with me at the moment, but I am sure we can get it before the estimates are completed.

I just want to make a couple of points on the cost. I get very upset when I read in the media where they talk about $40-odd million being spent on Minaki and $15-odd million being pumped into a road. The road had to be built to serve, and will serve, the Whitedog Indian reservation. I am sure members would not object to a decent road going into a reservation that has about 800 to 900 people. The number of tourist operations and tourist camps along that road is phenomenal. It is all part of a transportation network and part of a planning process. It has been in place for many years.

We accelerated the construction of that road. The cost came in because of the acceleration. Nevertheless, that road would have been built. They tied that road construction cost to Minaki Lodge. It is unfair. The airstrip would have been developed anyway in the course of time. It is a beautiful airstrip now that services that whole area. It requires an airstrip and it is all tied to Minaki Lodge. So the $20-odd million we used to renovate and develop Minaki Lodge to what it is today was money well spent.

Go up to Kenora. Go up to Minaki and see the dollar return today and the enthusiasm, the robust industry it has generated. In Minaki and Kenora, there is a whole new attitude, a whole new enthusiasm. In fact, they are so enthusiastic that the local people applied for a major Board of Industrial Leadership and Development grant, which was approved just last week, for $3.2 million to improve the waterfront facilities at Kenora. It is all part of the tourism package that the government has recognized and the local people have recognized.

If I may go back to my comments and refer to the 44 capital facilities we have assisted, they include the development of the Fort Vermillion and Fort Frances tourist information centres. We have funded over 214 other tourism projects, including Ontario North Now, sports and ski show participation and marketing grants under the northern Ontario rural development agreement. We are allocating $3.2 million for the next year.

With NORDA now lapsed, the members will be aware that the best of its tourism sports programs have been picked up as part of a new program funded solely by this ministry called Nordev, the northern Ontario regional economic development program, which I referred to a few moments ago and about which I will have more to say in a few minutes.

Right now, I would like to turn from this discussion to what are really regional programs to describe some of the ministry's community-based programs.

I will begin with industry development, which aims at diversifying northern Ontario's economy by working with municipalities to identify and develop opportunities on a smaller scale at the local level.

A key thrust in this direction is the northern community economic development program. This program provides advice as well as funds for business opportunity studies, consultants and the publication of municipal profiles. Initiated only a year and a half ago, the program has already provided professional consulting services to 30 communities and financial aid to 13 of these. We plan to enter into discussions with a further 30 communities next year and hope to provide funds to 23 of these.

We have also assisted seven northern Ontario communities over the years with the cost of servicing industrial parks or malls. I mentioned Nordev a moment ago. This new program of economic development assistance was announced just this past summer. Already, we have approved 10 worthwhile projects worth $2 million and creating 114 new permanent jobs. This is just the beginning. Nordev took over the best programs under the old NORDA program that I referred to.

Again, I would remind the members that Nordev is 100 per cent funded by the Ministry of Northern Affairs. It reaches into the heart of the small business sector in the north to fund good, nonretail, resource-based businesses that are creating jobs and adding to the local economy. We expect to approve 80 to 100 projects before this fiscal year is over.

Fundamental to the development of industry and population in any community is the need for safe water and sewer facilities. It is a fact of life that in the north these services are more expensive to install and harder to pay for because of the smaller tax bases in many communities. That is why Northern Affairs has helped to offset the cost of 158 water and sewer projects in the north since 1977. There are 20 such projects planned for 1984-85 and $9.5 million has been budgeted for them. The total seven-year expenditure in this area is more than $95 million.

The member for Lake Nipigon referred to the extra assistance my ministry gave to his own home town of Schreiber, which I think he will agree really made it happen. It would not have happened without that extra assistance. That is happening right across the north.

Under our community infrastructure program, we have also funded 15 other projects, including the Hompayne town centre and several storefront improvement projects.

Water and sewage projects do not gain much visibility or arouse much emotion, but health and social issues certainly do.

With the Ministry of Health, we have made great gains in providing a much higher level of health care self-sufficiency in northern Ontario. Since 1977, my ministry has provided funding for 40 medical and dental clinics in northern Ontario. We have awarded 351 health specialist bursaries to get young doctors and dentists to practise in the north for one or two years. Many of those doctors and dentists have stayed.

We have sponsored five health recruitment tours by northern municipality representatives to our southern Ontario universities. We begin our sixth next week. This tour, co-ordinated by our staff and with officials of the Ministry of Health, enables these municipal representatives to sign up doctors on campus to try the north and many have very positive results.

11:50 a.m.

If I might just deviate for a minute, I will point out to the members that at the recent northern affairs conference held in Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan, the delegation from Alberta was quick to point out to us during our discussions that it had sent a team down last year to look at our medical recruitment program, the one I just spoke about, where we bring municipalities down and put them face to face with the medical students right on campus.

They came down and they copied our program right to the nth degree. They put it in place this year and they were ecstatic at the results, because they have attracted 12 new doctors into northern Alberta. It is that kind of initiative and creativeness that we have in this ministry, and indeed this government, that is being copied right across Canada.

They paid us another compliment which I have to share with the member because I know he is enthusiastic about northern affairs. They pointed out to us that they received more positive suggestions, direction and ideas from this province than from any other province in Canada with respect to northern needs of their province.

They are looking at the fire protection program we have in the small, unorganized communities. They are also going to come down and look at the EldCap program, which they think is very exciting and very applicable to those areas in northern Alberta and northern Saskatchewan and Manitoba. I just point that out because it was very encouraging to hear them say it without being prompted in any way.

Our air ambulance program is certainly an object of interest and envy. Since its inception in 1981, 24,743 patient transfers have been made within and out of northern Ontario. Our figures indicate that approximately 97,000 additional people in the north have benefited from the increased access to health and social services through MNA-funded programs since the ministry was funded.

Last Friday, I was in Sioux Lookout to announce final approval for the addition of 20 extended care beds to the Sioux Lookout General Hospital under our EldCap program. Four other hospitals, in Geraldton, Dryden, Atikokan and Smooth Rock Falls, are also proceeding with EldCap additions. Altogether, this program will add 98 extended care beds to these communities.

I want to stress that the EldCap program is unique in Ontario. It was designed and presented right here in northern Ontario by northerners, for northerners. Because it is a unique program, we have not been able just to duplicate the plan as if we were constructing McDonald's restaurants. Each project presents its own special features. In most cases, extensive redesign and reconstruction of the entire hospital is made necessary to allow for the repositioning of service stations, traffic patterns and so on. In some cases, the size and scope of the hospitals is being doubled under the EldCap program.

All of this takes time and our hospital boards and the Ministry of Health staff work to high standards. At this stage, all five projects are well advanced with most planning to be under construction next year.

It has been stated that the health programs funded by the Ministry of Northern Affairs impact on nearly 220,000 people. That is about one quarter of the population of the north. It is a good proportion, but we are not claiming that more cannot be done in this vital area. We have plans to fund five more medical and dental centres in northern Ontario next year. We will award 71 health specialist bursaries and, with our colleagues at the Ministry of Health, we will continue to find ways to reduce the disparities in the delivery of some services between the north and the south.

We provide assistance to northern communities in other areas. For instance, we help the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission bring microwave facilities to the communities on the James Bay coast to provide radio, television and telephone services to these isolated settlements. We provide assistance for cultural programs such as the one we share with TVOntario to bring its programming into small northern communities by satellite to low-power rebroadcast transmitters. So far, 136 communities have taken advantage of this program and we expect to approve a further 37 during the 1984-85 fiscal year.

As a byproduct of this program we have helped Wawatay -- I am sure the member for Lake Nipigon is interested -- a native radio network, broadcast its signal right from Sioux Lookout by satellite to 16 remote reserves. This is very unique in that the TV signal is bounced off the satellite and there is room on that signal to attach two FM radio signals. It uses the same dish. It is basically the same rebroadcasting system and it all works from down here. The signal goes up and back at something like 44,000 miles. That is in place.

We had an official opening about a month ago, and it was very interesting to hear the chiefs reporting to their communities first hand and live from Sioux Lookout. Following days of meetings with various government staffs, they went to the radio station and reported back. The whole community knew what the chief was doing, and they are doing this on a regular basis, so it has opened up the north into a whole new area of communication. There is no question of the technical expertise of TVO -- the technicians there were the ones who devised it -- and I certainly want to compliment them on it.

Finally, my ministry has been able to make significant contributions to those areas of the north designated as unorganized communities; that is, communities or population clusters having no municipal structure or tax base. These communities have special concerns. They require the same basic services we do, but they lack the funds to acquire them. More to the point, they lack the mechanism that would allow them to raise those funds and be eligible for government grants. To address that need, this ministry introduced the local services boards program in 1980. It was enacted in 1981 and has gone a long way towards alleviating the immediate need for basic services in many of the north's 158 unorganized communities.

The local services boards program, as it is known, allows these communities to raise money to cover the operating costs of essential services such as fire protection, water supply, street lighting and recreation. Thirty-three communities have formed LSBs since the program was started. The LSB program complements our unorganized community assistance program, which provides a capital grant to acquire the services I just mentioned. Fire protection is undoubtedly chief among these, and I am proud of what my ministry, working through the fire marshal's office, has been able to achieve.

Since 1977, 35 fire trucks have been provided to the unorganized communities in the north. An additional 13 will be delivered this fiscal year and, as I announced during last year's estimates, by next year we will have completed delivery of fire vehicles to all eligible unorganized communities.

In smaller communities, we have provided fire packages, 66 in all since 1977, with two planned for delivery this year. We have provided support for 12 regional training schools for the volunteer firemen who give their time to their communities, and we have enabled 90 teams to be trained through these schools.

In total, 106 unorganized communities have been provided with some form of basic fire protection to date, helping not only to reduce the risk of personal injury and damage to property by fire in those communities, but also to reduce insurance rates.

It is interesting to note that the nearly 100 fire teams in northern Ontario's unorganized areas constitute what is the largest fire department in North America, covering what is undoubtedly the largest land mass.

Our total expenditures for services to unorganized areas since 1977 have been $4.3 million. To accelerate the fire protection component of the program, as I described, and provide operating subsidies to the local services boards, we have allocated $2.6 million for the 1984-85 fiscal year.

The one program I have not mentioned in these estimates is our northern affairs office network. Our 29 officers do an excellent job of providing a one-window storefront government information and assistance service to the residents of the north. In the smaller communities particularly, they are for many people the only government contact for most programs. The NAOs happen to be down here today for their annual staff conference, so northern members should keep an eye out for their local officer as he may be walking in the halls of Queen's Park.

My final words today will be on a special project of the Ministry of Northern Affairs in honour of Ontario's bicentenary. On October 30, I will be joining with Laurentian and Lakehead universities, and I hope the chairman of the bicentennial committee, the former Honourable Margaret Birch, will join me --

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: She is still honourable to me. She is always honourable. I still think they should have given you a real title, Margaret.

12 noon

On October 30 I will be joining with Laurentian and Lakehead universities to launch our bicentennial book on northern Ontario, entitled A Vast and Magnificent Land. This book is a hard-cover, 224-page history in words and pictures put together by the two universities with assistance from the ministry. Our support will enable the book to be priced reasonably, so practically anyone can afford a copy.

Before our two retiring critics rush out to order theirs, I want to tell them I will be sending them their own copies of the first limited press run with my compliments before they leave. I might even include the new critic from the official opposition party, the member for London North (Mr. Van Horne).

Hon. Miss Stephenson: Sign both of them.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Yes, I will make sure I sign both copies.

Hon. Miss Stephenson: He will autograph them personally.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I will autograph them. The member for Scarborough East (Mrs. Birch) and I will both sign them. I know they will want to keep them as a valuable bit of information and a remembrance of this bicentennial year.

This book will be of interest to people all over northern Ontario. Its editors, Ernest Epp, who is now the federal member for Thunder Bay-Nipigon riding, and Matt Bray, have done a tremendous job of marshalling the forces of their respective universities to make this a first-class product. The book contains hundreds of photographs, many of which were contributed by individuals who took the time to get involved in the project.

That concludes my remarks on the 1984-85 estimates of the Ministry of Northern Affairs. Naturally, I welcome comments and constructive and positive criticism from our friends across the House, and I am sure they will provide that.

Mr. Van Horne: Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to participate once again in these estimates of the Ministry of Northern Affairs. I would like to send to the minister and to the member for Lake Nipigon the outline of my presentation. If I could have a page, I will send them forward.

While these notes are being sent to the minister and the New Democratic Party critic, I would like to begin by recognizing the service provided by the member for Lake Nipigon not only to his community in the riding of Nipigon, but also to the other 14 ridings of northern Ontario. He has chosen to leave politics at the end of this parliament, provincial politics, at any rate; whether he does anything else, only time will tell.

I think it is appropriate and fair to say he has served his community, he has served the north and he has served this Legislature very well, and he should be commended for that. I say this in all sincerity. Although we may not always agree with the exact wording of the member, we have to agree, at least in principle, with what he is about, because he certainly does know the north and he does know how to present the case for the needs of the citizens of the north. I thank him for doing that and I wish him well in his retirement.

I would also like to make very brief reference to my colleague the member for Rainy River, who is choosing to leave politics at the end of this month. He has also served his community and the north generally in a very appropriate and thorough way. He has served our caucus very well too. I am sure it is trite to say he has been the lone voice of the Ontario Labour-Liberal Party for some years. He has presented the case for that particular philosophy very well.

We wish him well in his new undertaking with the Ontario Mining Association. He will still have some contact with this chamber after the end of this month. We all look forward to seeing exactly how that works out. I am sure he will serve that industry well and will continue to keep in touch with us.

Finally, while I am in such a benevolent mood, I would like to make reference to Mr. Morpurgo, who retired after 25 years of service in the ministry. It is unfortunate that neither the member for Lake Nipigon nor I was aware of the event of last evening, because we would have liked to have at least sent along some congratulatory notes if we could not attend, but we will be sure not only to recognize his service to the north and to the ministry by making reference to him here in the chamber, but we will also send a personal note of good wishes along to him.

It is always interesting to hear the minister make his presentation and his case for the north. He is very good at accentuating the positive, as the old song goes. I am sure the Minister of Education (Miss Stephenson) recalls the good old songs from the good old days: "Accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative." He has done that very well. He always does that very well. He accentuates the positive.

It is our role as the opposition to make him, this chamber and those who happen to read Hansard mindful of areas we perceive still to be areas of need. Whereas the minister's comments are on the upside, let me present an opposite view in the next 30 or 40 minutes. I will try not to digress too much from these notes. If I do, I am sure the minister or the Chairman will put me back on track.

Let me make some introductory remarks by observing the 41 years of Conservative government in Ontario, which we consider to be 41 years of government neglect. We feel that northern Ontario's legacy has been an economy starving of a firm injection of secondary industry to stabilize its boom and bust existence, based on primary resource extraction.

The north has been denied its fair share of Ontario's prosperity. Most resource development decisions have been made in the interests of the more populated southern part of the province and with a view of the north as a hinterland rather than a homeland.

Although there have been countless reports about northern Ontario from government committees, task forces and boards, the government's ad hoc policies have amounted to little more than profiles in failure. We will make reference later to the Royal Commission on the Northern Environment to prove our case in making a statement such as that.

The lack of diversity in northern Ontario's industrial development is largely responsible for the area's weak economic structure. Job opportunities are limited and the principal source of employment continues to be the capital-intensive mining and forestry sectors, and these resources continue to be depleted.

Northern Ontario has virtually been treated as a colony of the south and the provincial government has never made an honest attempt to make northern Ontario more than a provider of resources. Northerners are still hewers of wood and carriers of water.

The government's futile attempts at decentralization have been little more than cosmetic, while retaining real decision-making power with the centralized bureaucracy in Toronto.

12:10 p.m.

One wonders whether statements such as that are responsible for the northern Ontario population decline or, if not decline, almost a zero-growth situation. According to the latest population figures, northern Ontario's population in 1981 stood at 819,576 or an increase of only 2,435, or 0.3 per cent, people since the last census in 1976. This is the smallest five-year increase in population for northern Ontario since the Second World War. Over the same period, Ontario's population increased by 4.4 per cent, or 306,642.

Northern Ontario's total population, as I indicated, has remained fairly stable since 1971, when it was 806,719. This means that northern Ontario has not kept pace with its natural increase; that is to say nearly as many people have left northern Ontario in the past 10 years as has been the natural increase of approximately 75,000. People have been forced to leave the region because there simply are no job opportunities there for them.

As I indicated in my introductory comments, the major concern, or one of the major concerns, that we as an opposition have is the economy of the north. The overriding concern of the majority of northern Ontario residents who communicate with us is the declining state of its economy.

The major problem continues to be the one-industry syndrome. Most areas of the north are devoid of a diversified economic structure and are subject to the wild fluctuations of the national and international market for the resources it can provide. Therefore, there is a clear need to diversify the economic base in the north to mitigate these problems and to retrain workers in the vital resource industries.

Provincial assistance for single-industry communities has been promised since 1977. The program, finally unveiled by the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Bernier) on June 14, 1983, provided little more than words of encouragement. After boasting that the ministry had for six years been providing assistance for transportation, water and sewer projects in the north -- assistance which is provided as a matter of course to all municipalities in the province -- the minister went on to say that $750,000 would be made available to allow "our professional staff help communities become aware of and get in touch with other government agencies providing specific industrial development programs.

This was the entire extent of the long-awaited community economic development program -- an amount of money equal to three hours' worth of interest on the provincial debt to provide services. The minister admitted, "We have been doing a lot of this until now on an ad hoc basis." There are no new programs for economic diversification of the north, no new assistance schemes, just old services under a new name.

Let me go over to the theme of the Northern Ontario Development Corp. for a moment. Northern Ontario continues to be shortchanged by the NODC, which was established in November 1970 to promote economic development in the areas of the province north of the French River. We know that Parry Sound was added to this after 1970.

The degree of emphasis on northern development has been drastically reduced over the years. Since 1974-75, the first year in which in which all three corporations operated, NODC loans and guaranteed commitments have fallen from $23,787,125 to $10,652,254 in 1982-83. As a per cent of total corporation commitments, NODC's share was slashed by over half, from 27.5 per cent in 1974-75 to 13.5 per cent in 1982-83. By comparison, southern Ontario ODC commitments over the same period increased from $40,498,223 to $56,899,202, and the ODC share rose from 46.9 per cent to 71.9 per cent. This offers a clear indication of the government's much-reduced focus on northern development.

To move on to the theme of high costs in northern Ontario, high costs have become a disincentive to living in the north. It costs more to heat a house, drive a car or snowmobile and buy food in northern Ontario. It is a particular irritant to northerners that while beer prices, for example, can be equalized throughout the province, milk prices and fuel prices are not.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Would the Liberals do it? Would they equalize the prices of milk and fuel?

Mr. Van Horne: We will get to that point.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Would they equalize them? Yes or no.

Mr. Van Horne: Before the minister starts throwing questions out to me, asking for "yes" or "no" answers, as the person in charge, he has to answer the question, why is there such a discrepancy? When someone can say that beer prices, for example, will be equalized -- one pays the same for a case of 24 of whatever in London, Ontario, as one pays in Rainy River -- why can the minister not make the same effort to level off and equalize the basic commodities such as milk?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: What would the Liberals do? Let the member put on the record what his party would do. I would like to see it.

Hon. Miss Stephenson: He does not want to tell us.

Mr. Van Horne: The Minister of Education in her rather succinct way is suggesting that I do not want to tell the minister. In view of that voice of authority, let me simply suggest that I will continue with my notes.

Ontario Hydro rates, which are increasing at double the rate of inflation, are placing extraordinary hardships on the north. The north is virtually ignored when the Ontario Hydro board, in consultation with Conservative ministers, makes decisions on Hydro rates. In fact, a northern member of the Conservative government recently accused Ontario Hydro of engaging in "Mafia economics." This callousness must end.

Ontario Hydro rates are much higher than are the rates in the provinces on either side of our borders. While northern Ontario is charged an average of $50 per 1,000 kilowatt-hours, northern Manitoba residents pay only $34 and northern Quebeckers $39 for the same amount of power.

Ontario Hydro's rate increases have been much higher than those of Quebec and Manitoba. Hydro-Québec's rate increase in 1984 was 3.4 per cent. Manitoba had no rate increase for five years until 1983 when, to compensate, it raised rates by 9.5 per cent. That represents an annual average of 1.6 per cent over the six years and is quite a bit lower than Ontario Hydro's average of 9.3 per cent over the same period.

The Association of Major Power Consumers in Ontario, which has a number of member industries in the north, strongly objects to Hydro's rate increases. Each one percentage point increase in the rate adds nearly $5 million to the members' electricity bills. All member companies will face an additional $50 million in power costs as a result of the 1985 rate increases. Our source for that information is noted in these notes; it is an AMPCO press release of September 17, 1984.

There are a number of Ontario Hydro projects which could be undertaken in the north. These not only would provide jobs but also would give the north cheaper electricity than the expensive power that will come from the new nuclear units in southern Ontario. Electricity from the Bruce B station, for example, costs five cents per kilowatt-hour. Power from the Darlington nuclear station will cost eight cents per kilowatt-hour.

Ontario Hydro has failed to promote small-scale hydroelectric developments. In fact, it has blocked new developments by refusing to pay a fair price for electricity that businesses could generate and sell to Hydro. Ontario Hydro set the rate, called a "buy-back rate," at 1.88 cents per kilowatt-hour instead of the five or eight cents it is now costing Hydro for electricity from the new nuclear plants.

Ontario Hydro's plans to introduce a seasonally adjusted billing system, which would see higher rates paid for power used in peak demand times such as winter, would impose a penalty on those who live in the north, as has been pointed out by the Association of Municipal Electrical Utilities.

12:20 p.m.

A few moments ago the minister asked what our party would do. That is the game the government loves to play, the government that has been sitting there for 41 years and in many instance doing precious little. The game they like to play is to throw out to the opposition questions such as: "What would you do? We want to get it on the record. We would like to take something and paste it on the bulletin boards of northern Ontario to put you guys in line." That reflects a "we will get you" sort of mentality.

We do have a few constructive things to suggest to the minister. We believe that in recognition of the increased cost of living in northern Ontario there should be a northern Ontario tax credit. The minister should do something about that to assist the people of the north. My colleague the member for Rainy River, to whom I made reference a few moments ago, made such a proposal in his reply to the most recent budget put forward by the government.

We would ensure that Ontario Hydro rate increases for 1985 would be reduced by approximately half from the 8.6 per cent to somewhere in the neighbourhood of four per cent. That is a rate close to the current rate of inflation. Ontario Hydro's proposal to introduce seasonally adjusted rates in northern Ontario, which would impose penalties on northern Ontario because of geographic and climatic conditions, must be opposed. We say to the minister that is a positive suggestion to work on. If he wants policy, make that the policy.

The minister has made same observations about employment opportunities and the wonderful things he is doing. I submit that in cities across northern Ontario thousands of idle workers stand as living testimony to the government' s failure to stimulate development in the north. The government has never lived up to its commitment, made in the infamous 1977 Brampton charter, "to balanced growth and development in the north so as to make prosperity, social and cultural advancement equally available to the citizens of northern Ontario." We do not think that has happened.

The vulnerability of a natural-resource community made up of largely single-industry communities is demonstrated by looking at unemployment statistics for northern Ontario over the course of the recent recession.

In August 1981, the unemployment rate in the northeast was 5.9 per cent, only marginally above the provincial average of 5.4 per cent and sixth worst in terms of the 10 economic regions in Ontario. By November 1982, northeastern Ontario had by far the highest unemployment rate in the province. At 19 per cent it was almost five points above the next hardest-hit area and far in excess of the provincial average of 11.4 percent.

Since 1980, the unemployment situation in northern Ontario has deteriorated markedly. In August 1983, there were 7,000 people unemployed in northwestern Ontario, a rate of 6.6 per cent. By August 1984, this had increased to 8,000 or 7.9 per cent. For northeastern Ontario, the 29,000 unemployed in August 1983, equivalent to 12 per cent of the labour force, rose to 40,000 and 15.8 per cent by August 1984.

A further indication of the severity of the recession in the north is the percentage of the population in the labour force. In 1983, northeastern Ontario had a participation rate of only 59.5 per cent, by far the lowest in Ontario and actually lower than the region's 1980 rate. This indicates young people and women are not moving into the labour force at nearly the same rate as in urban areas in southern Ontario, where the participation rate in Toronto for 1983 was 70.6 per cent.

The lack of jobs in the north has kept many prospective labour force entrants from even trying to look for employment. This conclusion is further supported by a special Statistics Canada computer analysis of youth unemployment by economic regions in Ontario commissioned by the Ontario Liberal Party.

During 1983, northeastern Ontario had the highest youth unemployment rate in the province with more than one youth in four or 25.3 per cent unable to find work. The age group from 15 years to 24 years fared slightly better in northwestern Ontario, where 20.1 per cent could find no work.

Because of the failure of the provincial government to diversify the economy of the north, the northern economy is particularly dependent on the mining and forestry sectors.

However, in these areas also the outlook is not encouraging. Employment in the mining sector has decreased from 50,000 in 1980 to 39,000 in August 1984. For forestry, the number of jobs has remained stable over the last year at approximately 15,000.

A recently released report from the Ontario Manpower Commission indicates that a medium-growth scenario for the province will provide only 100 more jobs in forestry and 6,300 in mining in the five-year period from 1984 to 1988. A low-growth scenario would actually see 1,100 jobs lost in forestry and only 1,900 produced in mining.

This analysis provides a clear indication that within the foreseeable future in the two key industries of northern Ontario, one will either be stagnant or lose jobs and the other will generate employment of 10,000 to 15,000, which is 20 to 30 per cent less than the levels of 1980-81.

I want to swing over to forest resources and then to mining. The forest and its products have a very significant economic impact in our province, employing more than 80,000 people. Its impact in the north is more pronounced, accounting for 55 per cent of manufacturing jobs, 58 per cent of manufacturing wages, 57 per cent of total production and 58 per cent of value added.

More than 20 communities across northern Ontario are wholly or largely dependent on the forest industry. After 41 years of Conservative government mismanagement of that industry, which has permitted more trees to be cut than have been replaced, many northern communities are facing imminent timber shortages. To safeguard northern Ontario jobs, the mining of trees by the forest companies licensed by the provincial government must be stopped.

The problems in forest regeneration have been recognized and have remained the same since the early 1900s. What is lacking is the political will of the government to solve them. The total backlog of unregenerated cutover forest land since 1971 is some 1.5 million acres, and the area is growing. Of the 551,281 acres of total cutover in 1982-83, regeneration was undertaken on only 41.5 per cent of the land, or 229,134 acres; natural regeneration occurred on 100,225 acres, and 221,922 acres were left untreated -- in other words, essentially written off.

This record makes a mockery of the government's commitment, made in its infamous Brampton charter of 1977, to replace at least two trees for every one harvested and to "regenerate every acre harvested." Clearly, this promise remains unfulfilled. Because of the government's mismanagement of this resource, mills in Hearst, Chapleau, Thunder Bay, Nipigon and Atikokan face severe shortages of wood supplies in the foreseeable future.

In 1977, the former Minister of Natural Resources made this startling observation: "I thought that we knew how to replant trees. We don't." This analysis has recently been reinforced by a Ministry of Natural Resources report, which has found that half the trees are planted improperly. Poor planting decreases survival rates and causes stunted, deformed and weakened trees. At the same time, tree planting is being subsidized with millions of taxpayers dollars through forest management agreements.

It is truly ironic that this government has chosen the white pine as the province's official tree. It provides a grim reminder of the government's failed reforestation record. This tree, which as recently as 20 years ago formed nearly half of Ontario's sawmill output, is now so depleted as to make it an endangered species with but a single Ontario sawmill dedicated to its harvest.

12:30 p.m.

In so far as mining is concerned, a major component of northern development is the exploration for and discovery of new mineral resources. The value of Ontario mineral production, however, decreased in 1983 to $3.5 billion, down from $4.6 billion in 1980. Production of major metals has had a steady and significant decline in Ontario in the past decade. Since 1971, iron, nickel, copper, zinc and gold production have all fallen sharply in Ontario.

Employment in the mining industry in Ontario has declined from 50,000 in 1980 to 34,000 in 1983. While mining employs one per cent of the province's labour force, it accounts for 15 per cent of northern Ontario's labour force.

Junior mining, which is the backbone of new mine discoveries, has gone into relative decline in Ontario, a major reason being a result of the restrictive policies of Ontario securities regulations. The most recent dramatic mining success in Ontario, at Hemlo, was discovered by three junior mining companies. This discovery only came about as a result of financing from the Vancouver Stock Exchange after it was rejected by a number of major companies in Toronto. There is no conceivable reason why junior mining companies must go out of the province to get financing for mine development.

We in our party have encouraged the establishment of a separate ministry of mines to promote and encourage the mining industry. Furthermore, we believe financing for junior mines in Ontario must be encouraged through the creation of a junior mining exchange on the Toronto Stock Exchange. Hemlo has proved that there is still a need for the prospector and the junior mining company.

A major problem that has arisen as a result of the Hemlo discovery is that the mining companies are outside the township boundaries and do not have to pay municipal taxes. We raised a question about this yesterday in the chamber. We will continue to pursue that matter because we still perceive it to be a problem for the communities we mentioned yesterday. This is putting tremendous pressures on these townships in view of the fact that company workers live in nearby towns, and those communities are expected to provide the services for the new residents.

The minister is no doubt aware of the resolution I made reference to yesterday which has been passed by the councils of Schreiber, Manitouwadge, Terrace Bay and Marathon. The permanent work force in that area is expected to reach 1,000 when the mines are in full operation next year. This will place increasing demands on the ratepayers of the municipalities. The existing assessment formula and the provincial transfer payment programs are inadequate to assist municipalities in coping with this development.

We believe the government must ensure equitable and stable financing to these communities. When the minister replies to my comments, I would like him to be more specific than he was yesterday in telling us exactly what sort of funding is being provided and elaborating on his reference to the need for those communities to present their case to the Ontario Municipal Board. There is a little question in our minds as to the appropriateness of that reply from the minister. I hope he will address himself to it in more detail when he has the chance.

I made reference in my introductory comments to the Royal Commission on the Northern Environment. I would be remiss if I did not again inquire of the minister as to the status of this longest-running and costliest royal commission in Ontario's history. Created in 1977, this commission has no doubt become a political embarrassment to the minister.

I realize the responsibility for this royal commission has been shifted to the Attorney General (Mr. McMurtry), or at least to another ministry, but the Ministry of Northern Affairs as the lead ministry -- the minister likes to remind us of the co-ordinating role he plays -- surely has an obligation to bring us up to date as to where this commission is at.

With an original intended wrapup date of December 1982, the royal commission has missed every deadline it has set itself. At this time, we can only say that the end is still nowhere in sight. With a present cost of more than $10 million, we think it is fair to demand that this commission be required to report immediately. For all intents and purposes, its work has become irrelevant and most Ontarians would have forgotten that it exists were it not for the tremendous expense.

After all this time and expense, the commission, as far as we can tell, has accomplished nothing. Will the minister inform us of the latest reporting date and the latest government financial commitment to this commission?

The minister made passing reference to agriculture in the north. I would like to make a few observations on agriculture and wild rice licensing.

The neglect and lack of support for the agricultural industry in the north is very obvious. While 90 per cent of Ontario's land mass is north of Parry Sound, only five per cent of the province's improved farm land is in this area and this figure has remained relatively unchanged for the last decade. The five per cent figure also holds true for northern Ontario's share of provincial agricultural production.

There is great agricultural potential in the north. What is required is a government policy fostering an environment whereby the north could move towards agricultural self-sufficiency in the foods it produces.

The north is full of examples of farms that have gone bankrupt and are reverting back to wilderness. Between 1976 and 1981, agricultural land in northern Ontario decreased by 7.3 per cent, a loss of 433 farms.

Even though the government has announced marketing studies since 1977 to develop the agricultural potential of the north, we see very little being accomplished. Northern farmers are still awaiting the government's promise, as contained in the Board of Industrial Leadership and Development program of 1981, for the upgrading of one million acres of northern and northeastern Ontario land into high-quality farm land.

Just in passing, while the minister was away from his chair, I made reference to wild rice licensing. I wonder whether the minister will indicate in his response the status of the wild rice harvesting moratorium, which expired in May 1983. Also, can he tell us the status of negotiations with native people and whether and how the government is prepared to proceed on this moratorium?

I would like to deal with only two other topics. One of them is the Allan report -- the Minister of Education is here; I am not doing this in deference to her presence, but in deference to the educational needs of the north -- and the other is the government's health policy in the north.

In May 1982, Rodger Allan was appointed by the Minister of Education as a one-man commission to inquire into the problem of small northern secondary schools. Mr. Allan reported in February 1983. The Allan report was well received by all members of the northern education community.

Mr. Allan addressed certain local disputes that had arisen within and between northern boards. However, 20 of the 26 recommendations were directed to the Ministry of Education. Importantly, Mr. Allan recommended the introduction of an isolated school grants factor, doubling the small school grant for schools 40 miles distant or more from another school teaching in the same language of instruction.

Further recommendations included: (1) provision of incentive grants for program councils promoting co-operative activity between school boards, (2) provision of high-priority capital funds to schools without facilities to provide minimum compulsory credits, (3) development of computer-assisted instruction courses and planned delivery of these computer courses to the schools, (4) increased funding to continuing education programs and (5) increased support for other compensatory funding and staffing proposals.

12:40 p.m.

The Ministry of Education responded to the Allan report a year later, in February 1984. Mr. Allan made 14 recommendations that would require the ministry to spend more money in small northern schools. All 14 spending recommendations were, as far as I know, rejected by the ministry.

One year later the Ministry of Northern Affairs and the Ministry of Education announced a capital grants plan for small northern high schools where $1 million a year would be spent for three years. That appears to us a grossly inadequate response to the northern education needs Mr. Allan so clearly identified. I would like the minister to address himself to that observation.

In so far as northern health policy is concerned, I would like to talk about various subheadings that come under this last topic: air ambulances, travel costs from the north, northern internship programs, health care for Indian populations, bed shortages and so on.

The Algoma, Manitoulin-Sudbury and Cochrane district health councils have expressed concern that air ambulances are available only for transfer of emergency patients 10 hours a day. This service is expected to cost $11 million for the year 1984-85. Currently in the north, discussions about pressing the provincial government to extend the air ambulance service from the present 10 hours to 24 hours are proceeding. Although aircraft are available 24 hours a day, hospitals requiring this service beyond regular hours must provide their own crews. In March, the Algoma, Manitoulin-Sudbury and Cochrane district health councils called for the Ministry of Health to extend the services to this 24-hour coverage.

The ministry pays attendants to be on the aircraft during regular hours. After that time, staff from hospitals often must accompany the patient to the receiving hospital. In the case of Little Current, for example, if one nurse accompanies a patient to the receiving hospital, it may leave the hospital with one or two nurses.

A means of addressing this problem is to have trained paramedic personnel on the aircraft at all times. A training centre could be set up in Sudbury to acquaint trainees with the terrain and hospital personnel they would be working with. Both these proposals have been presented to the ministry and, while support has been expressed, funding has not been forthcoming.

Problems also occur with land ambulance emergencies, since ambulance attendants in the north are not involved in current pilot projects that are training paramedic emergency personnel. To date, these pilot projects have trainees at various stages of training in the paramedic program: 28 students from Metro ambulance service, 14 from Hamilton, and six each from Thunder Bay and Sudbury air ambulance services.

Dr. David Coulson reported to the Liberal task force two years ago that the northern Ontario air ambulance service provides a litany of grief because of the misuse of this expensive service. He still supports these comments in October 1984. He feels better screening methods are needed to ensure air ambulances provide service to patients in emergency situations and only in those situations where it is more time-saving to travel by air. Routine patient transfers delay services for real emergencies, according to the doctor.

Currently only hospital-to-hospital emergency transfers are funded as insured services under the Ontario health insurance plan. Several area councils in the north, such as the townships of Ignace and Atikokan and townships in Rainy River, have all passed resolutions supporting the city of Thunder Bay resolution of May 1984 requesting changes in the Ministry of Health Act to provide for funding for transportation from the north.

Cancer patients do not meet the definition of "emergency treatment." Therefore, the cancer societies in the north spend large portions of their budgets on travel costs. For example, the Sault Ste. Marie Cancer Society spent 42 per cent or $55,000 of its budget on transportation of patients to the south during 1983-84. The Thunder Bay society spent 37 per cent or $85,640 of its budget on transportation costs for cancer victims to the south in the same period. The Sudbury society spent approximately 50 per cent or $200,000 of its budget during 1983-84.

A case example illustrates the problem. An 11-year-old Thunder Bay child was receiving treatments in Toronto every three weeks for two years for throat cancer. Each trip for mother and child was $463.30. A total of $25,000 was spent on transportation.

Cancer societies were originally intended to do research and provide support to families falling victim to cancer. Transportation coverage cuts into their ability to act on this mandate.

Concerning internships, I was pleased to hear the minister tell us about the success he felt the recruitment program was realizing in attracting doctors and dentists. However, I would like to make some observations.

The Ontario ratio of doctors to population is one for every 550 people; in the north it is one for every 1,100 people. Last year 418 applications for internship positions in Canada were submitted by foreign-educated doctors; only 23 were accepted.

There are 600 internship positions in Ontario to match roughly 600 graduates from Ontario schools. My leader, the member for London Centre (Mr. Peterson), proposed in the Legislature in April 1984 that internship spots be guaranteed for qualified foreign-education graduates who agree to practise in the north. The Minister of Health (Mr. Norton) replied that many of these doctors signed agreements when they came to Canada that they would not practise medicine in this country.

I would like the Minister of Northern Affairs to address himself -- this is not spelled out in the notes; I am asking him to make note of it, however -- to determining from the Minister of Health whether he or his federal counterpart can see that these people are used in communities where the need is great. There was dialogue, according to our understanding, between the provinces and the federal government concerning what to do with these highly qualified people who come into our country -- if not Ontario, then another province -- who have the determination to learn our language and to do whatever the medical profession requires of them to bring their standards up to ours. Of course, it would appear that northern Ontario qualifies as an area of need; so if the minister could find out the conclusion, if there was any, to the debate between the provinces and the feds, we would appreciate it.

In so far as the native people are concerned, the health needs of the Indians of remote northern Ontario are often ignored in the minds of many people. Morbidity rates can reach as high as five times those of southern areas; deaths from respiratory diseases are often 150 per cent higher than the Canadian average.

It is difficult to receive funding to meet the needs of the Indians on reserves. For example, a reserve in Spanish, in the district of Algoma, does not receive home care because of the lack of funding to the local Victorian Order of Nurses providing service. The population on this reserve, as we understand it, is 500.

Preventive and educational health programs are desperately needed on reserves. Nutritional problems also abound. Rickets, malnutrition and the resulting learning disabilities in children all need some attention.

We are informed that much of the information provided is written in English, and of course there is a need to see this information put into the language of the people, who do not necessarily understand English.

12:50 p.m.

In the very few minutes that are left, I would like to leave the reading of my notes on general bed shortages to the minister; I will not repeat all that is said in my notes on bed shortages, hospital capital funding needs and waiting for placement.

Let me simply conclude by saying that in the remaining seven hours or so that we have, I would like to have the minister elaborate on his statement on roads. As I indicated in the beginning, the minister is inclined to accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative. We, on the other hand, must remind him of some of the negative things.

We note that back in September there was comment in the press, particularly related to roads and the Northern Lights Lake Road, which was in very poor condition. I am sure the member for Nickel Belt (Mr. Laughren) is going to dwell on that, but the press clipping I have in front of me reads, "Road Condition Battle Brewing." If we were to look at that and then listen to what the minister said, we would have to think we were living in two different worlds. What we read in this article is a story reflecting very bad road conditions, but to listen to the minister we would have to think everything was quite rosy on the roads up north. I would like to see this issue pursued a little.

I would also like to hear some dialogue between the member for Lake Nipigon, who is an old rail man, and the minister on northern rail service, because that has been an issue of considerable concern to the north. I do not profess to have expertise on the subject, but I can read the various newspaper articles. The Globe and Mail had a large feature in August headed "Lifeline: Northern Rail Service Resumed After Protests."

Again, if we simply read the headlines, we might say everything was looking pretty good, but when we get into the fourth or fifth paragraph we see this is a seasonal situation. The train will stop for the winter. It is fine to see the service resumed, but I am sure with its discontinuation over the winter months there are transportation problems that still have to be addressed. I look forward to comments from the member for Lake Nipigon.

I would also like the minister, because he did make reference to Chi-Cheemaun, to indicate the problems to us. If one heads up there and gets in the lineup at the right time and the weather is fine, the water is not rough and so on, one has a good experience. But we often hear the negative side of Chi-Cheemaun. I would like the minister to indicate what percentage of downtime, if any, was realized this year, what problems, if any, he ran into this year, what kind of complaints came to the minister this year, if any. Perhaps there were none. Perhaps this was a banner year. Certainly, I would like him to elaborate on his comments on that.

I would like to conclude. As I indicated a moment or so ago, I look forward to the remaining seven hours so that we can get into some detail and pursue the ministry with a request for specifics.

Mr. Stokes: Mr. Chairman, given the time on the clock and given the signs I am getting, both from the members on the other side and the table, there seems to be a consensus that I should adjourn the debate.

On motion by Mr. Stokes, the debate was adjourned.

On motion by Hon. Mr. Bernier, the committee of supply reported progress.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Hon. Mr. Wells: Mr. Speaker, to amend the business statement I made yesterday, it is my understanding we had announced that next Thursday evening we would deal with the 11th report of the select committee on the Ombudsman. Since the House did not complete consideration and debate on the seventh and eighth reports of the standing committee on procedural affairs on agencies, boards and commissions, we will conclude that debate before we begin the debate on the report on the Ombudsman next Thursday evening.

The business I indicated I would announce today for Tuesday evening, I will announce on Monday.

The House adjourned at 12:56 p.m.

October 12, 1984