Hansard Transcripts 1984-Oct-19 | Legislative Assembly of Ontario

Hon. Ms. Fish: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to announce a new initiative to recognize the tremendous accomplishments of volunteers whose activities fall within the mandate of the Ministry of Citizenship and Culture. A series of awards has been created that recognize both years of service and outstanding volunteer achievements.

There are nearly one million volunteers in Ontario. Their efforts enrich our society enormously. Let me just mention one or two examples.

Many organizations are almost entirely volunteer-run. Caribana, Festitalia, Carousel and many other wonderful multicultural events that we enjoy happen because of volunteer effort that goes into them. The high calibre of dance, music and art that we have in this province is in many ways the result of volunteer support in fund-raising, public awareness and audience development. Community information centres, libraries, English as a second language classes and even the Royal Ontario Museum all operate with the help of volunteers.

Every one of us in this House knows personally the importance of volunteers, for we all rely heavily on their time, their talents and their energies. I am sure members will join me in saluting Ontario's volunteers and their contribution to both the economic and social wellbeing of this province.

This afternoon, at the annual general meeting of the Ontario Association of Volunteer Bureaux/Centres, I will be launching the volunteer awards by presenting a one-time-only award to Avie Flaherty, a woman who has given a great deal of her time to others. Mrs. Flaherty was the driving force behind the establishment of the Ontario Association of Volunteer BureauxlCentres and has been extremely active in this and other community organizations serving in a number of executive positions.

As I know members would wish me to, I will be thanking all volunteers for a job well done.

HYDE PARK DUMP CLEANUP

Hon. Mr. Brandt: Mr. Speaker, earlier this week I responded to several members' questions about the Hyde Park landfill site in New York state. While I explained past actions that were taken by my ministry, I was not at liberty at that time to discuss a new development. Today I would like to advise honourable members of the latest initiatives taken by my ministry with respect to the cleanup of the Hyde Park site.

Members may recall that my ministry transmitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency in July 1984 a report on the inadequacy of detailed site investigations of the Hyde Park dump by Occidental Chemical Corp., formerly known as Hooker Chemicals and Plastics Corp.

In August, Ontario conveyed to the EPA a report that strongly criticized plans developed by Occidental for controlling pollution at this chemical dump site. United States officials were equally critical of the proposals. The proposals in question became the subject of negotiations between the EPA, New York state and Occidental.

A new issue has arisen which could affect Ontario's interests in the matter of Hyde Park, and I should like to advise the members of the action I have taken. The US government, with the support of Occidental, has applied to the US District Court in Buffalo for an order that would effectively prohibit the public release without approval of the court of any new cleanup proposals put forward or any evaluation of those proposals.

This application was prompted by an announcement by the state of New York that it no longer wished to be bound by the confidentiality imposed on the negotiations. New York wants the freedom to release information which the state believes to be in the public interest. Before ruling on this matter, the judge has invited Ontario to comment, and I should like to share with the honourable members the position taken by the province in a submission that is being filed with the court this morning.

Ontario does not believe that negotiations respecting the Hyde Park landfill, or any other such negotiations involving significant issues of public health and safety, should be conducted in private. We do not believe --

Mr. Elston: What about the negotiations in Stouffville?

Hon. Mr. Brandt: My friend will have ample time to ask a question with respect to that at the appropriate time.

Mr. Elston: Those were done in secret.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Brandt: We do not believe that restrictions should be placed on information respecting this landfill nor that the opportunity for scrutiny and criticism of cleanup proposals be shrouded in a veil of confidentiality. We contend that the release of information from the negotiations would have significant public benefits. It would enable citizens of both countries to follow the progress of negotiations to see if the information presented was correct and sufficient and to comment before a final cleanup program is cast in stone.

This is not a private lawsuit involving private interests; rather it is a matter of public concern. Ontario believes the court should reject the application made by the government of the United States and allow the negotiations to proceed without any confidentiality restraint.

I am pleased that Ontario was invited to submit its comments to the court, and I trust the postion we have taken will effectively influence the outcome of this case.

Mr. Bradley: Are we getting new lawyers?

Hon. Mr. Brandt: No. We are quite satisfied with the present lawyers.

ORAL QUESTIONS

Mr. Peterson: Mr. Speaker, I cast my eyes across this chamber and I see a mere handful of ministers. We have reached an accord in this House, as you may know, that the government House leader or someone over there will provide us with a list of the ministers who will not be here. We try to prepare ourselves accordingly. We try to be understanding when ministers are tied up on business.

We frequently see that the list is inaccurate; ministers who are supposed to be, are not here. It is very difficult for the opposition to conduct any meaningful dialogue, not only with the shortage of ministers but also with the bad information that is coming from the government House leader.

I see them scurrying now. I think the statement has to be made by the opposition that they cannot conduct the business of the House this way. Just because there is a leadership convention is no reason for this government to fall apart at the seams or not carry on with its responsibilities.

Mr. Bradley: Here is the Minister of Colleges and Universities (Miss Stephenson) now.

Mr. Peterson: They turned over some rocks across the way and some of them have scurried out.

I will commence today, Mr. Speaker, but I want you to be aware of the kind of frustration we suffer. I know the government House leader always has problems containing everything --

Hon. Mr. Brandt: Quit wasting time. Let us get on with the business of the House.

Mr. Peterson: I am giving him time to get the ministers out here. I am doing them a favour.

Mr. Speaker, I will not do as I was prepared to do when I started my remarks and move a motion to adjourn, but I am prepared to do that at some time in the future if we have a similar situation. I advise you of that, sir, and through you, the ministry. We will now commence.

10:10 a.m.

COMMUNITY COLLEGE LABOUR DISPUTE

Mr. Peterson: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Colleges and Universities with respect to the strike. Would the minister be good enough to stand in this chamber and tell us of any initiatives she has taken in the little while since the last discussion? My understanding is that the negotiations will not go on again until Monday.

Does she not feel that this is a waste of time? These are three critical days during which work could be going on to try to reach a solution. Why would she not use her good offices and her conciliatory point of view to try to bring those parties together to keep those discussions going today, tomorrow and over the weekend? Why would that not be a constructive approach?

Hon. Miss Stephenson: Mr. Speaker, the experts in the area of mediation are those who determine when it is most likely to be successful to resume discussions. Since I am not an expert in mediation, I usually attempt to take the advice of those who are.

There may be talks over the weekend. I cannot tell the honourable member at this point whether or not there will be. That will be determined by those who are in contact with both parties to try to decide whether it would be fruitful to bring them together at that time.

What we are hoping to do is to produce an agreement that is negotiated by both sides, not one that is forced upon either side of the dispute by anyone.

Mr. Peterson: What I am asking the minister to do is to assume her leadership role as the minister responsible in this regard, the minister responsible for education, the minister responsible for the quality of education. Obviously she and all of us have a very great stake in the outcome of this situation.

I suggest to her now that it is probably too big a situation to leave exclusively in the hands of a mediator who at this point, as she knows, has not been, shall I say, universally acclaimed.

We in our party believe it is time the minister personally broke that logjam. I ask her again, will she now assume her responsibilities and get involved, use her good offices to try to persuade the parties of the urgency of this situation and not let it just drag in the hands of others?

Hon. Miss Stephenson: I hope at some point the honourable members opposite will learn that the College Relations Commission, which has responsibility for ensuring that negotiations are carried out appropriately, is made up of people who have a great deal of experience and a great deal of expertise in this area.

It is not left up to the mediator alone; a group of people is actively involved. There are people within the ministry who report to me who are providing assistance in the area of attempting, as I said yesterday, to find the appropriate foundation for a negotiated settlement, and we shall continue to do so.

Absolutely no one is shirking his or her responsibility within the Ministry of Colleges and Universities at this point, including the minister; and I hope that, as a result of the efforts that are being carried out quietly, without flamboyance and without huge publicity, we will be successful in the not too distant future.

Mr. Allen: Mr. Speaker, I am sure members of the ministry are indeed not wasting any time and are doing their utmost to see that this situation is resolved, but I also understand the reluctance of the minister to involve herself, given her recent statements and contradictions on this issue having to do both with figures on the facts and with her judgement concerning whether she can guarantee anything to the students.

Mr. Speaker: Question, please.

Mr. Allen: None the less, I would like to ask the minister if she will not involve herself immediately in regaining some ground for the students by immediately getting the parties together. Given the fact that she is a political person and has an appropriate understanding of the way in which bodies relate to each other in the political process, and that this is the kind of expertise she can draw on, will she not herself get the parties together immediately, before this weekend lapses, and get them down to work again?

Hon. Miss Stephenson: Mr. Speaker, I certainly cannot promise immediate action at the present time. There was a death in our family, and I must attend a funeral this morning.

Mr. Peterson: There is another issue at stake beside the ones we have discussed here. The obvious one is the quality of education, but there are others.

One of the problems we have discovered is that the bargaining relationship has deteriorated very substantially. I refer the minister to the words of the fact-finder in this matter describing the bargaining relationship: "It is presently characterized by aggression, conflict, antagonism, a high level of distrust, the overt use of power and influence attempts and the denial of legitimacy to the other party." Those are the words of the fact-finder.

The minister will also be aware that the fact-finder said the present bargaining structure as established by legislation is "not working effectively and requires attention again." In other words, we have to look at this from a structural point of view and the kind of relationship in which these people are bargaining.

As the minister responsible for establishing that relationship, is she now prepared and working on new alternatives to the existing structure, which is not working well on the advice of the parties, so this kind of situation will not happen again and presumably we can build a structure that will create better relationships?

Hon. Miss Stephenson: As the Minister of Labour who was responsible for the initial establishment of quality of working life in this province and as the minister responsible for the introduction of preventive mediation in this province, that is an area that is very dear to my heart and it is one in which we have attempted to provide some leadership in the whole education field.

I might tell the honourable member that it has been introduced in a number of school board-teacher negotiations with some benefit. It is a matter of concern to me that it should begin to pervade other areas of education, not just at the college level but at the university level as well, to try to provide some reasonable alternative to that industrial attitude, which seems to be too omnipresent within employer-employee relationships in the education field.

It is a matter I would like to ensure will be changed rather dramatically in the not too distant future, but the mechanisms are there. The mechanisms have already been developed by the Education Relations Commission with the help of the Ministry of Labour of this province. The benefits so far have been excellent. There is the opportunity to introduce them further in the education field.

DEMOLITION CONTROL

Mr. Peterson: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Attorney General. The question relates to some buildings in his riding which I know he will be very familiar with; that is 790, 800 and 840 Eglinton Avenue West.

The Attorney General will be aware the court has made its latest ruling on the demolition permit and it appears the only thing that will save the homes of the approximately 200 people who live in those buildings from the wrecker's ball, when that permit will presumably be issued about November 1, is an amendment to the existing legislation. He will also be aware that when legislation was brought into this House, a watered-down version was finally passed here; but it is not sufficient to protect those people.

As the Attorney General and as the member responsible for those people and in whose riding they live, is he prepared to use his good offices and his considerable heft in cabinet to introduce an amendment to that legislation that would prevent this demolition from taking place?

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: Mr. Speaker, that legislation is not administered by the Ministry of the Attorney General, but I have been very actively involved on a number of fronts over several years now to do what I can, responsibly, to save those buildings from demolition. As the Leader of the Opposition well knows, the city of Toronto, with the appropriate minister, worked out an agreement for the legislation in respect to a limited form of demolition control.

I do not know what specific amendment the Leader of the Opposition would suggest, but certainly we on this side of the House are all concerned about issues related to demolition. That matter was addressed by the committee last spring. If the Leader of the Opposition has a specific proposal to make, I will be happy to discuss it with the minister responsible for the legislation.

10:20 p.m.

Mr. Peterson: Our position is very clear that the legislation must be clarified. I have in my hand a copy of an amendment that would solve this problem specifically -- if one of the pages will give it to the minister -- and would keep those people in their homes. It would prevent those buildings from being demolished. I think it is all there. When the Attorney General applies his highly-trained legal mind to the situation, I think he will see that it would solve the problem.

Will he study that? Will he try to persuade his colleague, the minister responsible for that situation, to bring it in at the earliest possible date to keep those people in their homes?

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: We on this side of the House are always grateful for advice from the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues. I am prepared to discuss with the minister responsible any rational proposals he might have.

Mr. McClellan: Mr. Speaker, this is like locking the barn door after the horse has escaped, but I would like to ask the Attorney General what he is trying to tell us this morning about the position taken by the member for Wilson Heights (Mr. Rotenberg) in committee last spring when he announced, as government policy, that the Conservative government would not accept the proposal requested by the city of Toronto for firm and effective demolition control in Bill Pr13.

Is he trying to tell us that was not the position of the government, that the cabinet had not taken that position and that he knew nothing about it? What kind of game is the Attorney General trying to play at this late date, now that the predictions that were made, not just by members of the opposition or spokespeople for the tenants but by the representatives of the development industry, have come to pass exactly as predicted?

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: Mr. Speaker, when it comes to playing games, nobody could excel the skills of the member for Bellwoods (Mr. McClellan). As I recall the history of this matter, the member for Wilson Heights was actively involved in working out with the city of Toronto what appeared, at that time, to be the best compromise solution.

Mr. Peterson: The Attorney General will be aware that these buildings have swirled with controversy for a long time, involving, as he will recall, part of the brouhaha around the trust companies affair.

I want to take the Attorney General back to an affidavit that was filed in court by one Ben Axelrod a few months ago. Mr. Axelrod said in that affidavit, filed in the Supreme Court, "On the advice of one Mr. Prousky" -- I am talking with respect to a mortgage on these buildings -- Mr. Prousky had assured him that the $500,000 fee would guarantee a rapid cabinet decision on these buildings, and if a decision did not come in time it would ensure that Mr. Rosenberg of Greymac Trust would assist him with secondary financing.

He said the $500,000 fee would be used in part to retain public relations consultants to lobby cabinet members and, also, that a Mr. David Cowper had become a senior executive of Greymac Trust and that Mr. Cowper was well known in Progressive Conservative Party circles and would assist in obtaining an early decision from cabinet.

I know that as chief law officer of the crown the Attorney General would say that, prima facie, it was a very damaging allegation. This was brought up in the House six months or so ago. The minister was not in the House. I remember specifically asking his colleague the Solicitor General (Mr. G. W. Taylor) to look into this matter.

Can the Attorney General tell us now the results of his investigation into the charges laid out in that affidavit? What has become of that investigation?

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: I have not seen that affidavit. I will certainly be prepared to look at it. I do know from communications that Mr. Axelrod attempted to make with the member for the riding of Eglinton, the Attorney General, about these buildings that, as the Leader of the Opposition has pointed out, Mr. Axelrod has expressed very deep displeasure with the way this matter has been handled by the government.

From what we have heard, I do not think the owner of those buildings has a grievance, but Mr. Axelrod feels he has been victimized by this process. Whatever clout he may have thought he had with this government, of course, has turned out to be quite the reverse as far as he is concerned.

SPADINA EXPRESSWAY

Mr. McClellan: Mr. Speaker, I have a question and I am not quite sure to whom to put it. I will ask if the Attorney General, as one of the principal leadership contenders, would be interested in responding to the question; but if he does not choose to respond, he may want to redirect it to the Deputy Premier (Mr. Welch) in the absence of the Premier (Mr. Davis), or to the Minister of Transportation and Communications (Mr. Snow). The question concerns the fate of the three-foot strip to stop the Spadina expressway.

The Attorney General will be aware that the government announced, most recently in June 1982, that it was committed to acquiring the Spadina lands owned by Metropolitan Toronto south of Eglinton Avenue and that it would then grant, through a transfer of deed, a three-foot strip to the city of Toronto in order to secure the city in perpetuity from the extension of the Spadina expressway.

Can the Attorney General tell us whether the lands have been surveyed, whether the surveys are complete, whether the deeds have been prepared and whether the transfer of the Spadina lands from Metropolitan Toronto to the province has taken place?

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry, I do not have that information, simply because, as the member for Bellwoods (Mr. McClellan) has pointed out, this matter is the responsibility of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications.

The Premier of this province has said on a number of occasions that no expressway would be extended south of Eglinton, and I am confident that the pledge by the Premier is going to be honoured by whoever his successor might be.

Mr. McClellan: With respect, does the Attorney General not recall the qualification on the promise, that the Spadina expressway would not be extended as long as he was the Premier? Now that the Davis era is dribbling along towards its termination, perhaps the Attorney General can answer the question, or redirect it to the Deputy Premier, who I am sure would know the answer.

Have the lands been surveyed? Have the deeds been prepared? Has the land been transferred from Metropolitan Toronto to the province so that the second-stage transfer of the lands to the city of Toronto can take place?

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: I will just repeat what I said a moment ago. I do not know. This matter is being looked after by the Minister of Transportation and Communications, and if the member is for some reason fearful of my rather large, imposing colleague, so fearful of him that he is reluctant to pose the question to him directly, I will be his messenger. What else can I do? We will get an answer for him.

Mr. Peterson: This was promised in 1975. That is almost a decade ago now, and that promise has yet to be fulfilled. What assurances do we have that the successor to the Premier will honour his commitment any more than he honoured Mr. Robarts's commitment?

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: I am not aware of any commitments made by Mr. Robarts to the people of this province that were not honoured by the Premier. With the enormous respect and affection we have for our leader and Premier, I would expect, as I said a moment ago, that his commitment will indeed be honoured.

10:30 a.m.

Mr. McClellan: I would like to thank the Attorney General for offering to act as my messenger boy to the Minister of Transportation and Communications. When he is performing that function, can he tell me, either now or when the minister advises him -- although I am amazed he does not know; I am flabbergasted he does not have this information -- when the surveys of the Spadina line lands will be completed, when the deeds will be prepared, when the transfer will take place and, most importantly, when will we see legislation in this House that will give the city of Toronto the power and authority to own and possess the three-foot strip?

Hon. Mr. McMurtry: All of these requests will be communicated to the minister responsible.

EXTRA BILLING

Mr. Cooke: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Health (Mr. Norton). However, since he is not here, I will ask it of the Deputy Premier.

The Deputy Premier may or may not be aware that as of July 31, 87 per cent of the anaesthetists, 64 per cent of the obstetricians and gynaecologists, 59 per cent of the ophthalmologists, 58 per cent of the urologists, 47 per cent of the general surgeons, 40 per cent of the orthopaedic surgeons and 34 per cent of the psychiatrists in Metropolitan Toronto were opted out of the Ontario health insurance plan.

Since the number of specialists who are opted out of OHIP are the real telling factors and figures of how far behind we are in terms of universal accessibility, how can the minister guarantee universal and equal accessibility in Metropolitan Toronto, given those numbers of specialists who are opted out in this regional municipality?

Hon. Mr. Welch: Mr. Speaker, if the honourable member wants a full answer, he would no doubt await the reply of the Minister of Health when he attends, either today or at the first of the week. I have listened to the minister respond, from time to time, to similar questions about the lists that are provided by the Ontario Medical Association with respect to those who are part of the plan.

I think it is unfortunate to leave the assumption that because one is opted out, he necessarily overbills. That does not necessarily follow. It depends on the particular circumstance.

However, the question of accessibility is a reasonable one and I will draw the minister's attention to the member's concern at my first opportunity.

Mr. Cooke: The implication of what the Deputy Premier said is that the only way opted-out doctors do not extra-bill is when patients go to them and beg for charity medicine. I would like to ask the Deputy Premier a policy question. Does he support the concept that when a patient goes to a doctor who is extra billing, he or she should have to beg for charity medicine in order to achieve equal and universal accessibility in Ontario?

The statistics prove that extra billing and opting out are problems not just confined to Toronto. In Middlesex county, 96 per cent of the anaesthetists are opted out, 66 per cent of the urologists, 64 per cent of the orthopaedic surgeons and 60 per cent of the plastic surgeons. The statistics are the same across this province.

What is the Deputy Premier prepared to do to guarantee universal accessibility? Why does he defend doctors who make $120,000 a year, rather than defending the people on middle and low incomes who are forced to pay $50 million in extra bills in this province?

Hon. Mr. Welch: I will simply underline the main point in my response in indicating the minister will perhaps give a fuller answer. I do not know that it necessarily follows that it is to be seen in the concept of begging for charity when members of the medical profession make some assessment with respect to extra billing or not. It is a personal relationship between a medical practitioner and his patient, taking into account the circumstances. There may be other reasons which motivate someone from being involved in the plan and reserving the right to make that determination.

That aside, I listened to the minister respond to questions from the member's leader at the beginning of this week on this whole question of accessibility and extra billing. I would draw the member's attention to that answer, to which I recall he had some supplementary questions at the earlier part of the week.

Mr. Sweeney: Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Premier will be aware that during the past week the Minister of Health has speculated in the media that the present position of the government of Ontario may change with respect to extra billing. Can the Deputy Premier indicate to us if this is the position solely of the Minister of Health, or is it the position of the government, given the fact that it does represent a major policy shift? Could he also tell us when such a change in policy might be implemented?

Hon. Mr. Welch: Mr. Speaker, I recall that question being posed to the minister at the beginning of the week. I think if the member were to read Hansard, he would find the minister indicated in response to the question that this was one of many options being explored. He did not come down with respect to any particular solution. He simply indicated there were a number of options and they were all being considered and studied by him.

Mr. Cooke: Since the Canada Health Act was passed with the support of all three political parties in the House of Commons, and since all three political parties at the federal level see extra billing as incompatible with the basic principles of medicare, why does the Minister of Health not do as the provincial Liberal Party did and change his position on extra billing, decide to oppose it and get rid of it in this province and restore equal accessibility to our health care system?

Hon. Mr. Welch: I repeat that the minister gave a very full answer with respect to the process at present being undertaken. I thought it was a very complete answer on that whole question. To save some time for other questions, I would simply ask the member to reread the very complete answer given on this subject by the Minister of Health at the beginning of the week.

Mr. Van Horne: Mr. Speaker, I have a question --

Mr. Speaker: Before you proceed, if I may interrupt, there seems to be a very high level of conversation and I am having difficulty hearing the questions. I would ask the co-operation --

Mr. Stokes: It is just the noise that is at a high level.

Mr. Speaker: I did not ask for further comment. I asked for co-operation. The member for London North.

HIGHWAY SIGNS

Mr. Van Horne: Mr. Speaker, this is a question for the Minister of Tourism and Recreation. I am sure the minister is aware that for some years now tourist operators and municipalities have been unhappy with the restrictive highway signage policy of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications.

Does the minister not agree that the tourism advertising potential of highway signs is not recognized and that the government should develop a uniform policy in co-operation with operators in communities in regard to signs that would advertise their legitimate attractions? I would like to know whether the minister agrees with that statement.

Hon. Mr. Baetz: Mr. Speaker, I think the honourable member will realize that question should be more properly directed to the Minister of Transportation and Communications (Mr. Snow).

As far as the tourism industry is concerned, it is true we do hear from time to time proposals that there should be more signs on highways, particularly the 400 series of highways. We feel, with the information offices and all the other advertising we do for the tourist attractions, the travelling public's needs are generally fairly well met.

As the member may know, in recent years there has been some trend towards more signs at more strategic places. If the member wants to have further information on this, he might direct his question to the Minister of Transportation and Communications when he returns to the House.

Mr. Van Horne: The question is being directed to the Minister of Tourism and Recreation because of his direct involvement with tourism.

Some communities, such as mine of London, Ontario, are under the impression that cabinet has authorized the posting of signs along Highway 401 and Highway 400 rights of way at the approaches to Toronto, advertising the major tourist attractions in Metropolitan Toronto. London city council has responded to this by requesting that similar signs be erected along Highway 401 at the entrances to London.

10:40 a.m.

Will the minister support London's request? If not, can he explain how he can endorse a government policy that favours Toronto over the rest of the province?

Hon. Mr. Baetz: This is a subject that is currently under discussion, and I do not want to report anything further in any great detail at this time. I want to reassure the member that we will be taking a look at this whole question. I am quite aware of the signs he is talking about at the entrances to Toronto.

Mr. Stokes: Mr. Speaker, what kind of liaison goes on among the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation with regard to an overall advertising policy?

During the estimates of the Ministry of Northern Affairs earlier this week, I asked whether it was possible for the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Bernier) to co-ordinate an overall policy of advertising for tourism, given the fact that we have one of the most important and most attractive tourist facilities, Lake Nipigon, and there is not one sign that actually points to it. If one travels along Highway 11, one knows the residents think they are second-class citizens inasmuch as most of the advertising dollars from the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation highlight all the attractions along Highway 17 rather than Highway 11.

What kind of liaison goes on among Transportation and Communications, Natural Resources and Tourism and Recreation in determining where the advertising dollars for tourism are going to be spent?

Hon. Mr. Baetz: Mr. Speaker, there is constant liaison going on among my ministry, the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and the Ministry of Natural Resources.

Obviously signs on the highways are a very small part of tourism advertising. The advertising is directed more through the medium of television, pamphlets, information centres and so on. It is also directed through our local tourist associations. We rely on them. We help finance these tourist associations to do their own advertising in their own particular areas.

It should be said again that this whole issue of signage on highways is one that is under constant study and review.

MINISTRY OFFICE IN WELLAND

Mr. Swart: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of the Environment, if I can have his attention. Will he tell this House whether it is true that he plans to move the Ministry of the Environment office out of the city of Welland and, if so, why?

Hon. Mr. Brandt: Mr. Speaker, I know of no such plans at the moment. I will check with my staff to see if there have been any discussions along those lines. Any input from the honourable member, either in favour or opposed to the proposal he is suggesting may be before my ministry, would be welcome. I have not been personally involved in any discussions or any plans to move the offices out of Welland.

Mr. Swart: The employees there have been told there is going to be a move to St. Catharines. When the minister looks into this, will he give consideration to the fact that the city of Welland -- in fact, the whole southern Niagara Peninsula -- now has one of the highest unemployment rates of any place in Ontario? Local studies indicate about 25 per cent of the work force is unemployed.

Will the minister also consider the fact that the 12 or so employees employed there have established themselves in the city of Welland or the immediate vicinity? It will be a hardship and costly to them if a move is made out of the city of Welland. I hope the minister will report back with the commitment that office will not be moved.

Hon. Mr. Brandt: I cannot give an undertaking that the office will not be moved. As I indicated, there are, on occasion, administrative moves made within a ministry that are not necessarily brought to the attention of the minister directly.

I will, however, look into this matter. I am sure the member for St. Catharines (Mr. Bradley) also has an interest in the unemployment rate he is experiencing in his community. As the member can well appreciate, these things have to be balanced off in the best interests not only of the province and the citizens we serve, but also of providing services on behalf of the ministry in an appropriate and realistic fashion.

We will look at all of that in coming to an appropriate decision, and I will get back to the honourable member with respect to the up-to-date status of the matter.

Mr. Bradley: Mr. Speaker, I do not have a supplementary on this. I was going to have a supplementary until I heard where he was moving it. I do not have a supplementary; I have a new question.

Mr. Elston: Might I ask a supplementary?

Mr. Bradley: Do not move it from St. Catharines.

Mr. Elston: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary for the Minister of the Environment. Since we are going through Environment estimates at this time and since we have had a long discussion of the overall reduction in absolute dollars being applied to that ministry's budget, can the minister undertake for us, when he is conducting his review of this administrative move, which may or may not have been brought to his attention by his staff -- he has told us before he is really just the messenger for the ministry and not the policy-maker there anyway -- that he will not allow the overall commitment to environmental programs in his ministry's budget to be reduced by allowing the levying of increased costs to house this move or eat up extra administrative dollars when we need as many dollars as possible in the Ministry of the Environment to deal with the very serious problems in the Niagara area and in other places?

Mr. Sweeney: A prime ministerial answer, please.

Hon. Mr. Brandt: I will do my best.

I appreciate the question raised by the honour-able member, but I want to assure him that we are not making these kinds of administrative moves in the global sense with the intent of increasing the cost or expense to the ministry. I do not know where that suggestion would come from.

During the course of the estimates we have had extensive debates on the spending of this ministry. I do not believe there is any indication whatever that the overhead of this ministry is increasing at a rate that is even comparable to the rate of inflation.

We have been extremely restraint-minded; I want to assure members of that. We have contained our budget in a manner that I think would be appropriate in the eyes of all members of the opposition, if they could ever understand the budget. The difficulty is that we cannot get these people to sit down and study these documents with sufficient interest to get them to come to an appreciation of the numbers we provide them with. But there is no intention of increasing administrative costs, if that was the question.

CO-OPERATIVE EDUCATION

Mr. Bradley: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Education. I noticed this morning a headline in a paper saying, "Teach on the Job, Davis Asks Execs." It is related to co-operative education programs for adults, and this is put on at the secondary school level.

As the minister is aware, a number of boards of education in Ontario, including the Lincoln county board, have developed excellent co-operative education programs at the secondary school level even though her ministry does not provide sufficient funding for transportation or monitoring of these programs.

Will the minister give an assurance to the House today that she will intervene with the federal authorities -- I have been waiting a long time for this -- with her federal friends in Ottawa, to ensure that the Canada Employment and Immigration Commission does not scuttle an excellent program by prohibiting individuals -- we are talking about adults now -- from participating in a program such as the acquiring of stenographer's skills at the St. Catharines Collegiate Institute and Vocational School and in other places that might have a similar program by denying unemployment insurance benefits to those who particiate in these programs because they happen to be attending school part of the day?

10:50 a.m.

Hon. Miss Stephenson: Mr. Speaker, I believe there is little chance of the scuttling of the program since I think it was only within the last two days that I noticed in one of the education publications an advertisement by the federal government supporting the use of the unemployment insurance program for skills development through co-operative education programs and encouraging boards of education and colleges to apply for information regarding the ways in which they could facilitate such programs; so I really doubt that the concern expressed by the honourable member has much foundation in fact, right at the moment.

It is a matter we had encouraged the former government to become involved in, and I am delighted that the program was first developed and is now going to be carried on. I think it is not limited specifically to school boards but is available to educational institutions approved by ministries of education or ministries of colleges and universities in various provinces.

Mr. Bradley: Mr. Speaker, the minister would know that one of the problems is at the secondary school level as opposed to the community college level. When community colleges have carried out programs of this kind, there has not been a problem with unemployment insurance benefits. However, when boards of education at the secondary school level have attempted to deal with adult co-operative education programs, that is where the blocks have been put in.

Is the minister saying today that she is now assured -- and this would be excellent news for all of us -- that the Canada Employment and Immigration Commission has changed its mind and, as of this week, is now prepared to allow those on unemployment insurance to take part in programs such as that at the St. Catharines collegiate?

Hon. Miss Stephenson: I do not have that assurance on paper at the present time. What I said was that it is only within the last two days that there was information from CEIC, in an education publication, suggesting strongly that school boards were eligible to participate in this program. I doubt that it would have been in that publication if the position of CEIC were not that they were to be members of the group providing the education program.

I think the honourable member may be aware that there was some difficulty in the beginning with the support of programs related to the development of the basic skills required to begin the process of skills development. There was concern on the part of CEIC for support of that portion which would lead the individual to the basic skill level to be able to be involved in the co-operative education program. Therein, I think, lay the problem that had to be sorted out.

DISEASE RATES AND ENVIRONMENT

Mr. Allen: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of the Environment. Is the minister aware of the recent survey undertaken by the health protection branch of the Department of National Health and Welfare, which found that Hamilton and region cancer-related death rates from 1971 to 1981 were considerably above the provincial average?

It found in particular that the rate for stomach cancer in males in Hamilton-Wentworth was 30 per cent higher than expected, the rate for lung cancer was 20 per cent higher, the rate for breast cancer in females was 11.5 per cent higher and the rate for bladder cancer was almost 11 per cent higher than the average for the province.

The minister will be aware that certain of these cancer-related deaths may be related to the presence of chlorine in the water, but there is also other evidence in this study to suggest that it is a broadly environmental problem.

I wonder if the minister would tell us, first, whether he is aware of these statistics and, second, whether his ministry has related specifically to studies concerning them, their causes and, we hope, their cure.

Hon. Mr. Brandt: Mr. Speaker, I suggest that any relationship between chlorine in water and cancer is very tenuous at best. I do not know of any studies that would link chlorination or chlorine treatment of water with cancer. It is a substance that has been used in a chemical sense to purify water for many years. The member should take a look at those facts again before he suggests there may be a problem in that respect.

The second part of the question, however, concerning the other matter of an epidemiological study to determine exactly what the problems are in connection with the elevated levels of cancer that he is suggesting are part of the problem in the Hamilton area, would be better put to the Minister of Health.

In fact, we do work co-operatively with the Ministry of Health in undertakings of this type. But as was the case in the Niagara area -- and I am sure the members from that area are aware of this -- the study that is being undertaken there, at a cost to the province of some quarter of a million dollars, is headed by that ministry. We will work with the ministry to undertake any environmental control programs following the findings and the completion of that particular study, but the study is being undertaken by my colleague the Minister of Health.

Mr. Allen: It is always difficult to ask a question of a minister who is not here and, of course, the Friday morning absences are no help in that respect. But may I call the attention of this minister to the fact that a few years ago a similar study was undertaken in Hamilton to get to the bottom of this and related questions and that study ran out of resources before completing its task. Therefore, I would like the minister to say, in general terms, that he is prepared to co-operate with the ministry in getting to the bottom of these distressing statistics.

Will he enjoin real resources from his ministry in hard dollars to studies which are being undertaken presently by local health officials and McMaster epidemiological experts in order to see that this matter is studied satisfactorily and completely, and is resolved to the best of our scientific knowledge, in this current study? Hamilton residents want to get to the bottom of this issue; find out what the causes are and have them remedied.

Hon. Mr. Brandt: The figures with respect to the Hamilton situation are not quite as extreme as the honourable member would suggest. There is cause for concern but not cause for alarm.

I will bring the concerns of the member and the constituents he serves in Hamilton to the attention of my colleague, and we will look at the matter. I do not want to undertake to commit my colleague the Minister of Health on any future studies he may or may not wish to undertake in that particular area.

I do want to say, and the member is aware of this, that we have expended large sums of money in the Hamilton area with respect to environmental control programs. I announced a series of grants within the last six or seven months in regard to certain specific cleanup programs that exceeded $500,000. We are continuing to work with the regional municipality in that area, with the local health councils and in co-operation with the Ministry of Health to do whatever we can to make sure that the health of the residents of that area is completely safe and secure in every respect. We will continue to do that.

Mr. Elston: Mr. Speaker, last night during his estimates, the minister indicated there are several large-scale projects which are drawing to a close in this budget. Can the minister advise this House that in cases such as that outlined by my friend the member for Hamilton West (Mr. Allen) he will try to salvage some of the money that will now not be required for those megaprojects that have been undertaken by his ministry and apply it to developing a series or a strategy to deal with the very questions which are raised by these types of federal studies and the results which they unveil, rather than waiting for the intervention of the Minister of Health whose budget we know is certainly under a great deal of stress?

Can the minister undertake that he will co-operatively help fund some of these programs and studies, as he has done with some of the other ministries such as the Ministry of Agriculture and Food in dealing with agricultural runoff?

Hon. Mr. Brandt: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member is quite accurate and correct in suggesting that there have been shifts in priorities in my budget which we talked about during estimates just the other evening. Some of the large investments and expenditures for provincial projects are not as intense or quite as demanding as was the case previously.

The member then asks whether there can be some shift of priorities to determine where those moneys might be expended in other areas of environmental control. I want to suggest I am not at all opposed to that kind of thing. However, the reality is that we have to know where we can spend those dollars to get the maximum benefit for the taxpayers of Ontario. That may be one opinion, but there are a whole host of priorities out there and we have to look at all of them.

The reality is that we have increased very substantially the program areas of my ministry, and over the past three or four years we have increased by some 40 per cent expenditures for specific programs that are not all that different from the one the member mentioned in his request. We will certainly look at it. We are very pragmatic, open-minded and realistic on this side of the House. We will look at any recommendations or suggestions the member might want to bring forward.

VISITOR

Hon. Mr. Drea: Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the attention of the House to the presence of a very distinguished visitor, a former Minister of Housing and a former Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations, Sidney Handleman.

Mr. Epp: That is a good warmup for my question.

11 a.m.

MARKET VALUE ASSESSMENT

Mr. Epp: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Revenue. The minister is aware that my task force on property tax assessment travelled to Sault Ste. Marie last week. The minister is also aware that in making assessments, assessors are not supposed to take into consideration the potential wealth of a property. The local commissioner of assessment in Sault Ste. Marie has confirmed that matter. Why is it then that in assessing the property of Howard Avery's gravel pit, the assessor assessed it on the potential wealth of the gravel pit rather than on the regulations in the manual?

Hon. Mr. Gregory: Mr. Speaker, I am delighted that the task force in its travels and with the many meetings it has had, extensive as they were, has come up with a problem, because it had been singularly unsuccessful up to this point. Obviously, I cannot answer a question about a specific property, but if the honourable member wishes to submit the information he has to me, I will have my staff investigate it and get back to him.

Mr. Epp: That remark is unworthy of the minister, because several months ago 4,000 people in Sault Ste. Marie protested against their assessments. The suggestion that there are no problems in Sault Ste. Marie or any other place in the province because of his incompetence is misinformation for this House and for the people of Ontario.

Mr. Speaker: Question, please.

Mr. Epp: Given that the local assessor has indicated it was based on a particular tonnage and given that the assessment commissioner has said this should not be the case, why is it that the commissioner appointed by the ministry says one thing to the people of Sault Ste. Marie and the assessor, appearing before the official court of appeal, says another thing?

Why are the people so misled by this kind of information? Is there not enough bureaucracy already in the ministry? They now have to try to overcome this misinformation being given out by the ministry people.

Hon. Mr. Gregory: It is quite possible to understand the frustration of the member. As I said before, his task force has been unable to find many faults.

Mr. Epp: There are 4,000 people in Sault Ste. Marie who disagree.

Hon. Mr. Gregory: I understand. Perhaps I can quote from a Mr. Michael Brooks, a spokesman in the Liberal head office. He said, "What they found is that people in some communities have called for the implementation of market value assessment and others have urged its abolition." He went on to say, "It is overwhelming to me that we have to write a report." I can understand his frustration, because it is being found that some like it and some do not. It took them a long time to find that out, and they have done extensive travel. I will look into the specific issue the member has in mind and get back to him.

ONTARIO ADVISORY COUNCIL ON MULTICULTURALISM AND CITIZENSHIP

Mr. Grande: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Citizenship and Culture regarding the extension for another five-year period of the Ontario Advisory Council on Multiculturalism and Citizenship.

Given the total and complete ineffectiveness of the advisory council in the past 10 years with respect to its performance and its ability to persuade the government to accept any serious recommendation the council has produced, given that the council does not enjoy the support of the major ethnic communities in Ontario, and given that the council seems to be dormant and is activated only during provincial elections, can the minister tell us why the mandate of this council was extended for a further five years, thereby wasting a lot of taxpayers' money?

Hon. Ms. Fish: Mr. Speaker, I could not disagree more with the series of so-called "givens" that prefaced that question. In my view, and in the experience I have had in dealing with representatives of a variety of cultures and groups around this province, that council is held in very high esteem and has the confidence of many quarters of this province.

The council has served for 10 years, providing key advice in a number of areas, from assistance in refugee settlement to English as a second language training, orientation, work place adjustment, counselling for family violence and abuse and to assistance in breaking down some of the barriers that are so easy to develop built upon some ignorance of cultural background that also may overlap a racial or religious difference.

The council has been extended precisely because of its valuable work in reaching out to communities across this province and precisely because it has made it its business to work closely with other advisory bodies to the government dealing with questions of the status of women, for example, and with particular questions of youth and seniors.

The review indicated a clear need that the society we have has made some great strides in tolerance, understanding and compassion but has more work to do. I am very proud to have a group of more than 60 people providing advice to this government through me on the key matters of how our society can better develop and understand and open even more doors for the participation of all groups in this society.

Mr. Grande: Does the minister not realize that many of the items she mentioned as being part of the work of the Ontario Advisory Council on Multiculturalism and Citizenship have absolutely nothing to do with the mandate of the council? If the minister goes back to 1973, when the council was established, and reads the mandate, she will see that a good number of the items she mentioned have nothing to do with its mandate.

Mr. Speaker: Question, please.

Mr. Grande: The convener of the education and youth concerns committee of that council states: The Ministry of Education has had seven important recommendations before it and, of the seven, one was looked at. It asks the Ministry of Education to consider the other recommendations. In other words, the government is doing nothing.

Julius Hayman, one of the distinguished council members, says in the July issue of Multiviews: "The government has allowed the council for the second time in its history to become dormant."

Mr. Speaker: Question.

Mr. Grande: Will the minister either look at and strengthen the mandate of the council or else scrap it completely?

Hon. Ms. Fish: I say again that I support the advice of that council on matters relating to immigration, refugee settlement, development and education -- which indeed it provides -- social integration, the breaking down of intolerance, racial problems and opportunities for youth. Those are the things that are the mandate of that council.

If the honourable member thinks that is not the advice this government should be receiving, then I say he is in the wrong age. That is the advice this government should receive, as it does, from more than 60 people representing that number of communities around this province.

PETITION

INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS

Mr. Kolyn: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the member for Dufferin-Simcoe (Mr. McCague), I would like to table the following petition to the Legislature:

"To the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"We, the undersigned electors of the Honourable George McCague, Chairman of Management Board, appeal to the Legislature to provide form and substance in law for the basic human right of parents in Ontario to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

"The present education policy provides no guarantees for the existence of independent schools that are one of the concrete expressions of this basic parental right.

"Furthermore, in a democratic and multicultural society parents should have the right to send their children to the schools of their choice without a financial penalty.

"We ask your help in reducing the unfair burden of what, in effect, is double taxation. We seek a just public education policy that supports all schools deemed to be operating in the public interest."

11:10 a.m.

MOTION

ESTIMATES

Hon. Mr. Wells moved that in the standing committee on social development, the time allocation for the estimates of the Ministry of Health be reduced to 12 hours, the Ministry of Community and Social Services be reduced to 11 hours and the estimates of the Ministry of Community and Social Services be taken up after completion of all other estimates referred to the committee.

Motion agreed to.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

House in committee of supply.

ESTIMATES, MINISTRY OF NORTHERN AFFAIRS (CONTINUED)

On vote 801, item 1, main office:

Mr. Stokes: Mr. Chairman, I am glad you are able to join us.

The Deputy Chairman: I am glad I am able to join the honourable member.

Mr. Stokes: I think the minister thought he had completed answering a lot of the questions we raised during our leadoff remarks. Just in case he has been further briefed on the questions brought to his attention by both the member for London North (Mr. Van Horne) and myself, I do not think he was finished.

The minister did not give a proper explanation of where his ministry stands on a very important issue. I refer to the crucial issue of tax sharing between the provincial government, the school board and the dormitory communities surrounding the development of the gold ore body at Hemlo. I know the minister met yesterday morning with a delegation from the Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association. I was not invited to that presentation, but I know it took place.

I know the minister said the situation was well in hand. He said that in very short order they would be coming up with a response to a resolution passed by the Lake Superior Board of Education. The resolution asked that they be given a mandate to extend the boundaries of that board so they could take advantage of the additional tax base at Hemlo and Winston Lake.

I am sure the minister would like to share with this committee and members of the House what he told that delegation from the Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association during its meeting with a committee of cabinet yesterday morning.

I also want to ask the minister where he stands on another point. I raised it during my leadoff remarks, and I suppose he inadvertently neglected to mention what part the Ministry of Northern Affairs is going to play in assisting and encouraging the building and completion of the Thunder Bay auditorium.

The minister did not mention that in his response to our leadoff questions, but he is well aware of what is going on. It is probably the only cultural endeavour anywhere in the history of Ontario or of any other jurisdiction that has been submitted to an environmental assessment. The minister will know his parliamentary assistant played a very active role in trying to block that.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: The member for Fort William (Mr. Hennessy) would not do that.

Mr. Stokes: I would have hoped he would not have, but the evidence is there that he certainly did not endorse it with a great deal of enthusiasm.

The minister, being the minister of everything in northern Ontario, knows the importance of the completion of that project, which has the accord of any thinking person in northern Ontario. It will be in the city of Thunder Bay, it is being built at considerable expense and it will have a very profound influence on the artistic and cultural life of everybody in northern Ontario. As I mentioned in my leadoff remarks, Dr. Charles Johnston is heading up the fund-raising drive. I know he has done an excellent job. Even in times of recession, when dollars are hard to come by, he is doing an admirable job, along with members of his committee.

One would have thought that this would be something the Minister of Northern Affairs could support very enthusiastically and give some tangible evidence by way of a substantial contribution to indicate that he does feel it is something worthwhile and something to which we should all lend our support. I hope the minister will take advantage of this opportunity to tell us where he stands. I know he is in favour of it -- he could not be otherwise -- but we would like a little bit more tangible evidence.

As I said earlier, I promised Charles Johnston I would bring it to the minister's attention at the earliest possible moment. I did so on Monday. The minister may have been looking to see whether there would be a ready source of funds he could tap in order that he could make a commitment and maybe even an announcement today. Perhaps Neil Stuart, under the gallery, could get on the horn and tell Charles Johnston that the democratic process here is alive and well and that this minister is interested in supporting worthwhile projects in Thunder Bay.

There are a number of other things I want to bring to the attention of the minister, but lest he thought he had completed his response to our leadoff remarks and questions, I want to disabuse him of that idea. Perhaps he could shed a little light on those two topics at this time.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Mr. Chairman, before I respond to the member for Lake Nipigon (Mr. Stokes), I want to put on the record my feelings with respect to our colleague the member for Rainy River (Mr. T. P. Reid). I said to the media this morning, and I think I should repeat it here, that the honourable member was a contributor to the examination of the estimates of the Ministry of Northern Affairs over the years; there is no question about that. He was a tough critic, but I think he was very positive and supportive of all the various programs, proposals and efforts of the ministry over the past seven years.

It was with regret that I read and heard on television last night that he would not be sitting in this Legislature again because of the way he was treated by his party, which disturbs me.

11:20 a.m.

Mr. Stokes: The minister does not let anything disturb him.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: It does. I think the member for Rainy River made a contribution. I think we should recognize that. I thought he would be here for the last two weeks to add a little spark and flavour and to contribute, but he will not be with us.

Mr. Stokes: He would not do it from the back row.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I know he would not do it from the back row. That is why he is not going to be here. It should be recognized that he will not be contributing to these estimates. I regret that sincerely.

With respect to the meeting we had with the Northern Ontario Municipal Association yesterday in the Resources Development policy field, it has been our custom to invite the opposition. I cannot understand what happened, or why the member for Lake Nipigon was not there. He has been there for the last five or seven years. I can assure the member it was just an oversight that he was not there.

Mr. Stokes: I was the most suprised guy in this Legislature when I saw Bob Myers and Neil McCaudrum sitting under the Speaker's gallery. I went over to say: "Welcome to Queen's Park. What are you doing here?" They said, "We met with a committee of cabinet with our NOMA brief."

As a matter of fact Ray Mercier, who is the deputy reeve of Nakina, was here this morning. Had they not taken the time to come and watch our proceedings, I would not have known the event had taken place.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I certainly apologize for that. I can assure the member it will not happen next year, if I am still around and if the member is still around.

Mr. Stokes: Thanks for nothing.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I will make sure his successor is there, because he will likely be sitting on this side of the House. I know who it will be, a fellow by the name of Jim Files. That is the name I have heard much of there.

It was an oversight and I apologize for it. It was a healthy discussion, a good two hours. It went on so long that some of the ministers had to leave in advance of the meeting terminating. It was the largest delegation NOMA has ever sent down to Queen's Park -- 31 in total.

The whole of northwestern Ontario was represented. The reeve of Terrace Bay was the only one from the Hemlo area, which surprised me. I thought the reeves from Manitouwadge, White River and Marathon would have been there because of the problems and the boom going on in that area, and the answers that they might want to obtain.

Mr. Stokes: I am sure he acquitted himself with distinction.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: He did. He asked a question about the boundaries, as to when they could see some approval. I pointed out to him that I had been in discussion with the Minister of Education (Miss Stephenson). She told me it would be approved within the next short period; that was her response. He was most pleased to hear that positive response to take back to Terrace Bay.

As to the question of the auditorium, I think the member is aware of my strong support for that cultural centre. I have always been in favour of it. There is no question about it. I believe northwestern Ontario needs something that will add to the quality of life not only in Thunder Bay but in all of northwestern Ontario.

Toronto has the O'Keefe Centre and Roy Thomson Hall. We should not be shortchanged in any way by not having an auditorium of that stature and magnitude. It would attract world -- is the member looking for money?

Mr. Stokes: Let us see the colour of your money.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I understand another request is coming down from the committee. We have indicated to them that, while the previous requests were not responded to in a positive way, which they expected, we would not close the door and would look at the request coming down. I cannot give you any guarantee that we will answer their call for additional funds, but if there is something that has a unique, northern Ontario --

Mr. Stokes: What does the minister mean by "additional funds"? The government has not given us anything yet.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Yes, we have. There is about $4 million or $5 million of provincial money.

Mr. Stokes: Where? There is not a penny from the Ministry of Northern Affairs.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Not from my ministry but from the government -- the government has been up front -- $4 million or $5 million has gone into that.

Mr. Stokes: I am talking about a commitment from the Ministry of Northern Affairs.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I know. I am talking about the overall contribution from the Ministry of Citizenship and Culture.

Hon. Mr. Ashe: A dollar is a dollar is a dollar.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: It comes from the same place. It was very substantial; in fact, it made it happen. If it had not been for the particularly large grant that was announced by the former minister, the auditorium would not have been down the road as it is today.

Nevertheless, it is there and I told them we would review carefully their latest request. If there is something there that has a unique northern Ontario problem attached to it, then it may well qualify for something we could address. I will certainly leave that door open; I will not close it.

Mr. Stokes: You have a reason. Now you want an excuse.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Yes, I need something substantive. Really, I do.

The member for London North asked me for a list of the communities that will be participating in the health recruitment tour next week and of the universities that will be visited. I would like to put those on the record right now so the municipalities can be recognized.

The following communities are participating in the tour: Atikokan, Chapleau, Dryden, Ear Falls, Fort Frances, Geraldton, Hearst, Hornepayne, Ignace, Iroquois Falls, Kapuskasing, Keewatin, Larder Lake, Manitouwadge, Marathon, Mattawa, Moosonee, Mount Forest, North Bay, Red Lake, Sault Ste. Marie, Schreiber, Shelburne, Sioux Lookout, Smooth Rock Falls, Temagami, Terrace Bay, Timmins, Vermilion Bay and White River.

Mr. Stokes: That just demonstrates the need, eh?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: It certainly does.

They will be visiting the University of Ottawa on October 22, Queen's University in Kingston on October 23, the University of Western Ontario on October 24, McMaster University in Hamilton on October 25, and the University of Toronto on October 26.

Members will see from this that it is a well-accepted program. The financial assistance we are able to provide makes it all happen, because we do assist them with their travel and with their accommodation when they get here. We have even assisted them in the last year or two with setting up their various displays.

I extend a very warm invitation to the members opposite to visit the group when it is here in Toronto on October 26, if they are around, or if they are in Hamilton on October 25, because it is well worth while to see these communities competing, and we are working very closely with the graduates of the medical campuses.

The member also inquired about the number of local services boards. I have that here and I can just pass it on to him. It is information on the opportunities in the service areas. This is the whole list. I will just pass the whole package over to the member.

Hon. Mr. Ashe: Mr. Chairman, quiet the noise out there.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: What is going on outside?

The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mancini): I think they are protesting against the policies of the incumbent government, but I am not sure.

Hon. Mr. Ashe: Not likely.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: They are down there applauding various programs of this government, I am sure, the great things we are doing.

Hon. Mr. Ashe: They are going to be there a long time. They may still be here next week if they are applauding all our accomplishments.

The Acting Chairman: Why did you want them quieted down, if that is the case?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Both members spent considerable time discussing alternative energy issues and uses in northern Ontario, and I have had my staff prepare a very lengthy report. I would like to put the whole report on the record because it is very informative and certainly lays out all the issues the members have touched on during their opening remarks. If members will bear with me, it is about 12 pages long, but I think they will find it very valuable.

Mr. Stokes: Are there copies of it?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I do not have copies; I am sorry. It is too bad. Can we get copies?

Hon. Mr. Ashe: Read it first, or they will not listen.

11:30 a.m.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: We are getting copies made for the members. Anyway, I can start.

The Ontario government has been working hard to develop ways of delivering energy service to remote northern communities.

Gasifier systems: both my ministry and the Ministry of Energy are very active in the gasification of peat as a replacement for fuel oil. The Ontario government is working on two systems: one, a full community-scale gasifier, and the other, a small commercial-scale gasifier. The former, designed and manufactured by Petrosun, is a 350-kilowatt unit and utilizes wood or peat. The system has been built and will be tested and monitored over the coming winter. Once testing is completed, it will be operated in a remote community, one that is yet to be determined.

The other unit is a small, 20-kilowatt gasifier that utilizes wood or peat to drive the peat briqueting machine, water pump, etc. The project cost is $150,000.

Mr. Stokes: That is not what the minister said on Monday. He said the economics were not there and it was not viable. Now he is telling us he is going to set up a demonstration model.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: These are only pilot projects. There is no economics on a large scale, but we are trying this as a pilot project just to see if it can be applied.

The data base studies have identified a large business potential in remote northern Ontario communities. About 80 per cent of 43 such communities surveyed have sufficient wood or peat resources to support biomass-fired electric generating systems. For example, in Cat Lake, peat reserves have been estimated at 1.5 million to two million tonnes within 10 kilometres of the community. The harvest system would cost about $1 million and operating costs about $100,000 a year. If developed fully, the estimated annual income to the community could be approximately $500,000 a year by the year 1990.

The member mentioned my trip to Italy. One of the outcomes of that trip is that we are now preparing two demonstrations. One is the small, commercial-scale gasifier just mentioned, and the other is a Totem engine to provide power and heat to a remote tourist lodge. That one I was not aware of, I have to admit.

The Acting Chairman: How did the minister enjoy the pasta when he was in Italy?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: The pasta was absolutely great. The wine was even better. We were in the Friuli area.

We are currently negotiating with a lodge owner in the northwest region who will provide a site and auxiliary facilities. The Totem engine will produce electricity and space heating at up to 90 per cent efficiency. It is proposed to operate on propane. Project cost is budgeted at $100,000.

In both cases, the ministry is providing the machinery and consulting services during the operation phase in exchange for the operator providing detailed reports on the economics of the system in actual use, so the economics have not been proven yet.

On the subject of wind diesel, the member for Lake Nipigon makes a pessimistic statement that we are no closer to the day. This is certainly not the case. The government will be installing a wind diesel system in Fort Severn this coming summer. It is news to me and I am sure to the member. It is very interesting. It is timed to coincide with Ontario Hydro's delivery of power to the community.

A little history may be in order. In March 1983, Ontario Hydro completed a study of the feasibility of utilizing wind diesel in selected Ontario remote communities. From a 16-community study, four were identified as holding the highest potential for a prototype demonstration and subsequent installation: Fort Severn, Fort Albany, Winisk and Attawapiskat, all of which are under federal jurisdiction. Fort Severn emerged as the best location. I think the member for Lake Nipigon mentioned that.

Mr. Stokes: They have been working on that for 10 years.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: The member finally struck a sensitive chord.

The Fort Severn installation is timed to coincide with Ontario Hydro's delivery of community electrification to that settlement. The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development is funding the diesel installation. The National Research Council, Energy, Mines and Resources, the Ministry of Energy and Ontario Hydro are all contributing to the wind component of the project. Equipment will be moved to Fort Severn this coming spring, with startup expected by August. It is great news. I knew the member would like it. I am pleased with it myself.

I have a few words by way of explanation on the announcement last week of the opening of the Heat Save North project in New Liskeard, the one that my parliamentary assistant was supposed to kick off and did not make it because of the fog, but the member for Timiskaming (Mr. Havrot) was there and he did the honours and did a great job for us.

Last year, the Ministry of Northern Affairs funded community-wide energy conservation projects in Chapleau and Geraldton. The participation rates in this Heat Save program were high, over 40 per cent in one community and over 50 per cent in the second. The annual energy savings resulting from these projects amount to about $6 for every dollar spent by government. As a result of this, we are now engaged with the Ministry of Energy in providing an expansion of the energy conservation health and advice program in a new Heat Save North program.

Following the New Liskeard clinic, we plan this winter to take the program to Haileybury, Cobalt and Latchford, Charlton, Englehart, Temagami, Fort Frances and Rainy River.

The member may also be interested to learn what we have been doing to assist northern residents to reduce their high household energy costs. The Ministry of Energy has all but completed a demonstration project in the Armstrong area to produce new house design plus refits on four more. Ten new houses are being completed in Armstrong by the local school board. Retrofits and renovations are complete with excellent results. The new houses use 80 per cent less energy than conventional designs, and results are to be published at the end of the monitoring period. Similar results were achieved as a result of new design in a housing construction program in the Windigo area.

The government is also active in providing energy conservation and oil substitution technologies in the institutional buildings field, including studies of waste heat recovery from diesel generator sets at Big Trout Lake, Sandy Lake and Attawapiskat hospital, where recovery resulted in a 50 per cent reduction in fuel oil use. In Armstrong, energy conservation retrofits have been done on the Ministry of Natural Resources headquarters building, as well as several other nonresidential buildings.

In Attawapiskat, Ontario Hydro has applied microprocessors to control the power output of diesel generator sets according to fluctuations in the level of electrical demand. A major off-oil initiative in northern Ontario is the extension of a national gas pipeline grid. Several studies have now been completed that are aimed at substantiating claims for federal assistance for pipeline construction under the distribution system expansion program.

DSEP support has been obtained for Elliot Lake, as was announced during the federal election campaign. Hemlo, on the north shore of Lake Superior, is currently in negotiations with Northern and Central Gas and the area municipalities. Red Lake and the Balmertown area are considered to have potential, whereas studies of the Parry Sound extension did not prove viable.

The member for Lake Nipigon will be interested to learn we have been experimenting with a new diesel design which promises substantial fuel savings. The Ministry of Energy has funded a Mechron-built, cycle-charge 2000 system designed to save 70 per cent of the fuel at the Telecom sites. The system has been built and tested and is now being installed at a Bell Canada site north of Sudbury.

This revolutionary system may also be used to save fuel in community electrification systems. The Ministry of Transportation and Communications, Bell Canada and Ontario Hydro are all interested in using the technology. A community-size system under 100 kilowatts is also being designed and evaluated under a Natural Research Council contract.

In the area of small hydro, we have been extremely active. Over the past year, the Ontario government has assisted in the installation of a system at a remote tourist lodge to show the benefit of small hydro to commercial enterprise in the north. We have also installed a system at Quetico Provincial Park to serve two Ministry of Natural Resources cabins and a Canada Customs office. This installation is a prototype remote design that is unique and takes northern engineering problems into account.

The Ministry of Energy has provided support for the Sault Ste. Marie Kinsmen Club for a 200-kilowatt, small hydro project at Kinsmen Park Falls as part of a seven-site federal-provincial small hydro demonstration program.

I have a list of the activities I have just announced. Maybe I should put them on the record. I will not repeat this, which is just a summary, but I will be glad to pass on copies to the members.

Mr. Stokes: I have it.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: The member has it. Fine. Thanks very much.

11:40 a.m.

I also have a copy of a letter that I sent to the chief of the Kingfisher Lake bands that I would like to pass over to the member for Lake Nipigon. In essence, it approves the airport in that particular community. That concludes my response.

Mr. Van Horne: Mr. Chairman, I would like to do two or three things. First, I would like to go to page 6 of the material sent to us just moments ago. The minister makes reference to the Ontario Hydro application of microprocessors to control the power output of the diesel generator in Attawapiskat.

The select committee on the Ombudsman had the pleasure of visiting Attawapiskat last January. Aside from the concerns that were presented to the committee, concerns directly related to the Ombudsman's office, the general conversation we had about living that far north and the lifestyle elicited comments about the very poor hydro supply. We heard comments such as late in the afternoon if one has the stove on and uses any other appliance, one pops a fuse. Aside from making the observation about microprocessors, I am wondering whether the minister can tell us anything about the determination of Ontario Hydro to better service communities such as Attawapiskat. Certainly, the feeling we came away with was that they did not have adequate hydro service.

That is one point I would like to make to the minister. If he would prefer to answer these as I raise them, then I will sit down and let him respond, or would he prefer that I give him a list?

In the leadoff, I made reference to topics to which the minister did not reply in his response on Monday of this week. I made reference to the population growth situation in the north which is very close to zero. I do not expect that the minister in his advanced years will be able to do much to increase the population personally, but perhaps he might give us some indication of what his ministry is trying to do, if anything, to attract and keep population in the north.

Beyond that, the minister was inclined to try to nail me to the wall on the equalization of milk costs when I pointed out to him that things such as beer and liquor cost the same in southern Ontario as they do in the north, yet many food commodities, and I used milk as an example, are of a higher cost in the north.

The minister's response was to ask what my party would do. I avoided that because the responsibility has to be the government's. However, I did go on to say our party supports some form of tax relief to accommodate people in the north and that this is a much more reasonable way to accommodate such problems as the higher cost of living. That precludes levelling out prices at supermarkets, individual corner stores, etc. The minister did not respond to that, and I would like to know if he has any comments or observations.

I also made reference to the employment situation in the north, particularly as it relates to young people. I asked questions about the royal commission. Coincidentally, after I made my comments a week ago, the Toronto Star had an editorial on that same theme suggesting the time has come for that commission to make its report.

I would like to know a lot of things about that report. I will share this question in specific detail as soon as the page returns. I sent this question out to be photocopied. I would like to know exactly how much money will have been spent on the Royal Commission on the Northern Environment, the Fahlgren report, or whatever it is going to be called when it is finally presented.

Mr. Stokes: About $10.5 million.

Mr. Van Horne: I was going to submit that the numbers range around the $10-million mark. My colleague says $10.5 million. I would not be at all surprised if it crept up to $11 million or $12 million before we finally get it. At any rate, I would like to hear something from the minister on the status of that report.

We realize the Attorney General (Mr. McMurtry) has some responsibility for that report. However, it is a report on the northern environment, and this minister here is the number one minister of the north. Therefore, I would expect he would have some information for us.

The minister, if I recall correctly, did not make any reference to the Allan report, which I drew to his attention in some detail. That is the report on the small secondary schools in remote communities of the north. Neither did he make any reference to a subject the member for Nipigon and I have addressed many times -- wild rice.

Beyond that, I would like to hear a little more about the determination of his ministry to encourage agricultural development in the north. Does he have a view of making the north more self-sufficient in so far as agriculture is concerned? It is my recollection that I did make reference to these in my leadoff and that the minister has not responded to them. Thus, I would like to give him the opportunity to do so.

Beyond that -- and I will do this later today or on Monday -- I have a series of questions that were put in Orders and Notices. These are questions regarding management consulting services, technical consulting services and so on. Many of these questions in Orders and Notices have not been answered, and I would like to put them back on the record again at some later point in the procedure.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Mr. Chairman, I might respond now to the member for London North. If he checks Hansard, I think he will see where comments were made with respect to the royal commission, the Allan report and wild rice. But I will repeat them and get them on the record again for the member.

He mentioned the question of poor hydro power in the Attawapiskat area. That is something I am personally very familiar with. I think it is fair to say we did look at the cost of running that line from Moosonee to Attawapiskat. When one realizes the cost would be in excess of $32 million to serve 450 customers, the economics just are not there to save something like $350,000 worth of fuel costs. That is something that will come down the road. I do not think it will come in these difficult economic times. However, it is one thing we will look at very carefully.

The member will notice that in my remarks on the energy question, we did identify Attawapiskat as one area that should be looked at with respect to these demonstration projects that do occur. They are difficult questions. We are very aware of the demand and need for improved hydro services. We hope these experiments they are pursuing in a number of different avenues will prove successful so that we could apply them in those remote Indian communities.

The question of zero growth is a difficult one. There is no question about that. I think we all realize there is not the massive growth in northern Ontario that many of us would have liked, worked for and hoped for.

One should realize what modern technology is doing in the resource industries. The mining industry is producing the same amount of metals it was 10 years ago with one third less staff and one third less miners. The same holds true in forestry operations. My father was involved in the sawmilling business, and I can remember the huge number of employees he used to have in the woods end of it and in the sawmill itself. Now the industry accomplishes the same production with about 30 per cent of the personnel. This is because of modern machinery and modern technology. That certainly does have an effect.

11:50 a.m.

I bring this question up at all our annual Northern Affairs conferences to try to compare what our growth is, or should be, in northern Ontario to that of places such as Manitoba, Alberta and Saskatchewan, and even the Northwest Territories and the Yukon because they are always interesting. Their populations are not growing at the great speed they would like and they have similar problems. We are not dissimilar to other parts of northern Canada.

What do we do to try to offset that? We have in our own ministry made improvements to the community with respect to infrastructure, hoping to broaden commercial land bases to attract new industries. In our northern community economic development program we work right with the municipalities to try to broaden and diversify their economic base. We work with some 30 communities now in northern Ontario through the northern community ecomomic development program.

We are also involved with the northern development program that was announced last June. It is going over exceptionally well. In fact, we have announced that some 30-odd projects and some 200 new permanent jobs will be established with that particular Nordev program.

The question of agriculture is on our minds and high on our list of priorities. I think we have a copy of that particular program. May I have a copy for the member for London North and the member for Lake Nipigon? I am sending over copies of the Nordev brochure, which I know the members will find very interesting, and also the AgriNorth brochure. This is a joint program the Ministry of Agriculture and Food and the Ministry of Northern Affairs brought together. It is a five-year, $10-million program to encourage development of agriculture right across northern Ontario in a number of different ways.

As I said in my opening remarks, AgriNorth is the good part of the Nordev program. The Nordev program expired last March. We have picked it up because it was well accepted and we felt it was doing a job. We have made some modifications to it and we think we have a very viable program that will work for northern Ontario farmers, dealing with land clearing and drainage and the types of development that really are required in northern Ontario. It is designed for northern Ontario farmers, by northern Ontario farmers and supported by a ministry from northern Ontario.

We are very active in those areas. I might say the member mentioned a tax incentive his party would apply to that part of the province. I want to remind him that we have a number of incentives right across the government such as the one for the capital construction program of hospitals. In southern Ontario the grant assistance is one third, but north of the French River five sixths of the capital cost is supported by the province.

Registering one's automobile costs $48 in southern Ontario, but it is only $24 in northern Ontario. The various unconditional grants in municipalities are much higher in northern Ontario than they are in southern Ontario. The legislative grants with respect to the school boards or weighting factor are very heavily weighted in favour of northern Ontario's conditions and needs.

There is a broad number of incentives that take the sting out and really soften the high cost of building, of moving around northern Ontario and, in some instances, living in northern Ontario.

I have just been informed that in the latest copy of Northern Ontario Business there is a very interesting story on the front page. Supported by the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations, they recently completed a survey of the major communities in northern Ontario. The results of that survey, as it relates to the high cost of food, was that more than 50 per cent of the communities surveyed in northern Ontario have lower prices in northern Ontario than they have right in here in Toronto. I pointed that out yesterday to the delegation of municipal leaders from northwestern Ontario when they brought up the question of equalizing the price of gasoline.

We did a survey about six months ago. I think the member for Lake Nipigon heard about that survey. In at least the major centres along the Trans-Canada corridor, I think we were one tenth of a point cheaper on a litre of gasoline than in Toronto.

I was quick to point out yesterday that did not apply in Nakina, Red Lake, Ear Falls, some of the places off the beaten track; there is no question about that. However, it was encouraging for me as a northerner.

Mr. Stokes: That was after the people asked, "Where does the Minister of Northern Affairs buy his gas?"

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I buy it in Hudson. It is a little more expensive than in Toronto. The volume of sales in Hudson does not compare with the volume of sales that would be enjoyed by one of the filling station operators in Toronto.

It is encouraging to me periodically to see that these surveys indicate we are not that far off base. I think we have made some great strides in the last five or 10 years when we can stand in this Legislature and point to the fact that the price of fuel and gasoline is not far off. I think it is because of the efforts of the members of this House who have constantly focused on the disparity, discrepancy or whatever one wants to call it that was being applied to northern Ontario. I think the gap has narrowed.

Two instances referred to are the cost of food and the cost of gasoline. These are moving ahead. I think our efforts to bring these issues constantly before the public and the private sector will certainly do something to encourage competition and keep us on an even balance with the rest of the province.

The member mentioned the cost of the Royal Commission on the Northern Environment. I want to point out that is not a responsibility of and does not relate directly to the Ministry of Northern Affairs, although we are very much concerned about the report.

Mr. Stokes: You mean to disband that.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I want to say something about that. I think it is unfair for the members to criticize the royal commission before the report has come down. One cannot criticize something that is not there.

The commission did make some reports, albeit a little late. I referred to the Detour Lake road. It came down with its report. I do not know what the final cost will be, but the press reports I have read recently indicate it will be around $10 million. I am not sure. I urge the member to bring this matter before the Attorney General.

Mr. McClellan: The public accounts committee.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Or the standing committee on public accounts. The Attorney General is directly responsible for royal commissions of this government and they report directly to him. I am hopeful something positive will come from that report.

I think the members across the floor look forward to something positive. It will be something we can get our teeth into and something that will further improve the quality of life for the people, including our native people who live north of the 50th parallel.

I was personally involved from day one with the Commission of Inquiry regarding Small Schools in Northern Ontario. There was my involvement with the member for Lake Nipigon and the many meetings and telephone calls I received from that area during the explosive discussions that were going on. It was most encouraging to have the Minister of Education respond to our request in short order by looking at the situation along the north shore.

12 noon

A fellow northerner, Rodger Allan from the Sudbury area, who is very knowledgeable and has been in the education business for years, took on the task, not only to look at what was happening in the Schreiber, Terrace Bay, Marathon and Manitouwadge areas but also to branch out and visit Ear Falls, Red Lake and Dryden to incorporate some of the requirements that were needed in the education system, particularly in the secondary education system. It was obvious that additional dollars were required and that we were falling behind the rest of the province in delivering some programs because of the small student population.

The assistance we have come up with is very positive. The Minister of Education has come forward with $1 million this year. She has also brought up to northern Ontario eight consulting specialists, who will work very closely with those small boards that cannot afford this type of expensive service, support and direction.

Since this was a unique northern Ontario problem, we as a ministry felt we could assist here with the strong endorsement of the Minister of Education, and we came forward with $3 million in addition to her $1 million. As a result, we have a $4-million program to answer the capital requirements of those 16 separate school boards.

I have just been told that our assistance of $3 million over the next three years will go to 26 separate high schools right across northern Ontario.

We spotted a problem, we moved quickly and we responded not only with support but also with our dollars. That is what the ministry is all about.

I know the acceptance from the school boards was very positive. We indicated to them that we would be prepared to look at their requests as soon as they directed them to us. They will be examined very closely by the Ministry of Northern Affairs in co-ordination with the Ministry of Education. It is moving ahead; in fact, I hope to make the first announcement about our direct assistance by the end of October.

While we are answering some of those problems, I have to admit that I personally do not see the end of the problem within the next three years; I think the problem is greater than the three-year span we have looked at. But we have targeted for at least three years; it may go on to five or six. If the need is still there and we have not rectified all the requirements, we will continue our financial support.

With regard to wild rice, I think the honourable members are aware that there are certain areas in northern Ontario which the Ministry of Natural Resources has licensed and is continuing to license to the general public, be they native or non-native, particularly in northeastern Ontario.

In the northwest, the questions and the discussions are still going on with the native people concerning the areas they have traditionally harvested. There is no question, as we have said on so many occasions, that the traditional harvesting areas are theirs in perpetuity as far as we are concerned because it is part of their religion; besides being an economic base for them, it is part of their way of life. The Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Pope) has said repeatedly that they will be protected.

We have to look at those areas outside the traditional harvesting areas and come forward with a licensing program that will encourage natives and non-natives to develop the high potential that is there in northwestern Ontario, because it is the high-potential area for wild rice.

I want to point out that three or four years ago we in our ministry identified a need to encourage research with respect to what we think is a very lucrative food product that can be grown exclusively in northwestern and northeastern Ontario.

For this reason, we engaged the services of Professor Peter Lee, who had been working with a professor at the University of Manitoba for a number of years. The name of the professor in Manitoba escapes me, but Peter Lee became well respected; he is now recognized as one of the leading authorities in the development of wild rice on the North American continent. It is because we have funded that research program at Lakehead University at about $100,000 a year for the last four years now, and it will likely continue for a few years yet.

It is very important not only that we come up with an acceptable, manageable licensing system that takes in all the native and non-native population but also that we have the research available in northwestern Ontario. I want to commend Lakehead University for taking the initiative and providing the necessary space and support staff that Peter Lee needs. They do provide a service up there right now. If one has a certain area one would like to develop as a wild rice producing area, they will do the soil testing. If one sends a soil sample to them, Lakehead University will do a breakdown and give a full report on the type of soil and whether it will support the development of a wild rice crop.

In my opinion, that is moving very effectively. In the next year or two, I think members will see a turnaround in the whole question of the development of wild rice in northwestern Ontario. During this five- or six-year moratorium, I think we have done ourselves more harm than good with respect to even the native people and our position in the world marketing system. California now is developing wild rice and finds it more lucrative than growing white rice. In Minnesota, the industry has grown by leaps and bounds. Saskatchewan has gone ahead in the past three or four years, and Alberta is getting into the act. We have lost ground.

Mr. Van Horne: Are they not catering to gourmet food types?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Yes, they are; and that is one of the fallacies. I get very annoyed when I go to an airport and I see wild rice, which I know was sold to a company for $5 or $6 a pound, priced at $15 or $17 a pound. That is gouging. The gourmet aspect of it has been blown out of proportion. Average people now can buy wild rice at a price they can afford to pay. It is not out of anybody's reach any more.

Mr. Stokes: How much is being charged for it?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Around $5.50 or $6 a pound. In Winnipeg, just last week, I saw $15.95 being charged for some rice for which I know they did not pay more than $6. That is a little much. It is like selling diamonds. They are doing us a disservice by putting a high price on it and putting it in the minds of a lot of people that it is just out of reach.

Mr. Van Horne: By way of observation, a year or two ago the minister was kind enough to provide two samples of California and northern Ontario rice. My wife and I are very fond of this commodity. We do not consider ourselves gourmets in any sense, but we certainly enjoyed the Ontario variety. I do not say that to pat anyone on the back, but it is far superior --

Mr. Stokes: What happened this year? Was the crop down?

Mr. Van Horne: Yes, we did not get any. We are out of it, by the way. It is far superior to the California wild rice.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I am pleased to hear that. I have to admit that I have never tried the California rice. I remember I received a number of packages that I distributed to my cabinet colleagues just to make them aware of what was happening out there. I am pleased to hear our product is far superior.

I wonder if the member has tried the canned wild rice.

Mr. Van Horne: No.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I will make sure before these estimates are over that he gets a sample of the canned wild rice from the great part of northwestern Ontario that I represent. He will enjoy it.

Mr. Stokes: From Ben Ratuski, the minister's campaign manager.

12:10 p.m.

Hon. Mr. Berniem: My campaign manager does an excellent job, not only as a campaign manager but also in producing and marketing wild rice. If the member is in the Kenora area in the fall, it would pay him to stop by; he would really be interested in seeing his operation.

It is just a super operation, ideally built in Keewatin. It has a gravity feed system, because he operates off a high cliff near the Winnipeg River. There is lots of water and gravity feed. It is well designed. They put a lot of wild rice through there. They do a lot of processing for other people, not just for themselves. A lot of the bands are bringing in large quantities of rice. He processes it and they put it in their own packages and sell it. It is an industry that has to grow; it knows no limits.

Mr. Stokes: The minister said he would share with me a copy of a letter he sent to Chief Simon Sakakeep on June 25, 1984. I thought it was a letter he was sending confirming what he said on Monday. This one is old hat. The minister thanked him for his band council resolution concerning the request for the construction of an airstrip at Kingfisher and gave a lot of reasons why he was not going to act at this time.

If the minister will look at page 3236 of Hansard for last Monday, October 15, he said in referring to Kingfisher: "They just wanted a helping hand to move forward. It was a nice, positive, sincere attitude, and we were pleased to respond to their request for an airstrip, which will go ahead as quickly as possible."

I thought what the minister was doing was confirming in writing what he had said. I took the trouble to call Kingfisher after he made that remark. I did not get a chance to talk to Chief Sakakeep, but I spoke to Noah Winter, who is the band administrator. He said, "We have heard nothing, but we are awfully pleased to hear that he has agreed to build an airstrip."

I thought that was what the minister was doing -- confirming what he had said here during the estimates. I am not being critical, but there has been a breakdown in communications some place. When are we going to get the letter confirming that the ministry is prepared to go ahead with the construction of the airstrip at Kingfisher?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I am just getting a copy of the approval letter. It has all gone through. We brought out the previous letter by mistake. The approval letter has gone out and the airport is going ahead.

Mr. Stokes: I am sorry the Minister of Citizenship and Culture (Ms. Fish) has left, because her ministry is responsible, through the Indian community branch, for delivering some services, even though it has a very modest budget. To the extent that the provincial government has any responsibility in such matters, it rests with her. This is so even though in policy matters and in liaison between this government and the federal government, the responsibility rests with the Provincial Secretary for Resources Development (Mr. Sterling).

The minister never responded to that. Given the nature of his riding, I had thought he would concern himself with that. He knows the problems that native people in the north have in breaking through the bureaucratic maze, and he does get involved peripherally. It seems to me he will jump in and he will jump out, jump in and jump out. If there is some political mileage to be gained he will jump in -- that is human nature -- and if it is something that is more than he wants to get his teeth into, he will do some fed-bashing. Now that we have David Crombie at the federal level, the days of fed-bashing are over, and somebody has to look after the legitimate needs and aspirations of native people any place there is a void.

I want to refer to a couple of for-instances, and I am sure the minister will know what I mean. We represent, as does he and the member for Cochrane North (Mr. Piché), all of the real north of Ontario. It does not matter to the people in those remote native communities whether one is a federal or provincial member. If one is accessible and shows a willingness to listen and assist them wherever possible, they do not differentiate between federal and provincial responsibilities.

On October 5, I wrote a joint letter to the minister and to the Minister of Transportation and Communications (Mr. Snow), and correspondence was attached. The minister will know what I am talking about. I am not going to bore the committee with all the details, but I say:

"Enclosed are copies of correspondence I have received from the Fort Hope Indian Band. This is a continuation of the ongoing saga in the efforts of the Fort Hope lndian Band to secure a reliable source of gravel of an acceptable quality. This is necessary to maintain the Fort Hope airstrip which the minister has responsibility for, as well as the needs of the band, the Department of Indian Affairs, and National Health and Welfare.

"I am sure you are both aware of the urgency in this matter and the necessity to identify an adequate source of good-quality gravel for the long-term needs of all concerned. Please may I hear from you at your earliest convenience."

That is one issue.

I want to remind the minister that when we travel up north we get inundated with requests from senior citizens to assist them in establishing their date of birth or their date of marriage to qualify for old age security or the Canada pension plan. This is a never-ending process for me. I go to great lengths to try to get the registrar general down here to search his records.

I have had cases where people 70 years of age and older are unable to collect old age security, which is a right of every senior citizen in the province, but because somebody did not take the trouble to preserve the records, or because there has been a fire in a church someplace, those records were destroyed.

The office of the registrar general, which is an emanation of the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations, is at a loss to know what to do. Then we go to Ottawa and ask whether they will do a search of the census records and whether they will accept that and somehow assist those people in coming up with proof of age, proof of marriage or something like that.

If the minister deals with these problems personally, or if he talks to his staff who are responsible for the constituency problems he has asked them to assist with, he will know this is an ever-increasing problem.

I want to read into the record a very good letter that I got from Reverend Ralph K. Rowe, who is a priest-pilot with the Anglican church; he has his headquarters in Big Trout Lake, and he travels far and wide in the minister's riding. He wrote me a letter dated September 27. He says:

"I understand that you too have been trying to help Henry Frogg of Long Dog Lake ... (not to be confused with Henry Frogg of Kasabonika) to establish his age for pension purposes.

"We have searched the available church records and cannot find any record of his baptism, nor can Moosonee diocese synod office. Some records have been destroyed by a church fire at Central Patricia and it may be Henry's records were included there.

"To the best of Henry's knowledge, he was born at or near Long Dog (on the Asheweig River system) about May 14, 1918. His father was Felix and his mother Juliet, née Winter. He has been told he was baptized at Fort Hope (Eabamet Lake) by the Reverend Mr. Fairies, who visited from York Factory, Manitoba, by canoe or dog team. Fort Hope was in the diocese of Moosonee at the time, but Mr. Fairies visited from Keewatin diocese.

"There is no record of Henry's baptism in the York Factory register, which is in the archives at our synod office in Kenora. Quite possibly, Mr. Fairies entered the baptism in one of the Moosonee registers which have been destroyed by fire.

"However, in a discussion with the Lieutenant Governor of Ontario, Mr. Aird, at Big Trout Lake a year or so ago, it was mentioned that there is a procedure by which age can be established at least to the satisfaction of the pension office by means of the Canada statistics survey taken every five years." Actually, it is taken every 10 years, as members know. "Could this not be done for Henry and a host of others who are having difficulty proving their age?

12:20 p.m.

"At the meeting with the Lieutenant Governor, I protested (and Mr. Aird reflected the same feeling) that the onus for the proof of age should rest on the individual.

"Especially in remote regions like northwestern Ontario, both the federal and the provincial governments have been slow to establish the records and services which were accomplished in other parts of Canada many years earlier.

"It was not until after the treaty of 1929 that attempts were made to have suitable records and band lists, and even today these band lists are filled with numerous errors.

"Surely if the government demands proof of age for pension and other services, the onus should be on the government to have provided the means of proving age, and where it has been remiss in establishing records (as in the case of northwestern Ontario), then some reasonable alternative, such as using Canada statistics or the use of affidavits and statements of elders, etc., should be acceptable for the purposes of establishing proof of age or residency.

"The native people especially, and anyone else with language differences, are really handicapped by the bureaucracy as it exists. I myself have spent many hours writing on behalf of many over the years. I can personally attest to the fact that many have had to wait for years for the pension to which they were lawfully entitled because they could not prove their age to the satisfaction of our bureaucracy. Some, unfortunately, have died before any such benefits arrived. Surely this is not right; surely it goes against the whole spirit behind the establishment of the pension plan.

"I would appreciate whatever you can do to help for Henry and for many others in similar circumstances.

"Thank you and God bless.

"Signed: Ralph Rowe."

If the minister looks in his own files he will see that his staff spend a goodly length of time trying to help these senior citizens living in remote communities to establish proof of birth, proof of age, proof of marriage. I have written to Mr. David Smith of old age security and asked him to hold a tribunal at which he could go up there and say: "Okay, there are no records. It is obvious that this person is well over age 65."

But let us have a tribunal so they could have a meeting of their peers and establish beyond any reasonable doubt that those people are entitled to old age security or Canada pension plan. There are a lot of them who are not getting it because government -- and I do not distinguish; just "government" -- cannot get its act together.

There is one other. This is a letter to Dr. Jim Parr on October 5. I am not sure the minister received a copy of it; it is probably unfair to ask him. We got a letter from the Wapekeka band; it used to be known as Angling Lake. They had been promised the signal from TVOntario. Apparently the dish is already in place; the tower is already in place, I am advised; but they are told they are going to have to wait until next spring for a hookup.

The minister finances a goodly portion of this program. It is a program I appreciate very much and I know all the communities that are enjoying it or are soon to enjoy it appreciate it very much. I am not going to read the letter into the record, but Chief Anderson pointed out in it that the reserve has very limited forms of communication. At the present time it receives service only from Wawatay by radio, and then it gets the Wawatay News about once a month, and that is the extent of any communication with the outside world.

They are extremely anxious to be hooked up to TVOntario at Angling Lake at the earliest possible date. They have been advised they will not receive service until the spring of 1985. It is our understanding that TVOntario has installed the dish or the tower. It is hard to convince those people that they should have to wait, even though most of the technology seems to be there. They wonder why they have to wait for a hookup until somebody visits the community some time in the spring of 1985.

I have voluminous files on the problems people have in the north. There is no obvious direction in which to point those specific problems. I regret that the Minister of Citizenship and Culture (Ms. Fish) is not here because, through her native community branch and its director, Fred Boden, one would hope that all the native people would feel free to make contact with them, to write to them; but they do not have the staff or budget; they are just playing around the edges.

The minister knows this from his travels to the far north. Those people quite often fall between two stools. They wonder: "Is it a provincial thing? Can we rely on the provincial jurisdiction to act as an advocate on our behalf, or is it a federal problem?"

I can say that 50 per cent of my work day is taken up with federal problems. I think it is fair to say that at least 50 per cent of everything I do as the provincially elected member for Lake Nipigon deals with federal problems.

That is a fact of life. I am not going to say to those people: "I am sorry, but that is not in my jurisdiction. However, when you find something that fits four-square within what is traditionally expected of a provincial member, I will do it; but this is not in my jurisdiction". One just does not do that when one represents ridings such as those of the minister and myself. One does whatever one can for those people.

I could spend the rest of the time allocated bringing out "for instances." I am not saying that the minister personally should do it, but we do not have a northern affairs officer, for instance. I know the excellent work the northern affairs officers do in the north. I think it is fair to say that those officers spend about 50 per cent of their time dealing with federal issues or providing information with regard to federal programs. They do an excellent job.

Why could the minister not do it in the absence of acceptance of responsibility by the Provincial Secretary for Resources Development (Mr. Sterling), who gets paid to do those kinds of things? If one goes over to the Whitney Block, the first door one sees is marked, "Provincial Secretary for Resources Development, Indian branch," or "Indian affairs."

If one asked the Provincial Secretary for Resources Development or his predecessor, they would not have a clue. They could tell a little about some tripartite function the secretariat has. However, if one asked them to get down to the nitty-gritty, roll up their sleeves and do something meaningful, useful and constructive on behalf of our first citizens, they would not know which end was up.

I am sure the minister does not go to them with the problems. I am sure that very rarely does he ever think it worth while to go to his colleague the Minister of Citizenship and Culture. She will do something with regard to cultural needs, but if one talks about the social and economic problems of our first citizens, and wants to get some assistance through the native community branch of that ministry, one should just forget it.

12:30 p.m.

The Minister of Citizenship and Culture is coming in now. I am not going to repeat what I said. She can read it in Hansard.

In the absence of any leadership through the native community branch of her ministry, and in the absence of any responsibility one had hoped the Provincial Secretary for Resources Development would take to assist our first citizens who find themselves in a very difficult position when wading through the bureaucratic maze, will the minister at least begin to think about the possibility of setting up northern affairs officers, or an officer?

Maybe there could be one for northeastern Ontario and one for northwestern Ontario. Then elected members of this assembly could say:

"Here is a real problem with senior citizens being able to establish proof of age. Here is a real problem with TVOntario. Here is a real problem with a band that is having difficulty identifying a reliable source of gravel."

We know what the problems are, but would the minister consider setting up an officer of northern affairs? They do a heck of a good job in the populated areas, but very rarely, if ever, do they get to a northern reserve to say, "We are here to provide a service for everybody in Ontario, regardless of where they may live."

I would like a response from the minister on that.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Mr. Chairman, I know full well how the member for Lake Nipigon feels. I share his frustration on many occasions in dealing with the problems he has outlined. There is no question the jurisdictional area between the federal and the provincial governments will have to be more clearly defined some day.

I go up there on a regular basis. I try to get there in the winter and in the summer; maybe twice in the summer. Even I find it difficult moving in and trying to help with economic development. Sometimes we are beyond our jurisdiction. The airstrip development program is a good example. If we had waited until we resolved the jurisdictional responsibility for airstrips and the application of that facility on a reserve -- because some of them are on the reserve and some are off the reserve and there is just an agreement through a band council resolution, which is a very loose arrangement -- if we had not charged ahead and accomplished that, we would not have the airstrip development program in place.

With that program, the improvement to those municipalities is absolutely unreal. They now have streets; most of them have an airstrip, hydroelectric power and street lights. In Sandy Lake, they have 90 cars and only about four miles of road. Now they only want traffic signs; it is so difficult. That program answered a need, but on the reserve we are sometimes told by the federal authorities: "This is our responsibility. Do not interfere." We have to tread carefully and tiptoe through the tulips. There is no question about it.

Mr. Van Horne: Just charge down to Ottawa and hug them all.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I want to speak to that point, because I intend to go down to see the new Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. I think they have to --

Mr. Van Horne: The minister may be able to catch him in Toronto.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Or in Toronto, yes. We should work out a better relationship because we have a winter road program --

Mr. Van Horne: The minister has faith in him even though he is from Toronto. At the same time we get criticized for --

Hon. Mr. Bernier: The jury is still out. He has to be given a chance. It is such a difficult task. There is no question it is a difficult task because he has to apply policy right across the province. The jurisdictional aspect is a problem. I will try to lean on the federal authorities. Now that we have an enlightened administration there we may be able to sort out some of these annoying and frustrating problems to which the member for Lake Nipigon refers. Gravel is one of them; just a simple supply of gravel.

The Ministry of Transportation and Communications does have a 50 per cent cost-sharing program for the maintenance of the roads, but its 50 per cent must come out of its core funding. Maybe the time has come when we should lean on the federal government to increase its core funding or to designate to certain things some of those funds out of the core funding that goes to a band.

I have several bands in my area in which the core funding is all moved into housing needs because the housing needs are so desperate, and this is a total federal responsibility. I am sure the member realizes this. It puts all its money into housing and there is nothing with which to do the streets. There are not even a few dollars to look after the town recreational centre, fix the town dock or something like that; it has all gone into housing because the need is so desperate. I intend to bring this forward to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, the Honourable David Crombie.

Concerning the winter roads aspect, we made a commitment with the former administration that if it would cut a right of way on a land-based route, an alignment, and the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Ministry of Northern Affairs would assist, with the co-operation of the bands, in defining the alignment. This is what we have done in the Petahbun area, from Sandy Lake down to Pikangikum and Poplar Hill into Red Lake. They were advanced about $1.2 million to clear a 30-foot right of way on land because they lost two or three of their fellow workers on the ice.

Mr. Stokes: You are just throwing good money after bad going back at it every year, it seems to me. All you have to do is talk to the people who are responsible for building those roads on a regular basis; talk to Billy Koval of Pickle Lake.

I had some liquid libation with him not very long ago. We were talking about that in Pickle Lake, and he said some of those communities do not want direct access. This is the problem the minister had at Round Lake.

But if you build a permanent road and have winter roads branching off, it maintains -- I hate to use this word -- the isolation they want. They think that by not providing an all-weather, permanent road they will avoid some of the social problems they think are bound to crop up if you can get cars, booze and all the other things in.

The minister has spent $500,000 a year for goodness knows how many years providing winter access that disintegrates because half of them are over lakes. It seems to me that Billy Koval has a good idea. If you get a good road alignment, something you can build on solid ground, once you have built it you have built it and all you have to do from then on is maintain it. If they still want to maintain that degree of isolation, then we can build winter roads to those various communities branching off the main road.

But, for heaven's sake, do not go back and spend $500,000 every year. When the spring thaw comes, the road disappears and they are right back knocking on the minister's door again in the fall to say, "Build me another road at another $500,000." That is not a good use of public funds; it serves nobody's interest well. If you said, "This winter let us build 50 or 75 miles of good road on good, solid ground." You would finish that and then branch off it -- whether it is the Windigo, Kayahna or the Petahbun tribal council, you are doing something that is going to be there and is going to have some permanency; it makes some sense.

12:40 p.m.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: We certainly agree with that, and that is the route we are taking. As I said earlier, we have the route and the alignment clearly identified now on the west side. They have about 40 per cent of that road completed and cut, but they need another infusion of additional funds.

The route we took in our argument to the federal government was that this was a job creation program. The federal government was going across Canada looking for Mickey Mouse programs and projects to spend money on to create jobs.

This was a natural. Cutting that alignment for hundreds of miles on a proper alignment is something they can do and do themselves, and they did. They engaged cutters from Sandy Lake, Poplar Hill and Deer Lake. They got about 50 per cent done.

We have made a commitment that if they will cut that alignment on the land we will accept the responsibility as a province of putting the road through every winter. Putting that access through would be a lasting investment and a wise expenditure of public funds. I intend to follow up on that issue with the new federal minister.

Getting further into the member's comments with respect to the problems of the elderly, I share with him the same problems he is having. In my area at Sandy Lake and Deer Lake, every time I go up there a long list of elders come to me who are having difficulty identifying their ages. They are caught up in the bureaucratic requirements of baptismal certificates, birth certificates, identification, family bibles and school books. A lot of those things they did not have and had not even heard of.

On this last trip I took in late August a similar problem surfaced at Sandy Lake and Deer Lake. It was so severe and the list was so long that I instructed one of our Ministry of Northern Affairs officers to go up and spend several days in the Sandy Lake, Deer Lake and Pikangikum area to sort out that problem.

Merv Wilson, our Northern Affairs officer, did that and is working on a number of issues with the band and those individuals. We are prepared to do that for the member if he has another area that has a sizeable number of problems. It is difficult to do that for one or two problems, but if there were five or six, we would send up a Northern Affairs officer. I would make that commitment to any other member. I do not know if the member for Cochrane North (Mr. Piché) is here or not, but we will certainly do that.

These things are so difficult to resolve. One has to go onsite to get as much factual information as one can. It cannot be done by letter because it is most difficult to explain oneself and get the proper response in a letter. If one is onsite, talking eyeball to eyeball, so to speak, to the Indian chiefs and the other elders, one can sort out all the various bits of information, then go out and try to find all the other information to make a valid case and make a proper application.

If a member has some areas that require this type of personal attention, we will direct a Northern Affairs officer into that area.

In my experience over the years, this problem is diminishing slightly. I can remember going into Sandy Lake 16 or 17 years ago, and coming out with a list of 25. Now I am coming out with a list of five or 10. As we are getting older, I guess they are getting a little less.

Mr. Stokes: They are dying off while they are waiting for old age pensions.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: While they are waiting, yes.

I found the elders were most helpful in sorting out this problem.

Mr. Stokes: The problem was not resolved; it just disappeared.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: On the one side it is very comforting to resolve the issue, and they get a back cheque for one year's pension or a year and a half's pension. It is a sizeable cheque, but the suffering that has occurred in the meantime is not offset sometimes by that back pay.

Mr. Stokes: I just got one for Henry Frogg. We got him back pay of something like $3,500. Now we are trying to do the same thing for his wife.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I see.

As to the question of Angling Lake and TVOntario, I am pleased the member has recognized that excellent program we have. He has heard me say it many times. We will service about 170 pockets of population, as I call them, because that is what they are.

Two teams move in. The power and dish team go in and put up the cement, put in the power and aim the dish in the right direction. Then the technicians come in and put the last bit of technology in place.

I would suspect the problem at Angling Lake could be the absence of hydro power. I am not sure, but if that is the case, we will follow it up with TVO. We are checking right now, so we will have an answer for the member.

Mr. Stokes: They do not have community power, if that is what the minister means.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Or sufficient power of some sort. That may be a problem.

We have not resolved the question of Angling Lake with regard to the airstrip. I think the member was aware that since it is so close to Big Trout Lake, there was a feeling that to develop an airstrip at Angling would not be economical. They would sooner have a road connecting them to Big Trout Lake.

Mr. Stokes: Yes.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I think that is one area we will be looking at. I do not have any answers with regard to the hydro question, but we will see if we can get that for the member.

Gravel is certainly a problem the Ministry of Transportation and Communications is grappling with. It tries to work very closely and co-operatively with the band using the equipment they have, but sometimes the road requirements are quite lengthy. I know at Sachigo Lake they want to build a road of something like 20 or 25 miles. With a grader, a couple of trucks and one tractor, it is very difficult to build on that terrain and that is causing some problems. I will take that up with the federal minister too and make that point.

Mr. Stokes: I wish the minister would, because I know he is interested and concerned. He will put it high on his list of priorities. I know the Ministry of Transportation and Communications is very co-operative, as is Hydro, as long as the federal government will come up with the bucks. With respect to maintaining airstrips that benefit all of us, without them we would not be able to get in and out of there. Other agencies and ministries of government rely on the airstrip program for easy travel in and out of those communities.

As the minister so rightly pointed out earlier, they have so many varied and diverse problems. If they are going to do something with regard to roads, they have to take away from their housing program and there is not enough money. I am hoping that at the first opportunity the minister gets to sit down with David Crombie he will sort of reflect the conversation we have been having here that there has to be a better liaison.

The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development will say: "No, we just do not have any funds for that at this particular time. It is going to have to wait its turn. We will give them block funding. They can spend it on housing if they want and let their airstrip or the provision of gravel go down the drain. We cannot embark upon educational or recreational facilities or water and sewer because there is only so many dollars to go around. It us up to the community to decide where it is going to spend it.''

It becomes very frustrating for those people. I just hope the minister will take advantage of the first opportunity he has to sit down and talk to David Crombie about this. The problem is not going to go away; it is going to get worse. If we are ever going to reach the point that wherever they demonstrate an ability to run their own affairs, Indian government, the sooner we let them make their own mistakes the better and in the process we hope they will not make the same mistake twice.

The sooner there is a realistic look at the magnitude of the problem in the north and the sooner the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development accepts its responsibility somewhere in keeping with and approximating the nature and the severity of those problems, the better it will be for the minister, myself, native people and everybody else. I hope the minister will undertake to do that.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: I certainly intend to do so. If I could have a page here, I would like to send a copy of my approval letter that was sent to the chief of Kingfisher Lake band to the member for Lake Nipigon. Maybe the honourable member would like to read it into the record. I am sure his people up there would be most pleased.

Mr. Stokes: It is a calculated risk reading it without having vetted it first.

Mr. Van Horne: He is setting the member up.

Mr. Stokes: He is setting me up. I am sure he is.

Mr. Nixon: You have your own letters you can read.

12:50 p.m.

Mr. Stokes: Yes. We spoke about that earlier.

To get it on the record, I hope it says what I think it says. It is to Simon Sakakeep, chief of the Kingfisher Lake band.

"Dear Chief,

"Thank you for your generous hospitality and the opportunity to meet with you and your council during my visit to Kingfisher Lake August 29, 1984.

"I was particularly pleased with the progressive attitude of your community and the economic development projects the band has undertaken. I commend you and Noah Winter for your initiative.

"I recognize that the construction of an airport at Kingfisher Lake is a high priority. Accordingly, I am pleased to confirm my ministry will finance the development of such a facility under the remote airport capital construction program. But here is the qualification. "The timing for implementation of this undertaking depends on the availability of funds, but I am hopeful that the necessary equipment can be transported to Kingfisher Lake during the winter of 1985-86 for construction start in 1986."

That is not this winter at all. A year from now the minister will think about getting the equipment in for a start in 1986. That is just what I complained about; that is what caused me to raise it in the first place.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: They are pleased with that.

Mr. McClellan: I guess we will have to go up there again.

Mr. Stokes: When I got that commitment from the minister and read it into the record, he said, "It was a nice, positive, sincere attitude, and we were pleased to respond to their request, which will go ahead as quickly as possible." That is as quickly as possible?

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Mr. Chairman, I should point out that we are building an airstrip at Cat Lake. That is moving full steam ahead and it should be finished by next fall. It might be used this fall, but --

Mr. Stokes: They used to build two every year and now they are building one every two years.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: No; Muskrat Dam is coming on this year and Kingfisher is next year. I must point out again that Kingfisher would have been on stream earlier had we received the band council resolution earlier, but they told us they were not interested. In addition to this, we are putting more money into the program because we are doing Ogoki besides that.

Mr. Stokes: The minister said last Monday, "The reason we did not act as promptly as we would have liked to in response to the request for an airstrip ... " and so forth. I do not want to give him a history lesson but I want to refresh his memory. He will recall that about eight or nine years ago he and I were actively involved in assisting the Big Trout Lake Indian band in getting reserve status for satellite communities such as Angling Lake, Wunnummin Lake, Kingfisher Lake, Kasabonika and -- he can help me -- two or three in his riding: Muskrat and --

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Muskrat Dam.

Mr. Stokes: We battled the federal bureaucrats over in Ottawa for years. When we finally got an agreement it was a tradeoff. Some land had to be taken away from the Big Trout Lake band in order to get an appropriate size reserve for the satellite community. They made a mistake with regard to Kingfisher, the very one we are talking about.

There were three parcels of land that were to form the reserve boundaries at Kingfisher. What they had been promised was not reflected in the final agreement. Rather than hold it up and go back to the drawing board, they said to the Kingfisher Lake band: "If you will not withhold your approval, so that we can satisfy the legitimate aspirations of all of the other satellite communities, we will guarantee to make it right. We understand what you are saying. We simply made a mistake, but let us not hold up the whole process for that one thing." Kingfisher, in good faith, said that would be fine.

Does the minister know that it took them a further six years to resolve that one minor problem? He should not point his finger at Kingfisher Lake and say they were dragging their feet. They had to make sure they were going to get the land they were promised by the agreement eight years earlier before they could decide where they wanted the airstrip.

There are two sides to every story. I just wanted to make the minister and members of the committee aware that he is blaming the wrong people.

Our colleague just signed an order in council granting them the land that was promised to them eight years ago, and that was done within the last year. Now that is all resolved; now they know where they want the airstrip; now they know they have tenure to the land and they are off and running. I thought we had better keep all that in perspective.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: If I could add a little to that: the ownership of the land would certainly not deter us from building an airstrip. We have built airstrips on crown land in some cases and on reserve land in other cases. Had we received a positive response, we would have acted more quickly than we have. I know they wanted that airport on reserve land. I am aware of that.

Mr. Van Horne: I have another question to put to the minister before we conclude today's activities. In my opening comment, I made reference to the seasonally adjusted hydro rate proposal. I may be wrong, but I do not recall the minister addressing himself to my question on that point.

I also made reference to the Northern Ontario Development Corp. funding, the slippage from some $23 million to $10 million in 1982-83. I know the minister has made reference to many different dollars and monetary issues, but in that specific instance, and again I may be wrong, I do not recall his addressing the particular point I made.

Beyond that, I indicated I wanted to get to a few points we attempted to investigate through questions in Orders and Notices. When we return here on Monday, it may well be we will finish these estimates that afternoon. I hope we can take a look through the ministry estimates and spend a few minutes at least on the various items there.

The questions we had in Orders and Notices were questions such as this: Would the Minister of Northern Affairs indicate the amount spent by the ministry for management consulting services, technical consulting services, communication services, legal services, research and development services, creative communication services, as defined by Management Board of Cabinet Manual of Administration? We also specified certain years.

In the review of the estimates on Monday, I hope the minister will be able to provide an indication at least of what kind of services his ministry is using in these various areas. In the last minute or two, I will not attempt to read all the other details we were after in the Orders and Notices questions, which still remain unanswered. We were concerned as a party about the government's use of people, part-time and full-time, within the government and people who were brought in as consultants, etc.

Using a moment to address a theme our party has been very concerned about, it strikes me as passing strange that the Ministry of Northern Affairs devotes too much of its energy to public opinion polls in the north. We have asked questions about that too in Orders and Notices. Again, the responses have been conspicuous by their absence. I hope on Monday, if the ministry is doing any polling -- and I do not want to create the impression we consider this to be all bad -- I will learn if there has been any polling or if there is any place in the estimates we are now considering where we could find a reference to that.

Given the time, I think it is appropriate that I take my seat and let the minister adjourn the debate.

Hon. Mr. Bernier: Perhaps I could wind up for today by pointing out to the member for Lake Nipigon that the dish is in place at Angling Lake. They are having some problems getting the electronics for the dish. They are looking at early December for delivery and the latest it will be in place would be February.

In answer to the member for London North, I will have some information for him with respect to the Northern Ontario Development Corp. We are just checking those figures out now and the answers to the questions in Orders and Notices will be with us on Monday.

With regard to opinion polls, we do not use them in this ministry because we have an excellent staff, 70 per cent of whom are located in northern Ontario. They are grass-roots staff. I can assure the member that my answer on Monday for the questions on the order paper will be that no opinion polls are ever taken by this ministry.

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

The House adjourned at 1:02 p.m.

October 19, 1984