Hansard Transcript 1985-Jun-06 | Legislative Assembly of Ontario

Mr. Speaker: I beg to inform the House that I have today laid upon the table the eighth report of the Commission on Election Contributions and Expenses respecting indemnities of the members of the Ontario Legislature.

VISITOR

Mr. Speaker: I would like to introduce to members of the Legislative Assembly and ask them to join me in recognizing and welcoming in the Speaker's gallery Mr. Elijah Harper, member of the Legislative Assembly for Rupertsland, Manitoba.

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

Mr. Speaker: This being the first opportunity I have had to welcome and introduce to you the pages for the beginning of this session, I would like to place their names and ridings on the record:

Sarah Barker, London Centre; Cameron Cobb, York East; John Dent, Essex South; David Epp, Waterloo North; Lisa-Marie Flynn, St. Catharines; Sal Iacono, York Centre; Lindsey Jeffrey, York Mills; Kristi Lynn Kerford, Durham York; Matthew Lane, Huron-Middlesex; George MacPherson, Mississauga South; Dean Maltby, Simcoe East;

Robert Papineau, Sudbury; Jonathan Pollack, Oakwood; Allegra Rich, St. George; Marc Sanderson, Brantford; Paula Smith, Oshawa; Karen Snelson, Scarborough-Ellesmere; Gillian Snowling, Welland-Thorold; Sara Sterling, Carleton-Grenville; Sandra Stewart, Mississauga North; David Wright, Windsor-Walkerville; and Kathryn Yates, Hamilton Mountain.

Please join me in welcoming the pages.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

SPECIAL WARRANTS

Hon. Mr. Ashe: In accordance with section 51 of the standing orders of the assembly, I am tabling the special warrants issued when the Legislature was not in session. Copies of these special warrants have been placed in the postal boxes of each member.

A special warrant is issued by the Lieutenant Governor under section 4 of the Management Board of Cabinet Act, when the Legislature is not in session, authorizing expenditures of an urgent nature for which no appropriation exists.

One special warrant provides for general and necessary government expenditure on and after the first day of April 1985. The other provides for the general and necessary government expenditures of the Office of the Provincial Auditor, the office of the chief election officer and the Office of the Ombudsman on and after the first day of April 1985.

Since authority for making payments had to be in place on April 1 for the beginning of the fiscal year and the House was not then in session, the two special warrants were required. If the House had been in session, the expenditures authorized by the special warrants would have been approved by way of interim supply granted by the Legislature.

WELCOME TO NEW MEMBERS

Hon. F. S. Miller: Before I read my statement, let me welcome all the new members on both sides of the House to this Legislature. Let me congratulate my two fellow leaders on their showing in the election. I am sure both are proud of their parties and their organizations. I am proud of mine.

[Later]

Mr. Peterson: I join in offering my congratulations to all the new members. I have not seen such an influx of new members since 1975. They are a very good-looking lot and much brighter, I am sure, than the class of 1975. They will make a very great contribution to this House.

Mr. Breaugh: Speak for yourself.

Mr. Peterson: I was just speaking for my party, obviously.

Many of these members will find we all came in a partisan way representing our parties. We have had our differences of opinion in the past, and I am sure we will in the future; but I am also sure members will agree with me that we do as individuals and as members of parties have very much more in common than we have things that divide us. Particularly since the throne speech of a couple of days ago, I am persuaded this minority House can make great progress to renew and change Ontario and I am looking forward to that opportunity with great determination.

DISASTER RELIEF

Hon. F. S. Miller: I wish to inform the House of the progress that has been made in assisting the communities in central Ontario that were struck by a series of tornadoes last Friday. The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing (Mr. Timbrell) will provide additional details of our relief efforts at the conclusion of my remarks.

I wish to begin by offering to the families and friends of those who lost their lives in this disaster the profound sympathies of all members of this Legislature. Our prayers today are with them and with the many victims who lie in hospitals recovering from the injuries they received. It is our hope that their recovery will be swift and complete and that they will be returned to their loved ones as quickly as possible.

In the wake of this tragic event, we have attempted as a government to bring together all the necessary services, resources and agencies in one united effort to provide comfort to the victims of this disaster and to help them to rebuild their lives and their communities. More than 20 communities were destroyed in whole or in part by a series of very powerful tornadoes. In many cases, houses, buildings and farm properties were literally ripped apart by the force of the winds.

2:10 p.m.

In the hours immediately following this disaster, representatives of some 16 provincial ministries, along with representatives of the federal government, met to co-ordinate our relief efforts. On the following Monday we met with the heads of the council of the affected municipalities to work out further details.

The central Ontario disaster relief fund was established. Individual disaster relief centres were established in five communities: Barrie, Orangeville, Tottenham, Arthur and Grand Valley. A separate provincial committee was established to assist industrial and commercial businesses damaged by the storm. Financial aid was authorized under the Ontario disaster relief assistance program.

Provincial assistance in this case will be triple the normal rate. Each dollar raised by the disaster relief committee will be matched by $3 in provincial aid. Emergency funds are being made available immediately in cases of extreme hardship. In addition, we have met with representatives of the federal government to obtain additional financial assistance under the federal disaster financial assistance arrangements program.

As I mentioned, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing will provide further details on those and other matters in a few moments.

Thanks to the goodwill, the hard work and the sheer determination of the people of our province, the communities affected by this tragedy are on their way back. At this moment hundreds of volunteers are working their way along the path taken by the tornadoes, cleaning, fixing, painting, building and striving to return to a degree of normalcy the lives of the people in the towns.

In the first moments following the storms, organizations of every conceivable makeup raced to the scene to help out. Individuals arrived with food, clothing and blankets, anything that could possibly be of assistance. People opened their doors to provide shelter; businesses opened their doors to provide all manner of goods.

Special mention must be made of professionals involved -- the police officers, firefighters, armed forces personnel, Red Cross workers and many others who responded quickly and effectively to the demands made upon their services. Through these and countless other individual actions, the people of Ontario have again demonstrated the concern, generosity and breadth of spirit which have made this such a fine province in which to live. Ontarians may derive considerable pride and satisfaction from the manner in which they have responded to the needs of their fellow citizens.

On behalf of the government, I would like to thank all those who have given so much of themselves throughout this past week. Their efforts have made all the difference in the world and have earned our profound and lasting appreciation.

In closing, I would again like to extend our deepest sympathies to the families and the friends of those who have been lost to us as a result of this tragedy.

Mr. Peterson: May I also join with the Premier (Mr. F. S. Miller) in extending thanks and congratulations to the people who have been involved in the cleanup from the series of tornadoes that hit our community.

I had occasion to visit there on Saturday last, the day after the tornadoes, and I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, I have never in my life seen anything like it. It was a complete rearrangement of the landscape. There were pieces of metal driven into trees, insulation hanging on trees, great harvest silos in the middle of the fields far away from their foundations, and houses completely torn from their foundations. It was the most incredible thing I have ever seen in my life. To realize it happened in 10 or 30 seconds makes us never cease to marvel at the wonders of nature.

I want to congratulate the Premier and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, who were immediately there on the job, showing leadership and helping the thousands of people who had already been involved in that cleanup. I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, from the point of view of my party I am willing to do anything I can to assist these gentlemen, to honour any commitments they make and work with them and the citizens who are trying to bring an effective resolution to the many personal problems that have been faced.

All that being said, in the midst of this great natural tragedy, I, who had the opportunity of visiting Barrie and Grand Valley, did not see one unhappy face. I saw remarkable stories of personal courage, people who had lost everything who were out there with their chainsaws. Even the former member for Chatham-Kent, Andy Watson, was there. Many of us remember him. I believe his mother-in-law lives in Grand Valley. He was there that morning with his chainsaw cutting up trees on his mother-in-law's lawn. He must have a marvellous mother-in-law.

It shows the kind of help that has come from all quarters right across this province. I know it will continue. There have been fund-raising efforts. The minister was running this morning to raise money. There are telethons; Global is doing one on Saturday. I suspect every member of this House is participating in one way or another to bring help to that area.

The fact that we all pull together in these kinds of tragedies is a testament to the good people of this province. I again assure you, Mr. Speaker, of our complete support for the initiatives of the government.

Mr. Rae: I simply want to join the Premier and the leader of the Liberal Party in extending our sympathy, as I have been able to do personally, to the families that have been affected by this tragedy and who have lost their loved ones. It is an enormous tragedy for those families and for those who are still waiting to hear happy news from the doctors and the hospitals concerned.

I would also like, first of all, to congratulate the Premier and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing for doing what they have done in this last week. The way they have responded so quickly in pulling these communities together represents in its own way the best in speedy action from the government of Ontario.

It should also be noted that many people have responded through the radiothons we have all heard going on all week, not only here in Toronto and in Barrie but throughout the province, and with the kind of money that has been raised. The understanding I have is that all the money that has been raised in these radiothons is going to be matched on a three-to-one basis by the provincial government. I think that is a very good precedent for this province and something I know is going to make a difference to people.

There is no predicting these kinds of events. They are an enormous tragedy when they happen. They are perhaps a reminder of the power of nature and something of the nature of the world, in that there are things out there that cannot be predicted and cannot be controlled.

What we can do something about is the response we make, the response that comes from individuals, from communities, from governments, from organizations, from volunteers, from everybody, to try to compensate in some way for the tragedy that has happened and to give these communities a chance to rebuild and to renew themselves.

I say to the member for Wellington-Dufferin-Peel (Mr. J. M. Johnson) and to the member for Simcoe Centre (Mr. Rowe) that, knowing the kinds of thoughts and burdens they have experienced as members, our hearts go out to them. We join with them in reaching out to these communities and in saying that whatever can be done by government must be done, locally, provincially and federally. And, of course, we join all the citizens in the province in trying to do whatever we can to see that people are compensated for this enormous tragedy and for the devastation that has happened.

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: I would like, first of all, to thank both honourable gentlemen opposite for their comments on the events of the last almost six days. We on this side have been equally impressed by the willingness of everyone in this House and of people from all parts of the province to participate, first, in meeting the immediate effects of the disaster that struck last Friday and then in joining in efforts to raise the funds and carry out the programs necessary to rebuild this part of the province.

Before I go into my prepared statement for today, it occurs to me that in the spirit evidenced here today I would like to invite the leaders of the two opposition parties each to name a member of his caucus to work with me as Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and with all our staff to oversee this effort to ensure that it remains a completely nonpartisan, united effort.

2:20 p.m.

I would also like to join with the Premier in offering congratulations to the literally hundreds of volunteers who have donated considerable time and effort to help rebuild the communities affected by this disaster. As minister responsible for co-ordinating our relief efforts, I think it is obvious that we really could not do it without them.

As the Premier has mentioned, our primary concern as a government has been to unite all our energies and resources to help rebuild the affected communities and the lives of the people living there. To that end, a number of provincial ministries have been involved in providing various kinds of assistance.

The Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Community and Social Services have provided backup to local health units for counselling of tornado victims suffering from shock.

The Ministry of the Environment has been testing water supplies and establishing interim sites for the disposal of debris of all forms.

The Ministry of the Solicitor General has moved a trailer into Grand Valley to provide a temporary replacement for the medical centre that was severely damaged.

The Ministry of Industry and Trade is convening an interministerial committee that will establish an office in the stricken area. This committee will examine ways in which the province can assist local industries and commercial establishments affected by the disaster and those people who have been left unemployed.

The Ministry of Transportation and Communications has met with local municipal staff to assist with the cleanup of roads and bridges.

Finally, in the area of housing, we have worked to get homeless people into emergency housing as quickly as possible. Providing shelter is a crucial concern in these communities as the high winds completely destroyed a great many homes.

We have established a central emergency housing control centre at the South Simcoe and Barrie Housing Authority office in Barrie. This central office is co-ordinating the activities of three emergency housing offices that have been established in Barrie, Tottenham and Grand Valley. Each of these offices is maintaining an inventory of available accommodation and is receiving applications daily for emergency housing.

As of yesterday, these three offices had received a total of 91 applications for emergency housing. The inventory of available units included 200 units offered by the Barrie community at large, consisting of houses, apartments and rooms; 40 units, comprising 25 family units and 15 one-bedroom apartments, offered at Canadian Forces Base Borden; 21 family units, ranging from two bedrooms to eight bedrooms, offered by the Ministry of Community and Social Services at its occupational therapy unit in Edgar.

Moreover, the Salvation Army is prepared at its command centres in Barrie and Toronto to provide furnishings and houseware packages to these units as required.

At present, it appears the need for emergency housing can be met through our available stock of shelter. However, should additional housing be required, we have made the following preparations: between 70 and 80 trailer and mobile home units have been identified through operators in southern and central Ontario and knowledge of more becomes available by the hour; two sites near Grand Valley have been identified with a capacity of up to 60 units if required; two sites near Barrie have been identified to accommodate even more units; further, 18 units owned by Ontario Housing Corp. in eight communities have been identified for use as required.

As I have stated, it is our hope that trailers and mobile homes will not be required to meet the need for emergency shelter. However, a truer picture of the need is not expected to materialize until the end of this week, and once we have that knowledge we will take all necessary and appropriate action.

As the Premier has already mentioned, we met at the beginning of this week with the heads of council of the 21 affected municipalities and have enjoyed excellent co-operation throughout the week. These municipal councils have appointed citizen representatives to the Central Ontario Disaster Relief Committee, which will hold its first meeting this evening.

In the area of financial assistance, arrangements have been made for banks, trust companies, credit unions and offices of the Province of Ontario Savings Office to accept donations to the central Ontario disaster relief fund through the Red Cross.

I must point out that the public response to the financial needs of these communities has been nothing less than extraordinary. Donations are pouring in from all manner of fund-raising activities, revealing once again that the people of this province truly are among the most generous in the world.

As has been noted, provincial assistance in this serious instance will be on a three-to-one basis and victims can apply for assistance at any of the five local offices in Barrie, Orangeville, Arthur, Grand Valley and Tottenham.

At this point, we estimate that total provincial assistance will be more than $20 million. I caution that this is only an estimate and it may change when we receive a more complete accounting of the damages in the next week. At that time, we will also be able to inform the federal government as to the amount of federal financial assistance these communities require.

Yesterday, the Solicitor General (Mr. Gregory) and I travelled to Ottawa for discussions on this matter with the Deputy Prime Minister, the Honourable Erik Nielsen, and with the Minister of National Revenue, the Honourable Perrin Beatty, who is responsible for co-ordinating the federal relief effort and has been closely involved with all our activities in the aftermath of this disaster. Federal assistance to our province will be made under the disaster financial assistance arrangements program, and it will be the first time this province has had to call for assistance from the federal government under that longstanding agreement.

We have indicated to the federal government that we will provide them with detailed data on the cost of repairs when those data have been compiled next week. Based on those figures, the federal government will be making a contribution over and above the $20 million provincial contribution. In the end, the combined financial aid will likely be quite substantial, and it will ensure these communities will be fully restored.

In all, it appears these communities are already well on the road to recovery. We will continue, of course, to carefully monitor the situation and respond to any and all unforeseen difficulties.

At this point, it appears the generosity of the people of our province, combined with the determination and pride of the people of the stricken communities, will see us through this difficult period.

FAMILY LAW REFORM

Hon. Mr. Pope: On the opening day of the new session, I introduced for first reading as Bill 1 an act which will replace the Family Law Reform Act passed in 1978. The new bill will be known as the Family Law Act, 1985.

I would like now to advise the members of this House and the people of Ontario of the great importance of the measures contained in Bill 1 and to reiterate that this government gives those measures the highest priority.

The Family Law Act is the culmination of a process that began 11 years ago under my predecessors. They engaged in extensive public consultations on matrimonial property reform that led to the Family Law Reform Act of 1978. We have received many helpful letters and submissions from individuals and organizations across Ontario; these include the Ontario Advisory Council on Women's Issues, the Canadian Bar Association--Ontario, family law section, and the Ontario women's directorate.

The changes build on our earlier initiatives in this vital area and reflect our continuing desire to lead in the promotion of economic equity when marriages end.

Under the bill, the value of all property acquired by spouses during their marriage, other than gifts, inheritances and other very limited exceptions, will be shared equally between the spouses on marriage breakdown or on the death of one of them. Any increase in the value of property that is exempt from sharing or any income from it during the marriage will also be shared equally by the spouses on a division of assets. As well, the family home will retain the special status it has under our existing legislation and will be subject to sharing regardless of whether it was acquired before or after the marriage and irrespective of whether it was purchased by a spouse or received as a gift or inheritance.

There will be a limited discretion in the court to relieve against unusual economic circumstances where the equal division of the value of assets would be unconscionable. This discretion is more confined and guided than the equivalent provision in any of the other common law provinces of Canada.

The changes reflect our view that marriage is an economic partnership in which the contributions of each spouse have the same value regardless of the form in which they are made. This will add a considerable degree of certainty to the law of matrimonial property and assure the equitable sharing of business property that is acquired or appreciates during a marriage.

I want to point out a feature of the bill that will be particularly important in relation to professional partnerships, small businesses and farms. We recognize that in some cases the division of these assets on marriage breakdown might pose problems. Accordingly, the bill would direct a court to accomplish the financial settlement between the spouses so as not to interfere with the operation or economic viability of a business or farm. In this connection, a variety of remedies will be available to the court, including, for example, time payments over as long as 10 years.

2:30 p.m.

The new legislation will apply to persons already married unless they have entered or in the future enter into a marriage contract or separation agreement, or unless they have proceeded to a final judgement or settlement in property litigation before June 4, 1985. In other words, this bill takes effect as of June 4. We have chosen to do this because we do not want to create two classes of married persons in Ontario depending on the date of their marriage, and we certainly do not want to have a flurry of litigation commenced so as to avoid the application of the new property sharing rules.

It will remain open to couples, including couples who are already married, to contract out of the matrimonial property system contained in this bill. We are committed to a sufficient period of lead time to allow those couples who wish to do so to enter into a marriage contract before the new law comes into force.

Ontario's new legislation builds upon the foundation established by our 1978 initiatives and is consistent with the trend of matrimonial property reform in both Canada and the United States. It reflects the approach recommended by the Ontario Law Reform Commission. Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta have substantially similar property systems in place.

Much of the 1978 Family Law Reform Act's approach to providing special protections for the matrimonial home has been retained under this new bill. I have already mentioned that so far as the division of matrimonial property is concerned, the matrimonial home is always shareable, regardless of when or how it was acquired. As in the former act, both spouses are given equal rights of possession in the matrimonial home, and neither spouse may dispose of or encumber the home without the participation of the other or a court order dispensing with the other spouse's consent.

A new feature of the legislation is the creation of provincial offences for breach of a court order for exclusive possession of a matrimonial home or nonmolestation of a spouse. We have adopted suggestions that it was necessary to create a speedy means of removing a spouse from premises occupied by a family, primarily in the interests of physical safety for the spouse in occupation and the emotional wellbeing of the children, where an exclusive possession or restraining order is being disobeyed. By creating a provincial offence for breach of this kind of order, it is possible to permit the arrest of a person, thus physically removing a person from the premises and removing any threat to the family members in occupation.

Not much has changed with respect to the support measures in the new bill, but there are a couple of very important developments. We propose that the period of cohabitation of persons living together outside marriage should be shortened from a minimum of five years to three years for the purpose of one of them having a right to claim support against the other under the act. This was recommended by the Ontario Advisory Council on Women's Issues.

Also in the support sections of the bill are two provisions that will permit the indexing of orders for support according to the consumer price index, so that the person receiving support does not have to apply for a variation when the order has been substantially eroded by inflation.

I am proud of the path we blazed in 1978, and I am pleased that the experience of the seven years since will enable us to take these additional, very significant steps. We anticipate there will be a good deal of public discussion of these bills, and we are eager to have the views of interested persons.

Mr. Nixon: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I point out to you a departure from 300 years of parliamentary tradition in the introduction of Bill 1, a very important bill, which I know we will have an interesting time debating and passing into law.

With your extensive experience in the chair, I am sure you are aware that Bill 1, introduced following His Honour the Lieutenant Governor's speech, takes up business not referred to in the speech from the throne, thereby emphasizing the independence of this House from the crown and our right and responsibility to consider our own business ahead of the business of the crown.

You will remember that His Honour's speech detailed this legislation and that it is part of the formal package that was put before us. In that sense I do not consider it out of order, but you should be aware that the Attorney General has departed substantially from the traditions of both this House and parliamentary practice.

Mr. Warner: The only honourable thing is to resign.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: There is a familiar echo here, which I might say I hope to hear later this summer.

Mr. Speaker: Order. Does the government House leader have a point?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Yes.

Might I take this opportunity to say that the opposition House leader, not surprisingly, is right once again on this issue. However, I might say that the government, in assisting His Honour the Lieutenant Governor in preparing the throne speech, wished to emphasize that it was meeting the commitment of the Minister responsible for Women's Issues (Mr. Timbrell) and the Premier (Mr. F. S. Miller) in pointing out that it would be Bill 1. We were anxious to honour that commitment.

Might I add two things? One is that I will heed the advice of the opposition House leader and join with him in doing everything possible to protect 300 or 700 years of parliamentary tradition as this session unfolds. Second, I take this opportunity to mention to the House that the order of business for next week has been the subject matter of some discussion between the House leaders and we will clarify it tomorrow morning as opposed to doing it later this afternoon as we ordinarily would.

Mr. Speaker: I thank the member for Brant-Oxford-Norfolk (Mr. Nixon), and I am certainly glad to see the co-operation that is felt here. Does the Premier have a further statement?

Hon. F. S. Miller: Yes, I do. It is just a coincidence that His Honour saw the light of day too in the course of the action.

TRIBUTES TO FORMER SPEAKER

Hon. F. S. Miller: On behalf of my colleagues, I would like to acknowledge, with thanks and with personal appreciation, the contributions of the former Speaker of this House, the member for Peterborough (Mr. Turner).

As we are all aware, the acceptance of the Speakership entails, as you will find, Mr. Speaker, a substantial commitment of both time and energy and, at times, patience. The office carries with it the duty to chair the Board of Internal Economy, to administer the Office of the Assembly and to represent all honourable members in external matters.

However, it is in the capacity as presiding officer of this House that a Speaker is most visible to the people of Ontario. In carrying out the duties through some of the most heated and difficult debates ever witnessed in this chamber, the member for Peterborough evidenced a courteous and patient nature that often differed from the tone set by the debates themselves.

Despite the partisan nature of this place, he endeavoured to make his decisions on the basis of precedent, custom and fairness. It is never easy to make judgements that will receive the unanimous support of 124 masters. In his efforts to serve us all, the member for Peterborough evidenced his respect both for the rules and for the other members of this House, and he has earned our congratulations.

Equally deserving of our congratulations is the newly elected Speaker of this House. Throughout his years as a member of the assembly, he has earned the confidence, respect and goodwill of colleagues on all sides. Having served as Deputy Speaker in the 31st Parliament, he has already acquired knowledge of the position to which he has now been elected. We on this side of the House are pleased to welcome him to his new duties and to wish him well in his new capacity.

2:40 p.m.

Mr. Peterson: It is an honour for me to address you as Mr. Speaker and to give you my congratulations as well. As you look forward to your new duties, you will obviously be in a position where you will never again have to take advice from anyone here. You will be very much on your own, and we will respect the wise pronouncements that will come in the course of this legislative session. We all wish you very well in your new duties.

While we celebrate renewal and change in this province, it is also fitting that we honour those who have served this Legislature with distinction. I join with the Premier in adding my voice in praise of the member for Peterborough, who served us so well. As a former pugilist, I am aware that in the heat of combat sometimes the referee gets a little roughed up, but even in spite of that, referees are necessary and all of us respect that role.

I say to my honourable friend that he served this House very well and was always a gentleman. He distinguished this province as its official host, along with his wonderful wife June, Mrs. Speaker to many of us. The two of them distinguished this House with their service. On behalf of my colleagues, I thank them for their contribution.

Mr. Rae: On this happy occasion, Mr. Speaker, may I offer you my congratulations. I am looking forward to a very productive session of the Legislature and I want to congratulate you on your election. Perhaps there will be times when you will understand why you have to be dragged into this place and into the chair, but until that day happens I am sure you will want to share with all of us a sense of pride which you, your constituents and your family will have in having taken on the responsibility as the Speaker in what is going to be, if nothing else, a most interesting session.

The member for Peterborough is wearing a pink shirt today. I want to congratulate him on his attire. He looks much more relaxed than we have seen him on other occasions. We too very much appreciated the way he served as Speaker and presiding officer of this House in the last assembly.

We congratulate him and Mrs. Turner on the wonderful job they did serving as hosts and, in a sense, as guardian angels of this place at Queen's Park. I wish him well in his new partisan role. We look forward to participating in the debates, whatever side of the assembly they may come from. We enjoyed working with the member and look forward to working with him in the new House.

Mr. Speaker: I would like to say thank you for your words of congratulations and I would like to add my personal word to the member for Peterborough. I met him in the hall the other day and I appreciate the offer he made to assist me at any time. If the honourable member wishes to say a word, I am sure the other members would be glad to hear it.

Mr. Turner: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I am not sure whether this is a point of personal privilege --

Mr. Breaugh: A point of information.

Mr. Turner: Whatever. The Speaker is going to have to make these rulings from time to time. I do want to extend to you, Mr. Speaker, my very sincere congratulations.

Mr. Martel: Condolences.

Mr. Turner: No. Mr. Speaker, you are occupying a chair that goes back in history many centuries -- 700 years as a matter of fact -- and you are going to enjoy it. You are going to be called upon from time to time, as has been alluded to, to make some very difficult decisions. However, I know from your past experience you are not going to have any difficulty in making a fair decision. I want to say again how pleased I am that you are the one chosen to occupy that eminent spot.

To the other members, the Premier (Mr. F. S. Miller), the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Peterson) and the leader of the third party, to all my colleagues in this assembly, I would like to thank them very kindly for their co-operation in the past and their very generous and kind remarks today, which are very much appreciated. I will be very happy to tell June what has been said and I am sure she will appreciate it too.

Mr. Peterson: Why do I keep hearing about 710 years of parliamentary tradition?

Mr. Speaker: I am sorry, the honourable member cannot ask the Speaker questions.

Mr. Peterson: Enjoy all this praise, Mr. Speaker. You know it will end shortly.

ORAL QUESTIONS

ROMAN CATHOLIC SECONDARY SCHOOLS

Mr. Peterson: I have a question for the Minister of Education. Given the divisiveness of the separate schools question and the distinct lack of information that has been shared with members of the community right across this province, and given that a large measure of that divisiveness and ill feeling is a function of the lack of information that has been shared with people -- for example, I have talked with people about this issue, people picketing against it, and they say to me: "I am not really against it. I just do not know what is going to happen to me, my job, my child, my school, my community" -- why would the minister not immediately table all the information he has, including the impact studies and the draft legislation, so we could start the public discussions?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Might I begin by saying, in fairness to the Commission for Planning and Implementing Change in the Governance and Administration of Secondary Education in Ontario, which has been doing quite extraordinary work on this issue for some time now, it would be wrong to say that nothing has been done or that extensive work has not been done. It really has.

There have been 18 public hearings throughout the province, not confined to one place. More than 200,000 information sheets have been distributed in order to support those hearings and provide other information. Several hundred briefs have been received by the commission, and of course the commission has now dealt with 40 of the boards -- all of the separate school boards, in other words -- that are seeking to proceed with funding this year. In all those circumstances, broad information has been available to those interested.

I think it would be a mistake for us, on the other hand, to pretend the public at large is as fully aware as we would like of all the implications of what all members of this House, as I understand it, think ought to be done commencing this September.

The point I would like to make is that there is nothing unusual about that fact. In the case of almost every piece of legislation we introduce, even those of significant importance such as this one, there is a difficulty in transmitting all the information to the public, explaining it all to the public and having broad public awareness of all the implications.

How do we go about that? As I say, I think the planning and implementation commission has gone an extraordinarily long way to do that. There is no member of this assembly who has not been discussing this issue with members of the public during the past three months.

The stage we have now reached is the following. A bill is going to be introduced in this House shortly; that is, in a matter of days, I expect. In order to ensure this bill is a proper one, I am again having a round of negotiations -- sorry, discussions -- with all the major groups affected before introducing this bill. That should not take very much longer.

I have already instructed my staff that upon introduction of this bill we will have a compendium far exceeding anything that has been delivered to this assembly before. It will include, I believe, if I heard the member's question properly, all the information he requested, all the briefs and all the information from the planning and implementation commission; in other words, it will cover every aspect of this question.

When this occurs, and when we have a bill that is in the proper form -- one that we as legislators, at least on this side of the House, think is in proper form, given the sensitive nature of this bill -- it will be available. Then the long consultative procedure from here to legislation will begin once again.

Mr. Peterson: Would the minister not agree with me that time is very much of the essence in this matter? We have less than three months now before the implementation of this legislation. The minister has been in possession of draft legislation for a long period of time now. He has the impact studies. He knows, as I do, the impact will not be as severe in some respects as had been expected by a number of people.

I am told, for example, that only 300 teachers may be displaced in one way or another as opposed to the thousands that had been expected. We are aware that some 30 boards, more than half of them, have already come to agreements and that there is progress.

I call on the minister again to move with haste in this matter as opposed to just letting it sit. Day by day, in my view, the situation becomes more critical, and that is why I am asking him to release what he has now.

Obviously, it will be amended; it will be changed. There will be input from members of this chamber. We all take that responsibility upon ourselves. But please do not rest under the delusion that Mr. Newnham has satisfied the appetite of the people of this province for input and for public consultation. Would the minister take that under advisement?

2:50 p.m.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Yes, I will. Again, I hope the member has noticed that everything I have said since I accepted these responsibilities points towards more extensive public consultation and using every means possible.

Let us be open about the question. There is no doubt about the fact that whatever bill I should offer in a draft form will be interpreted by many as being the single version -- that is right, in my judgment -- that this government believes is the single way to go. Until the time at which I, as a relatively new minister, am satisfied the draft is in a form I am prepared to introduce into the House, then I am very hesitant to encourage more public debate on a level that misunderstands what we intend to do. I do not think that would add to the process.

In other words, I believe that if I were to hand out this afternoon the current ministry draft -- and I pause to say there are now at least nine -- if I selected one of them, it may not reflect what this cabinet wants to introduce into the assembly, but it would be seen to be that; and if as a result of putting out that draft bill there is more misunderstanding and there are more hardened positions out there, then it would have been a counterproductive exercise.

It is for that reason I think the proper course is the one I outlined.

We intend not only to consult with the teacher groups, the parent groups and other interested groups through the next few days on this bill, but also to show them the options we are considering so that they may reflect on those options and tell us which ones would be most appropriate in the bill we finally put out. I think that is the appropriate way to go.

I might add that this government and this party do not under any circumstances believe there should be constraints put on public input when it gets to the committee stage.

I see in the media reports the Liberals do not quite share that view at this time. Though they have not committed on either side, they refuse to undertake that there would not be constraints. The third party has said there should be. This party stands on record as believing there should not under any circumstances be any public constraints on public input over the next few months and will stand behind this.

Mr. Rae: It did not take long for the Minister of Education to find his partisan form. It has now been 359 days since Premier Davis, as he then was, announced the policy with respect to the extension of funds. It is hard for those of us on this side of the House to believe the Conservative Party in its collective wisdom over the last 359 days has not been able to produce draft legislation with respect to this matter.

I would like to ask the minister if he will table that legislation immediately and, because of the political events which everyone in this House and outside is aware of, would he not agree it would make best sense, as soon as that draft is made available, to have that draft sent to committee immediately so that discussion can take place in the month of June prior to the political changes of which all of us are aware?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: If the concern of the leader of the third party is that it gets to committee as soon as possible and that there be no delay, this party would be happy to continue to sit right through the months of June, July and August, without fail and without stop, to send the bill through.

Mr. Conway: I think it will come as somewhat of a surprise to the people of Ontario that on the eve of the introduction of this historic bill we are now told there are at least nine drafts of that legislation in his possession.

Will the minister give this House an undertaking that all nine drafts will be available to this Legislature and to any other government that might be called upon to deal with this legislation in the not too distant future?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Might I say that perhaps as time goes on the honourable member may become more familiar -- perhaps not -- with the way bills are drafted, but there has not been any bill of substance ever introduced into this House without going through many drafts. That is the ordinary course. The legislative draftsmen have to go over these bills many times. A bill goes to legislative counsel and back, a working draft for a minister, and out for consultation. There is nothing unusual about the nine drafts.

I repeat this government's undertaking that all of the information that is available to us will be available to all members of this House and to the public for as much consultation as the public desires, in an unfettered way, for as long as they wish.

FEDERAL BUDGET

Mr. Peterson: I have a new question for the Premier with respect to the federal budget. The Premier will be aware of the new provisions in the recently announced federal budget, that there are policies of deindexation of the old age security that will affect almost one million residents of Ontario. He will be aware that policy will next year take $91 million directly from the pockets of Ontario senior citizens and more than $500 million by the year 1990. This translates into about $100 per person next year and $500 to $600 at the end of this decade.

Was the Premier consulted by his federal colleagues before they brought in this policy? If not, why not? If he was consulted, what position did he put forward on behalf of Ontario senior citizens?

Hon. F. S. Miller: I am pleased to have the opportunity to answer the member's question. The normal process in a budgetary matter is not to have a great deal of advance consultation. As a result of that, we responded on page 27 of the throne speech and said we were concerned about the impact the budget would have upon the elderly people in this province.

As the Leader of the Opposition knows -- and I am sure he agrees with this -- we said we would increase our tax grant program for seniors to help them compensate for those losses.

Mr. Peterson: Do I interpret that to mean the Premier has given up trying to influence the federal government? Does he agree with what they have done? What does that mean? He obviously has not done it in the past, but will he press the case with his federal colleagues on behalf of the seniors of Ontario -- or has he already capitulated?

Hon. F. S. Miller: I thought the Leader of the Opposition had read His Honour's throne speech. It says, "In addition, we will make strong recommendations urging the government of Canada to compensate fully for inflation those pensioners receiving guaranteed income supplement."

Certainly we will carry on the fight. We represent the interests of the people of Ontario in every sense. We have never been shy to bring those interests to any federal government of any political stripe. We will carry on doing that.

The member said during the election campaign there was going to be an increase of 22 cents a gallon in gas prices, and it was 1.3 cents a litre.

Mr. Foulds: Why is the Premier continuing to allow Michael Wilson to pick the pockets of senior citizens in this province? Why in his statement does he continue to allow the government to undermine the universality of old age security pensions, which is what his statement does?

Hon. F. S. Miller: Mr. Speaker, before answering this supplementary question, do they have the right to a supplementary now that they are one party? Which party am I addressing?

Mr. Warner: The party that is asking the Premier to resign.

Hon. F. S. Miller: We have a new name for that group. It is the social alliance party, the SAPS.

Interjections.

3 p.m.

Mr. Speaker: Order. I believe a question was asked. I would appreciate it if members would listen to the reply.

Hon. F. S. Miller: Over the years this province has shown a concern for and an interest in the wellbeing of our senior citizens that I would say is unmatched by any other province in this country.

Mr. Nixon: If the Premier's influence was such that he could not persuade his Tory cousins in charge of the Treasury in Ottawa to retract their decision to de-index these pensions, is it a serious proposal on his part and the part of his Treasurer (Miss Stephenson) that in the unlikely event they are left with any responsibilities as far as the ministries are concerned, they are going to make up these lost funds on behalf of the seniors in Ontario? If so, what procedures do they put before the House in order to prepare for that?

Hon. F. S. Miller: We always give an indication of a program in the throne speech. My friend, having had a great deal of experience, and whom I hold out as probably the most knowledgeable and intelligent in terms of ways and means of this House of all members of all parties, knows fully the procedures of this House. Because we have had a very successful management of the province, the revenues, one sees, are doing very well. That will be revealed in the budget the Treasurer will bring forward.

ROMAN CATHOLIC SECONDARY SCHOOLS

Mr. Rae: On the question of separate schools, I want to ask the Premier to get some reality into the discussion. We all know the nature of political events in this province over the next few weeks.

I ask the Premier if he will accept reality and, instead of allowing a delay of perhaps as long as four or five weeks in hearings by a legislative committee on the subject matter of the bill on extension of separate school funding, refer the bill to committee as soon as it is available so it can be discussed through the month of June and so the people can have access to the process as soon as possible.

Why not make a move on that so we can take it away from the partisan nature of the discussions which are going to go on this month to make sure the public has access to the process as soon as possible?

Hon. F. S. Miller: I hope that June 19 is early enough. With your assistance and with your co-operation, that is altogether possible.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: We will call it on June 19.

Hon. F. S. Miller: Yes. I will gladly call it on June 19 and proceed with it without any delay.

Mr. Rae: Will the Premier stop playing games? He knows there is a vote coming June 18. He knows the people have spoken. Will he stop playing that game and face up to reality? All we are asking is whether for a moment he will step back from the partisan nature of what is happening here and accept the fact he is losing power. Will he also accept that when the Premier of this province made the announcement on June 12, 1984, all 125 members of this House said we would be involved in ensuring it was dealt with in a nonpartisan way.

I stood up and the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Peterson) stood up at that time. What I am asking the Premier to do is make good on the sense of what took place on June 12 and let us get it to committee right away, have the committee deal with it and leave the fall of the government apart from that issue, because it is much too important to be subject to that kind of partisan procedure.

Hon. F. S. Miller: I do not recall the leader of the third party saying those kinds of things during the election campaign. I do not recall his sharing any of the benefits of that discussion. I do not recall his saying he wanted full discussion. We want full discussion. A member of that party said we would cut it off as quickly as we could to get it through. That is what he said.

Mr. Rae: No.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Yes, he did. He was your critic.

Mr. Martel: You had better ask Norm Sterling what he said.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Oh, here it comes.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Mr. Mantel: Where is Norm Sterling when we need him?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: You are embarrassing your party.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Mr. Sweeney: Given the fact the implementation commission that was set up by his government is the only contact the separate school and public school boards now have with this pending legislation, and given the fact this implementation commission has authorized up to 40 boards to proceed, can the Premier indicate to us and to those boards outside what authority this implementation commission has and how valid the directions it has given to the boards are in respect of hiring staff, acquiring facilities and doing those kinds of things?

Hon. F. S. Miller: Sooner or later the final authority will be in a bill of this House; I assume the member knows that. However, when Mr. Davis announced the funding on June 12 of last year, to the cheers of this Legislature, he also set a series of conditions. Those conditions became the basis on which the implementation committee reviewed all the proposals by all the boards, and they have been very fundamental to it. They are basic to the bill, and I assume they will be honoured -- I hope they will be honoured -- as we go through the process of discussing the bill.

If we learned anything in this election, and I hope the member learned it too, it was that the people of Ontario in their concern for this very important piece of legislation, whether they wanted it or not, as the Leader of the Opposition said, wanted an opportunity to understand it, to take part in framing it and to offer their advice. We, at least in this party, have said: "Yes, we have heard you. We want that opportunity, we are going to give you that opportunity and we will not see it arbitrarily passed without giving you your chance."

Mr. Rae: It is precisely because we do not want any sense of arbitrariness introduced into the process that I am making a very simple suggestion to the Premier. I honestly cannot understand his reluctance to do it this way. Why not refer the bill to a committee as soon as it is available? There is ample precedent for that. Let the committee get on with its work in June so the public can have access to the process in June.

I do not think it is fair to the public for the Premier to insist that everything be held up as we go through this throne speech and as we go through the process in which his government is going to be defeated. It is not fair to those people who feel strongly about this issue. If the Premier were sincere in wanting to see that this matter is treated on a nonpartisan, tripartisan basis which is fair to everybody, involves the public and assures public access, why would he be so reluctant to get the matter to committee right away in June without any conditions, without anything attached to it?

Let the committee go to work. Let it happen tomorrow. It can start tomorrow. The process of hearings can start next week. There is no reason for delay, other than the Premier's determination to tie it to his partisan success in the future.

Hon. F. S. Miller: My friend does not expect me or the rest of the world listening to believe that he is so untutored in the ways of this House as to think he does not have ways to help us too. Why, for example, if he is really interested in the people of this province, has he said he will defeat this government in spite of a good throne speech? Why has he said he will not listen to any reason? Why has he then left this House open to whatever delay he and his colleagues want in the middle of the summer?

The best way is to make sure that this House continues sitting on a daily basis, doing the business of this province as it has in the past and as it should now, honouring the traditions of parliament.

Mr. Rae: What the Premier of this province is really saying is that if the Conservatives cannot be in power for ever and ever, then they are not prepared to play the game. It has to be their way and nobody else's way, and that is why he is going to be out on his ear in two weeks. That is exactly the reason.

3:10 p.m.

PATRONAGE APPOINTMENTS

Mr. Rae: I have a list of 200 order in council appointees appointed since May of this year to various boards and commissions. These are various assistant crown attorneys, people on boards of convention centres and people appointed to pension commissions and other places. I would like to ask the Premier what his intentions are with respect to the next two weeks. Is it his intention to carry on and continue for the next two weeks with a series of essentially public appointments, many of which are made on a partisan basis, or does he intend to proceed differently and leave office with an element of dignity rather than an orgy of patronage?

Hon. F. S. Miller: There are literally thousands of volunteers in this province who serve on things such as the Royal Ontario Museum board, school boards, university boards, etc. Those are the kinds of appointments the member is talking about. Many of them have absolutely no remuneration at all. They are seen as services to the community. We have a system that has been in place for years and almost all are reappointments. Our system, unlike his, has always looked at the competence of people when making a choice.

Mr. Rae: Let me refer specifically to a series of appointments the government has to make; I refer specifically to changes in the operation of the Workers' Compensation Board. Appointments to the previous board were made on the old boy or old person network basis in terms of senior positions. I would like to ask the Premier his intention with regard to the appointments that take effect on July 1 of this year.

Is it his intention to proceed on the old-fashioned patronage basis or does he intend to proceed on a different basis so that, as I say, he can leave office with some dignity rather than in an orgy of self-interested appointments that brings the very notion of public service into disrepute?

Hon. F. S. Miller: I do not think the member heard the comment I made earlier that most of the names he was reading were reappointments to boards. As the member knows, we have a six-year rule past which, most times, no one sits on an agency, board or commission.

The member mentioned specifically the Workers' Compensation Board. Reappointments made recently that probably have not yet come to his attention all terminate December 31, 1985, because we are contemplating changes in the board at that time.

Mr. Rae: I would like a clear answer from the Premier with respect to his intentions in the next two weeks.

Hon. F. S. Miller: Neither faster nor slower.

WATER QUALITY

Mr. Bradley: I have a question for the Minister of the Environment. I congratulate her on assuming this new position.

It was stated in the speech from the throne, "My government will continue to impress upon appropriate American governments their responsibilities regarding potentially unacceptable pollution levels in the Niagara River." I would like to know how the government of Ontario can maintain any credibility with the United States government when it botches its presentation on the S area case in the United States district court and when it hides information about Ontario's contribution to the growing toxics problem in Lake Ontario.

Specifically, I would like to ask the minister why her office failed to release an important study that shows our own sewage plants are pumping as much in the way of toxic chemicals into the Great Lakes as the 10 large chemical plants and oil refineries in Sarnia.

Hon. Ms. Fish: We intend to pursue discussions and put pressure on the American authorities at several levels. We intend to pursue it through our normal intergovernmental contacts, through the appeals that have been filed in the court system on particular cases and, as well, through direct bilateral contact, most notably with officials in New York state.

I am very troubled at the suggestion there has been any information or any reportage that has been hidden. In fact, the ministry has been extremely open, particularly in responding through international joint studies on sources of pollution on the Ontario side as well as on the American side of the Niagara River and the Great Lakes. Indeed, the entire intent of the analysis and the study was to enable us, particularly in the Niagara River area, to move to clean up several of those sites that were identified on a much more stringent basis than is done on stateside.

If the member would be kind enough to give me the particulars in the report he is concerned about, I will ensure that, if it is not already released -- and my understanding is that it was -- it certainly will be.

Mr. Bradley: It was not during the election campaign.

This report, which I now have and which I know the minister has seen, entitled A Survey and Evaluation of Organic Compounds in Nine Sewage Treatment Plant Effluents in Southern Ontario, reveals that the plants are contaminating the lower Great Lakes and several tributary rivers with 272 organic chemicals, five of which were singled out by the study as posing a significant threat to humans. The report also says there are 3,200 tons a year of pollution flowing into the Niagara River, six times the amount given in the joint report that came out last October.

I would like to know why over the last few years the government has cut $33 million from the ministry's annual budget, mostly from funds for upgrading sewage treatment and water plants, when the ministry had this report and knew about the serious chemical problems developing in the sewage treatment plants of this province.

Hon. Ms. Fish: The member will know from the speech from the throne that very substantial new cleanup initiatives are being taken. Substantial additional funds are targeted to improvement of municipal water and sewer works and to improvement for beach cleanup, most of which is through water and sewer. In particular, there is a substantial $100 million fund to assist with hazardous waste cleanup.

Those measures, flowing from the specific analysis and reports that have been done, point us in the right direction of improved technology and, still better, improved treatment of our water quality. They are the kind of actions the people of Ontario can be proud of and sure of.

GRAIN FINANCIAL PROTECTION PROGRAM

Mr. Ramsay: In the absence of the Minister of Agriculture and Food (Mr. Stevenson), I would like to ask the Premier a question regarding the failure of the grain financial protection program to cover the claim of soybean producers who have balances outstanding on basis contracts involving the R. B. McKinlay and Sons Ltd. insolvency.

Will the minister, or the Premier in this case, seeing that farmers thought these contracts were covered according to information supplied by the ministry, authorize an emergency payment of $1.4 million? Will the minister also instruct his staff to prepare amendments to the present legislation so that the new Minister of Agriculture and Food will be able to introduce this legislation as soon as possible?

Hon. F. S. Miller: Before I refer that to the Provincial Secretary for Resources Development (Mr. Timbrell), who also knows a lot about farming, I thank the member for thinking, unlike his leader, that we will be here long enough to do that.

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: The plan in question was developed after extensive consultation with the industry. I will take the member's expression of concern as notice and ensure that the Minister of Agriculture and Food, or officials of that ministry, deliver a full response to the member as soon as possible.

Mr. Ramsay: There is a pamphlet regarding the program produced by the ministry in which two exemptions are mentioned, but this particular exemption is not mentioned. The tragedy of this is that these farmers entered into this agreement in good faith and have been let down by this government. I also request that under the circumstances the licensing of these firms be tightened up. This firm was approved six months previously and now it owes $3 million to the farmers of this province.

Mr. Speaker: I am sure the minister will take that to the proper authority.

3:20 p.m.

Mr. Riddell: I am sure the former Minister of Agriculture and Food is aware of the number of farmers who are hanging near bankruptcy because of the R. B. McKinlay and Sons Ltd. insolvency. I am sure the minister is also aware that many of these farmers were not able to get operating capital this year because they have not been paid for the corn that was in storage with R. B. McKinlay.

Has the minister consulted at all with the Minister of Agriculture and Food -- he is the former minister -- to ascertain whether the basis contracts are going to be honoured under the grain financial protection program? The farmers then would know and would be able to go to the bankers and say, "Yes, we are going to get paid for our crop because the government has decided it is going to honour the basis contract."

Can the minister tell us today? Can we go back and tell the farmers they will get paid for the grain, the soybeans and the corn they sold on the option contract?

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: As I have already indicated, the original question and supplementary by the new member for Timiskaming (Mr. Ramsay), whom I welcome to the House, and the supplementary by the member for Huron-Middlesex (Mr. Riddell) will be referred immediately to the office of the Minister of Agriculture and Food. I am sure as soon as he returns to this House he will deliver to the members a full and complete answer.

DISASTER RELIEF

Mr. Epp: I have a question for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. First of all, I want to congratulate him on his appointment.

Many of us saw the devastation and destruction in Barrie and that area the other day, and I guess one of the big surprises after seeing the destruction was that there was not a greater loss of life. It was reported in the Globe and Mail this morning that in the minister's pronouncements is a phrase that he will give the three-to-one funding if need be. I wonder if he would clarify that for the benefit of the House, because there is a lot of uncertainty among the public and particularly in the communities that reaped this devastation.

Also, would he clarify for the benefit of the House the three-to-one formula for individual projects? What is the comparison? If the Red Cross gives money, is that money included in that particular project as part of the public contribution, or is it not included as part of the public contribution to the devastation in that area?

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: We have been in touch with a number of organizations that have launched various fund-raising appeals to ask them to ensure that all the proceeds from those appeals end up in the hands of the Central Ontario Disaster Relief Committee; in other words, in the central financial pot, if you will, from which claims will be paid to the affected citizens in that area. That includes the Red Cross.

I will give an example. On Tuesday I took a call from the Chancellor of Toronto, the Most Reverend Bishop Wall, who sought my guidance. I advised him that any contribution the archdiocese might want to make should go to the central Ontario disaster relief fund. That afternoon, His Excellency had delivered to me, on behalf of his Eminence the Cardinal, a cheque for $100,000. That has gone into the central fund, and we are urging all others to do the same so we will then match.

The use of the words "if needed," I suppose comes in part from our experience with the last major disaster of this type, in Woodstock six years ago, where the fund-raising campaign was so successful they did not have to draw from the government as much as the government was willing to donate.

I point out, though, that the three-to-one matching of funds donated is but one part of the assistance provided by the provincial government. There are the obvious things that have already happened: the response by the Solicitor General and his staff at the very time the disaster struck; the responses of the various ministries, some of which I outlined in my statement today; and the things that will be ongoing with respect to the municipal assessment base. There are some municipalities whose assessment bases are destroyed, and we are going to have to assist them for some time to come to enable them to continue to function as viable municipalities by providing assistance with respect to municipal roads and bridges and so forth which will be over and above anything we might do with respect to matching contributions. I will not go through the whole list, because it is extensive.

When I came back from Barrie on Saturday afternoon and called a meeting of the ministry, I found that we ended up, as the Premier (Mr. F. S. Miller) said, with 16 ministries represented in my boardroom around noon on Sunday, and when we got started we found we were touching every part of the government.

The assistance to the area has already been extensive. It has been well co-ordinated by the local municipalities and by the local members of the Legislature, who are working very closely with them.

Mr. McKessock: Last Saturday morning I was asked by the reeve of Melancthon township to view with him the disaster in the southern part of my riding. I found the complete destruction of a restaurant, a new $200,000 potato storage facility and numerous potato and cattle farming operations.

The people affected asked me two questions; although they were not recognized in the press, they want to make sure they are recognized in the government assistance program. First, what steps should they take now to ensure they are going to be able to participate in the program? Second, the destruction is so great that some of them have to determine whether in fact they can afford to rebuild, and they would like to know what percentage of the loss they can expect to be covered by the government.

Hon. Mr. Timbrell: I spoke with that reeve at about one o'clock last Saturday in the community centre in Grand Valley, as did some of my officials. I believe the head of that council now understands that, like all other councils, his council must ask by resolution to be designated a disaster area.

We have purposely gone about this in the way we have to avoid any problems between municipalities. We are calling it the Central Ontario Disaster Relief Committee and the central Ontario disaster relief fund so there will be no problems between or among the municipalities. There will be one central pot of money from which all claims will be drawn so that we do not end up, as has apparently happened in the past, with separate funds in each municipality. One municipality might be very successful and end up having more money than it requires to meet the claims there; another might not have enough, and we get into that kind of problem. We are not going to have that in this instance.

We met with 21 municipal council heads on Monday afternoon. Since then we have learned of five other municipalities farther east in the province that were affected, and they will be included, assuming their councils ask to be included by way of a council resolution.

As far as the coverage is concerned, the normal maximum is 90 per cent.

ALTERNATIVE ACCOMMODATION

Mr. Warner: As I was saying before I was so rudely interrupted four years ago, this government does not deserve the confidence of the people.

I have a question for the Minister of Community and Social Services. I would like to know why the minister has failed to protect legislatively the residents of homes for the aged from being arbitrarily removed from a home, as in the case of Mrs. Lorenzetto, who not only was removed from Villa Colombo but also was abandoned in a car in front of her relatives' home, Villa Colombo being fully aware that the relatives could not adequately care for her.

Hon. Mr. Eves: I am sure the honourable member is aware that every home for the aged in Ontario, including Villa Colombo, has its own independent board of directors, which oversees the operation of that home.

In this particular circumstance the home went to great lengths during a period of some five years to encourage Mrs. Lorenzetto's family to take her back into their home or to assist them in finding alternative accommodation for her. Her behaviour had become extremely disruptive to other residents of the home. She was not fulfilling her obligations with respect to her diabetic diet.

Despite the fact this was repeatedly brought to the attention of the family by phone calls, meetings and letters, the family quite frankly did not appear to be interested in finding alternative accommodation or in asking Mrs. Lorenzetto to comply with the requests of the home and its administrator. Finally, after some time, one grandson in the family did agree to assume responsibility for trying to find alternative accommodation for Mrs. Lorenzetto.

3:30 p.m.

Although not obliged to do so, the villa took it upon itself -- normally this would be done by the family -- to send out applications to 12 other settings where she could possibly be located. One facility, a retirement home, accepted the applicant. However, the family refused to accept the arrangement because it was too far for visiting.

Finally, at the end of May, this matter all came to a head. On two occasions discharge orders had been extended by the villa. The family was telephoned and advised Mrs. Lorenzetto would be brought home on the weekend of June 1 and 2. The family member who talked to the administrator on the phone indicated the home should do whatever it felt was necessary. On the way home in the car, Mrs. Lorenzetto indicated she was pleased she was going home and asked the staff members into the house for coffee when they arrived there.

Apparently, between the telephone call and the time Mrs. Lorenzetto arrived home, some members of the family had a change of heart and they refused to accept her upon her arrival at home.

Subsequently, I am led to believe, and it is my understanding of the facts today, at least one daughter and one son were willing to accept Mrs. Lorenzetto into their home and are taking care of her now.

Mr. Warner: I will be pleased to correct the minister later on his misinformation.

I am asking the minister, instead of putting the responsibility back on a 76-year-old woman who is not well, to correct the Homes for the Aged and Rest Homes Act and to draft changes so the consent of both a doctor and the family is necessary and suitable accommodation in place before a home is allowed to throw someone out. That is what I am asking him to do.

Hon. Mr. Eves: The administrator and staff members at the home over a period of five years were more than co-operative with the family and tried to enlist the family's co-operation and support with respect to Mrs. Lorenzetto.

Mr. Warner: They washed their hands and left the lady in the car.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT

Mr. Carting: My question is to the Minister of Skills Development.

On May 15, 1984, the former Treasurer, now the Minister of Education (Mr. Grossman), introduced in his budget the Ontario Youth Tourism program. The then Treasurer said the program would be in operation "this summer." That was in June 1984. The first trainees entered the program in January 1985. Will the minister please explain this eight-month lapse and bring us up to date on this program?

Hon. Mr. Gillies: The Ontario Youth Tourism program was announced as part of the Ontario Youth Opportunities package in the 1984 budget. The 10 programs introduced by the then Treasurer in his excellent budget have taken off extremely well. Many of them are oversubscribed at this point. We anticipate part of the additional funding announced in the throne speech will be going into some of these youth opportunities programs.

One of those that was requested by the tourist industry on some occasion back in the spring of 1984 was a special program to be directed at enticing young people to be trained in the tourist industry and brought into it on short-term placements. The program is modelled very much on our Ontario career action program. The training period takes with it a $100-a-week stipend.

We have found that the takeup on the program has not been nearly as great as on many of the others under the OYO package. This is partially because there are many other programs under my ministry that are already working in developing new trainees for the tourist industry. One finds them in OCAP, the Ontario youth employment program, summer Experience and so on.

It is currently my intention to roll the youth tourism program into another, larger program, probably OCAP, to help cut down on the duplication of paperwork and on the overlapping I sense is taking place between it and some of the other programs.

Mr. Curling: Let me inform the House that by the end of the fiscal year, March 1985, exactly 18 trainees had gone through this program. Of those 18, not one has been hired by private sector tourism agencies as the program envisioned. All 18 have been given government-paid jobs in other youth programs.

The youth commissioner has said he hopes 1,500 trainees will be produced this year. That still remains a reduction of 40 per cent of the original goal. Given the government's sad performance last year, does the minister seriously believe even this modest target can be reached?

Hon. Mr. Gillies: I am sure the modest target can be reached. I would suggest to the honourable member that, if he wanted to be fair, he would also advise the House that Ontario Youth Opportunities and our other youth programs now expend some $175 million a year, that we employ in excess of 100,000 young people in this province and that the province's commitment to youth employment has quadrupled in the past four years, a record unparalleled in any other jurisdiction in this country.

I hope the member will be as quick to point to some of the successes and to some of the lives that are being changed by these excellent programs as he is to point to a program that has had a slow start and perhaps a lower than anticipated takeup.

FLOODING

Mr. Hayes: I have a question for the Minister of Natural Resources arising from his response on the serious shoreline flooding problems along Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie. Will the minister explain why there has been such a long delay in responding to the serious flooding that has been happening in the fall and in the spring, especially in the past few years? Will he also tell me why this program provides only loans instead of outright grants to compensate for the damage?

Hon. Mr. Harris: The ministry has been involved for some time with conservation authorities and municipalities in the area. If the honourable member is referring to the program that has just been announced, as well as emergency and short-term aid, I believe a long-term program was announced by my colleague on Monday or Tuesday. I think that program was evolved through consultation with officials in the area, with conservation authorities, with municipalities and with the member for Essex South (Mr. Mancini).

I know he attended a meeting in the deputy minister's office, and at that time the rough guideline of the program was discussed and shared with him. It was reported back to me that he agreed a logical way to start was in consultation with other groups. I understand the news of the announcement and of the manner in which we plan to proceed has been very well received.

Mr. Hayes: In view of the fact that the residents in my area believe persistent flooding is not purely a natural phenomenon but results from manipulation of the water levels in the Great Lakes, will the minister press the International Joint Commission to conduct and publish a study of the causes of this frequent problem and table the study in this Legislature?

3:40 p.m.

Hon. Mr. Harris: I am not sure I am going to agree today to do everything the member has suggested, given the time it might take. It might be an appropriate action for me to take. We have had some representations in the ministry that the water is being manipulated in some way. My information, on investigation into whether it be by diversions or anything that is there, is that it is a very minimal part of the problem.

However, in the light of the fact there are some people on both sides of the border who feel it is a major part of the problem, we are investigating it. We are looking at getting information out in public as to what impact there is from any artificial mechanisms along the water. I assure the member the information I have is that we are talking about very minimal amounts, less than tenths of an inch, and that when we talk about the wind and other problems, what the member refers to is a very minimal part of the problem.

Mr. Mancini: The question deals with a $5-million program that has been specifically announced for the problems we have had in Essex and Kent counties. We have not received the lengthy technical detail we need in order to assess properly how this program can work and how the individuals who have been hurt will be able to have their pain eased somewhat.

In the light of these facts, would the minister guarantee he will keep an open mind as to how the money can be used, whether for breakwalls or structural repairs on homes, and ensure that all the money is not used for the repair of the roads and the provincial park which may have been badly damaged during the floods? I want to ensure that a good portion of this money is going to be used by the home owners who have been very badly hurt.

Hon. Mr. Harris: I think the question was whether the minister will keep an open mind. When I first decided to enter the profession I am now involved in, I did so not only with an open mind but also with open eyes. I would like to assure not only the member but also you, Mr. Speaker, and the House that I will keep an open mind on the issues the member raises.

TIMMINS HOSPITAL

Mr. Sweeney: I have a question to the newly appointed Minister of Health concerning the appointment of an architect for the new Timmins hospital. It is my understanding there was a direct conflict of interest involving a member of the interim board of that new hospital and the appointment of this architect. There is also the possibility of a misrepresentation on the part of that particular architect's Toronto partner. I understand the minister is aware of this. What is he going to do about it?

Hon. Mr. Andrewes: In spite of the very extensive briefings I have undergone during my two-week period in the ministry, the matter the honourable member raises is not one with which I am completely familiar. If he would provide me with the details of his allegations, I will be pleased to take this as notice and report back to the member.

Mr. Speaker: I am sure the member will follow the instructions given to him by the minister to provide him with further information.

PETITIONS

ROMAN CATHOLIC SECONDARY SCHOOLS

Mr. Kerrio: I have a petition.

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

"We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition the parliament of Ontario as follows:

"Whereas any action to extend public funding to separate Roman Catholic secondary schools in Ontario would represent a fundamental change in public policy in our province; and

"Whereas it is uncertain whether extension would contravene the Ontario Human Rights Code and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; and

"Whereas in democratic societies there is a recognized convention which respects the rule of law that before fundamental changes in public policy are implemented such matters are debated in the Legislative Assembly, with an opportunity for the public to appear and be heard before an appropriate committee of the Legislature;

"We petition the Ontario Legislature to call on the government:

"(1) to seek a constitutional referral prior to any implementation to determine whether extension would conflict with the Ontario Human Rights Code and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; and

"(2) to debate fully the issue of extension prior to any implementation, such debate to include consideration of the issue by an appropriate committee of the House with an opportunity provided for the people to appear and be heard."

It is signed by teachers at the Lord Elgin Vocational School, Niagara Falls Collegiate and Vocational Institute and Westlane Secondary School.

Mr. McKessock: I have two petitions, one that I have received from the clerk of the session of the United Church, Palmerston, and one from the secondary school teachers, district 23 in my area, signed by 130 of my constituents. The first reads as follows:

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

"We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition the parliament of Ontario as follows:

"Whereas any action to extend public funding to separate secondary schools in Ontario would represent a fundamental change in public policy in our province; and

"Whereas people in a democratic society have a right to be consulted prior to implementation of policies which change long-standing relationships; and

"Whereas there is an understood convention in democratic societies which respect the rule of law that before fundamental changes in public policy are implemented such matters should be debated in the Legislative Assembly with an opportunity for the public to appear and be heard;

"We petition the Ontario Legislature to call on the government to debate the issue of an extension of public funding to separate secondary schools prior to implementation, such debate to include consideration of the issue by an appropriate committee of the House with an opportunity provided for the people to appear and be heard."

Mr. Speaker: Before the member begins the second petition, there seems to be quite a number of private conversations. I wonder whether they could stop for the time being.

Mr. McKessock: This petition was sent to me by Mr. M. J. McKenna, director of education of the Grey County Board of Education, and is signed by 170 of my constituents. It reads as follows:

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

"We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition the parliament of Ontario as follows:

"Whereas the proposed extension of funding to separate secondary education will significantly change the character and delivery of secondary education throughout Ontario, reducing the density of students and the variety of educational programs offered; and

"Whereas the decision to extend public funding to Roman Catholic separate secondary schools was made without the benefit of public input, legislative debate or in-depth study of the potential impact of such a change in policy; and

"Whereas the necessary changes in legislation and regulations will be found to be more responsible if subjected to greater consideration and evaluation than is possible before the commencement of the 1985-86 school year; and

"Whereas the required program and accommodation modifications shall require more planning time than is available prior to September 1985; and

"Whereas any legislation that is inconsistent with the Constitution is to the extent of the inconsistency of no force or effect, we petition the Ontario Legislature to delay the implementation of the proposed separate secondary school funding until appropriate constitutionally acceptable legislation is in place."

Mr. G. I. Miller: I too have petitions.

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

"We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition the parliament of Ontario as follows:

"Whereas any action to extend public funding to separate secondary schools in Ontario would represent a fundamental change in public policy in our province; and

"Whereas people in a democratic society have a right to be consulted prior to implementation of policies which change long-standing relationships; and

"We petition the Ontario Legislature to call on the government to debate the issue of extension of public funding to separate secondary schools prior to implementation, such debate to include consideration of the issue by an appropriate committee of the House with an opportunity provided for people to appear and be heard."

This petition has 74 signatures from the Delhi United Church. The second has 30 signatures from the Dunnville Secondary School. The third has 22 signatures from the residents of Haldimand-Norfolk. The fourth has 31 signatures from Port Dover Composite School. The fifth has 40 signatures from Simcoe Composite School. The sixth has 25 signatures from the Valley Heights Secondary School and the seventh has 56 signatures from Waterford District High School.

3:50 p.m.

FAMILY BENEFITS ASSISTANCE

Ms. Bryden: I have a petition to the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It is signed by 43 residents and is on the subject of the administration of the Family Benefits Act. It reads as follows:

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

"We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition the Legislature as follows:

"The petition of the undersigned residents of Ontario who now avail themselves of their ancient and undoubted right thus to present a grievance common to your petitioners in the certain assurance that your honourable Legislature will therefore provide a remedy, humbly sheweth:

"That whereas women in the province of Ontario, as evidenced in the city of Ottawa, are being subjected to unnecessary harassment and unwarranted financial and social hardship by the Ministry of Community and Social Services in its arbitrary interpretation of regulation 424/82 (section 5(b)) of the Family Benefits Act (this section states that single women aged 60 to 64, sole-support parents and wives of institutionalized old age security recipients are not eligible for family benefits assistance if they are `not living as a single person');

"That whereas the interpretation of the section of the act presently being used by the ministry is unfair in that it automatically assumes that the `man in the house' is willing or able to assume financial support for the woman and her children;

"That whereas at present there is no protection under Canadian law to ensure financial support for women and children in such situations, which often prove to be temporary rather than permanent; and

"That whereas the present interpretation and application of regulation 424/82 (section 5(b)) of the Family Benefits Act by the ministry is inconsistent with the intent of the Children's Law Reform Act, the Family Law Reform Act and the Child Welfare Act, which first and foremost considers the wellbeing of the children involved;

"Therefore, your petitioners humbly pray that this Legislature immediately direct the government of Ontario to investigate and review its related policy in this matter and take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that women and children receive fair, unbiased and nondiscriminatory treatment in both determining eligibility for family benefits assistance and in reviewing cases which come before the ministry for reassessment."

PORNOGRAPHIC MATERIAL

Mr. Van Horne: I have a petition to the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly:

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

"We, the undersigned, beg leave to petition the parliament of Ontario as follows:

"We urge that the provincial government amend the current legislation that will curtail the spread of pornographic literature and videotapes. We wish to express our gravest concern about the rampant spread of pornography in our society. Proliferation of magazines such as Penthouse and Hustler and the spread of pornographic videotapes is becoming an issue that we as teachers feel obligated to address."

This petition was signed by 330 members of the Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association in London and Middlesex county.

MOTIONS

DEPUTY SPEAKER AND DEPUTY CHAIRMAN

Hon. Mr. Grossman moved, seconded by Mr. Nixon, that the member for Oxford (Mr. Treleaven) be appointed Deputy Speaker for this parliament, and that the member for Carleton East (Mr. Morin) be appointed Deputy Chairman of the committees of the whole House for the present session.

Motion agreed to.

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon. Mr. Grossman moved that, notwithstanding standing order 64(a), private members' public business not be considered until the first Thursday following the completion of the throne speech debate.

Motion agreed to.

4 p.m.

INTRODUCTION OF BILL

HUMAN TISSUE GIFT AMENDMENT ACT

Mr. Van Horne moved, seconded by Mr. Elston, first reading of Bill 2, An Act to amend the Human Tissue Gift Act.

Motion agreed to.

Mr. Van Horne: This bill is one that I feel very strongly about. The Human Tissue Gift Act, which is relatively new in this province, is intended to be amended through this bill. Very simply, it will provide for a registry that would identify those who would be willing to donate an organ and, in my view, the registry would best be found through any and all who are eligible for Ontario health insurance plan benefits.

There is no question that medical science improvements in techniques and technology have led to a considerable demand for organs. Often they are very difficult to obtain or even to identify. I would submit this is a very serious theme and one this assembly should address as soon as possible.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE

Consideration of the speech of the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor at the opening of the session.

Mr. O'Connor moved, seconded by Mrs. Marland, that an humble address be presented to the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor as follows:

To the Honourable John Black Aird, an officer of the Order of Canada, one of Her Majesty's counsel learned in the law, Bachelor of Arts, Doctor of Laws, Lieutenant Governor of Ontario:

We, Her Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario, now assembled, beg leave to thank Your Honour for the gracious speech Your Honour has addressed to us.

Mr. O'Connor: Mr. Speaker, through you to my fellow members of provincial parliament, it is an honour for me to initiate this inaugural debate of the first session of the 33rd Parliament of Ontario and to move that this House endorse and adopt the policies and programs outlined in the speech from the throne presented to this assembly by His Honour the Lieutenant Governor on June 4.

May I also extend congratulations to you, Mr. Speaker, in your election as our Speaker. We are confident you will preside over the business of this assembly with evenhanded impartiality, fairness and wisdom. You may be assured that you can count on the full co-operation of members of this party as you assume the responsibilities of this challenging and important position.

I would also like to extend congratulations to members of all three parties on their election to this chamber. Simply to have survived the sort of effort we have all expended with one's sanity intact is a victory in itself. For each of us sitting here, there are at least two other individuals -- in my case three, one of whom I believe is here in the House -- who offered themselves in the service of their fellow citizens only to meet defeat at the polls.

We were all honourably and ably opposed by individuals who, while they do not sit in this House today, have none the less served their parties, their ridings and the people of Ontario in a most exemplary manner. I would hope all citizens of Ontario, but in particular we in this House, would take the time to reflect upon and applaud the contribution these people have made to our community.

I take this occasion to express my thanks to the people of Oakville for their support in the general election and for the confidence they expressed in me personally and in my party in electing me as their representative to this parliament. It is my hope that through my own efforts and with the support of my colleagues I will be able to vindicate the trust the people of Oakville have placed in me.

In assuming my place as representative of the riding of Oakville, I am most conscious that I am succeeding a man who served the people of Ontario and of Oakville in a most dedicated and effective manner during the 18 years he sat in this chamber. First elected to this assembly in 1967, James Snow served the people of this province as Minister of Public Works, Minister of Government Services and Minister of Transportation and Communications for 12 years. In the last capacity, Jim Snow managed and directed the development, maintenance and expansion of Ontario's first-class transportation and communications infrastructure and thereby contributed to the economic development and social integration of this vast province.

In discharging my duties as the member of the provincial parliament for Oakville, I will be guided and inspired by Jim Snow's record as an efficient administrator and a tireless, dedicated representative.

I am new to the provincial political arena and I must say my rookie session is proving to be a most interesting and stimulating one. There are predictions that this session will prove to be very short, that the hair which holds the sword of Damocles over the head of this administration will be cut and we will find ourselves back here some weeks hence to debate a new agenda, a rough draft of which has already been published in the local newspapers.

I am not sure we should add the fall of this government to the short list of life's inevitabilities, among which we now number only death and taxes. That subject is a matter that the members opposite have the right to decide. It is my hope that in making this decision they will carefully review the agenda this government has placed before this assembly for public debate in an open forum.

I believe the speech from the throne outlines an agenda that directly and effectively addresses the concerns and aspirations expressed by the people of Ontario during the last provincial election and reflected in the composition of this House. The speech from the throne details a program for action that will help secure economic growth and social equity for the people of Ontario. Through the throne speech this government has expressed its determination to help our regions and our key industries to achieve their full potential for the benefit of all our citizens.

Mr. D. S. Cooke: We have heard that before.

Mr. O'Connor: And again and again and again.

Mr. D. S. Cooke: It never comes true.

Mr. O'Connor: The throne speech makes it clear that the Progressive Conservative government is committed to policies that will allow for the rational development of our resources and enhance environmental protection. As it has in the past, the government of Ontario will continue to support programs to generate new job training and new training opportunities, and to ensure that all the people of our great province have an equal opportunity to share fairly in the social, economic and political life of our community.

Moreover, through the throne speech this government has dedicated itself to improving the quality of life for the citizens of Ontario through measures that will strengthen our high-quality and accessible health care and education systems and expand services for that fast-growing group in our society, senior citizens.

In sum, the throne speech puts before this assembly a responsible and responsive agenda. The throne speech demonstrates that this government is prepared to provide this province with responsible, moderate and effective leadership, the type of leadership the people of Ontario have come to expect from their government and the type of leadership required to realize fully the tremendous potential of this province.

Our efforts to achieve the objectives of sustained growth, new employment opportunities and social equity will be considerably assisted by the fact that during the past few years this province's economic performance has been without parallel in Canada. In 1983 and 1984 we experienced our two strongest years of growth in a decade, and in both years our economy significantly outperformed the national economy.

4:10 p.m.

In 1983, the first year of recovery from the recession of the early 1980s, the Canadian economy grew by 3.3 per cent in real terms; in Ontario, meanwhile, our economy expanded by 4.2 per cent in real terms. We bettered our performance last year, achieving a real growth of six per cent and the biggest increase in real gross provincial product since 1972. Ontario's 1984 growth rate of six per cent compares quite favourably with the national rate of only 4.7 per cent. This province has quite simply led the nation in economic growth in the past two years. Under this government we expect to do so again in 1985 and 1986.

The strong economic growth we have experienced in Ontario has generated new employment opportunities for our citizens and has helped significantly to reduce the unemployment rate in our province. Last year, for example, economic growth in this province generated 147,000 new jobs, as average employment in Ontario increased by 3.6 per cent over 1983 levels. In the rest of the country in 1984, employment grew by only 1.9 per cent. In 1984, fully 55 per cent of all new jobs created in Canada were created right here in Ontario.

Also, last year our economy generated 39,000 new jobs for young workers in the province and our youth unemployment rate fell from 17.8 per cent in 1983 to 14.9 per cent -- three percentage points lower than the national youth unemployment rate of 17.9 per cent.

Our province continues to lead the nation in employment growth in 1985. As of the end of the first quarter of this year, 181,000 more people were employed in Ontario than there had been in March 1983, and in that period, 63 per cent of all new jobs in this country again were created right here in Ontario.

In April of this year, 4.407 million of our citizens were employed in this province, more than ever in our history. In April 1985 the unemployment rate in our province stood at 8.3 per cent, 2.6 percentage points lower than the national rate and the second lowest unemployment rate recorded in any province in Canada.

In addition, the youth unemployment rate in Ontario over the first four months of 1985 averaged 15.4 per cent which, while admittedly unacceptably high, is significantly better than the national average of 19 per cent experienced during the same period. It should also be noted that from April 1984 to April of this year the number of young people employed in this province increased by 29,000, while youth employment in the rest of the country during that same period decreased by 5,000.

That type of economic expansion and those kinds of employment gains are not achieved by accident. They are the result of a partnership for growth which exists between the government and the private sector in Ontario. Those gains are the result of hard work and determination by our people, the competitive spirit of our industries and the productivity of our labour force. They are also the product of several policies introduced by this government, policies which encourage initiative, reward risk-taking, attract investment and stimulate employment and economic expansion.

I am most encouraged that this government has served notice through the throne speech that it intends to continue to implement the type of job-creating economic policies which have not only helped this province recover from the recession but have ushered in a new era of growth. The top priority of this government is job creation. As His Honour told the House in the speech from the throne, "Higher employment growth must remain the unifying objective of economic policy."

To ensure that this province continues its pace-setting economic performance, this government will implement programs to encourage private sector economic growth and to increase direct public investment in job creation and skills training initiatives.

It is well recognized that a healthy private sector is the source of the vast majority of secure, well-paid, new jobs. In the last decade more than 90 per cent of all new jobs created in Ontario have been created in and by the private sector. It is also generally acknowledged that within the private sector it is the small and medium-sized firms that generate the most new jobs. As members on both sides are aware, Ontario's 240,000 small firms have created nine out of 10 new jobs generated in the last five years.

Aside from their important economic function, small businesses perform an important social role in that they provide many young people and women with their first employment or entrepreneurial opportunity. Any investment by government that can maximize the growth potential of this dynamic sector will pay substantial dividends in the form of new jobs and greater employment equity.

Given that all members are agreed that job creation is the top priority of this province, I am confident all members will support the government's proposal to reduce the tax burden on growing small enterprises. This initiative would help to compound the beneficial impact of measures introduced in the federal budget to assist the small-business sector.

As noted in the throne speech, Ontario is a major trading power. About one million jobs in our economy depend either directly or indirectly on foreign trade. Last year, assisted by programs introduced by this government such as the export success fund, the value of Ontario exports increased by a phenomenal 32 per cent, a rate of growth greater than that achieved by any other industrial jurisdiction. Exports represent a significant source of employment growth. It is estimated that every $1 billion in exports creates 16,000 new jobs in Ontario.

As the Premier (Mr. F. S. Miller) has said on a number of occasions, the primary objective of our trade policy must be jobs for the people of Ontario. All trade strategies and proposals must be evaluated in terms of their impact on employment.

The creation of a committee on finance and economic affairs with the mandate to address the issue of trade objectives for Ontario would provide this House with a valuable means of ensuring that our trade policy furthered the attainment of our priority goal of job creation. It is vitally important that we in Ontario continue to refine a comprehensive and co-ordinated trade strategy designed to diversify markets and products and to encourage more of our producers to take advantage of export opportunities as they arise.

We must also have a well-defined understanding of how the provincial and national interest would be affected by various free trade schemes with the United States. Access to the American market, which consumes 90 per cent of Ontario's exports, must be assured. However, it should not be paid for by any diminishment of our economic sovereignty or job loss. The finance and economic affairs committee and the trade adviser proposed by the throne speech would assist this House to develop an appropriate response to the many complex issues it will have to address in this area in trade.

4:20 p.m.

As the member for Oakville, home of the Ford Motor Co. of Canada, Mack Canada and many automotive industry suppliers, I am most pleased that the government of Ontario will continue to press the government of Canada for an extension of the voluntary export restraints with Japanese auto producers. The one job in six in our economy that depends on the auto industry is too important to be bargained away or placed at risk simply because our friends to the south are satisfied with conditions in their markets. I know this government can count on the support of members of all parties in its efforts to ensure that the principles of fair trade are respected and Ontario jobs protected in the auto trade sector.

One of the hard lessons we learned during the last recession was that economic competitiveness is determined by the level of productivity, which is in turn related to the quality of the technology employed in the productive process. To enhance the competitiveness and productivity of Ontario firms and thereby protect existing jobs and create new ones, the government is proposing that the province establish an enterprise technology fund. This fund will be used to help qualifying firms upgrade their technologies and equipment.

Consistent with the view that all economic policies must respect the priority we have assigned to job creation, fund assistance will be conditional on an undertaking from recipients to develop training and retraining programs for their employees. Employees will also benefit through amendments that this House will be asked to make to the Labour Relations Act to require that employees be given advance notice of and be consulted on technological change. These measures will ensure that the process of technological upgrading will not result in job loss and will provide employees with training and retraining opportunities.

In addition to measures to stimulate employment growth through economic expansion, this government will increase its direct investment in job creation and training programs. The government has always recognized that it has a responsibility to invest public funds sensibly to provide greater employment opportunities for its citizens and to ensure that the province has a well-trained, skilled and flexible labour force.

For example, in 1982 this government invested $133 million in a capital projects acceleration program that created jobs for 14,500 people. Through its commitment of $110 million to the Canada-Ontario employment development program in 1983, the government provided work for some 26,000 more people. The three-year, $450-million Ontario Youth Opportunities program and the $115-million Ontario skills fund established in the 1984 budget have enabled 108,000 more people to take advantage of training and experience opportunities.

This year, through its commitment of an additional $100 million to an employment and training supplement, we will make training and experience opportunities available to at least another 105,000 people in this province. In addition, accelerated spending on northern and rural road construction and maintenance and the continuation of last year's community economic transformation agreements program will use public funds to expand employment opportunities in regions with high unemployment rates.

Furthermore, the commitment of an additional $10 million to the tending Ontario's forests program, $15 million to the recreation capital construction program, $30 million to the cultural facilities fund and the $400-million rental supply fund all represent significant public investments that will help create new jobs for Ontario citizens.

To assist all regions of our province to attain their full potential and to share fairly in the economic and employment growth, this government will commit an additional $10 million to the northern Ontario regional economic development program. To encourage greater diversification and investment in the northern economy, the government will increase the funds available to small business development corporations and will broaden the eligibility for SBDC investments in the north.

The government also proposes a five-year, $40-million, cost-shared program to replace the eastern Ontario subsidiary agreement. This program would support projects in the agricultural, tourism and forestry industries. These initiatives, in conjunction with specific programs for the efficient management of our tourism and forestry resources and for the support of agriculture in Ontario, will help generate new employment and economic opportunities in all regions of the province.

This government is convinced these programs and efficient management of our economy will help us create 200,000 new jobs in the province this year. The fact that we have been able to create more than 330,000 jobs in the past two years demonstrates that we have the capacity to create the jobs the people of Ontario need.

The government is determined that not only will the people of this province have the jobs they need but also the principles of employment equity and fairness will be respected in the work place. It is for that reason this throne speech proposes some 12 measures to improve safety in the work place and to strengthen the rights of employees.

While all these reforms are significant, the one issue that has attracted the most public attention of late is the issue of compensation equity. The principle of equal pay for work of equal value has been endorsed by all parties of this Legislature. However, considerable confusion exists as to precisely how this principle could be implemented in the work place.

I suggest that in the throne speech the government has outlined a sensible approach for the application of this principle to the public and private sectors. With the assistance of the compensation equity commission, the implementation of equal pay for work of equal value in the provincial public sector will serve as a valuable test case and demonstration project and provide us with the opportunity to identify and rectify any problems with implementation before pursuing a broader application in the public sector.

To my mind, it would be reckless and irresponsible for government to require, as a matter of public policy, that the private sector implement the principles and practices of compensation equity before first making every effort to ensure that the concept was clearly defined and fully comprehended by all parties affected.

There is every reason for confidence that the public discussion on equal pay for work of equal value to be initiated by the compensation equity commission will result in the development of a workable and effective method of implementing principles of compensation equity in a fair and affordable manner in all sectors of our economy.

This government will also ask this House to support measures to ensure that every person in this province has an adequate income during his or her retirement years. The proposed Pension Benefits Act will provide for earlier vesting of pension entitlement, assured pension portability, improved survivor benefits and other methods which, while of benefit to all pension plan participants, will be of special benefit to women and individuals who change jobs.

The government of Ontario has played a leading role in the national debate on pension reform, and many of the province's recommendations are reflected in the recently announced amendments to the federal government's Pension Benefits Standards Act.

4:30 p.m.

It is my hope that this government will continue to press for the adoption of inflation protection methods for pension plans. The position of this province has always been that there should be some form of inflation protection for pensioners. In the past, this government has proposed that inflation protection be provided to at least 60 per cent of the rate of increase in the consumer price index. This strikes me as a most reasonable proposal and one that should be adopted to ensure that the value and security of a pension are not undercut by inflation. The government should be encouraged to argue forcefully for this option in its discussions on pension reform with other governments and with the private sector.

While we are convinced that economic growth provides the key to job creation and the improvement of social services, we will not permit growth to be achieved at the cost of the degradation of Ontario's environment and natural heritage. The quality of our environment must be maintained and protected. In response to that concern, this House will be asked to support 12 major initiatives which will augment and expand this province's environmental protection legislation.

Among other things, this assembly will be asked to support the establishment of a $100-million environmental protection fund to finance the cleanup of waste sites, the creation of a new investigation and enforcement branch to increase our ability to identify and prosecute those who violate our laws, and the establishment of a $20-million beach protection fund, all announced in the speech from the throne.

I am aware that there are those who have suggested these measures represent nothing more than a deathbed conversion of an administration that they would have us believe has long been indifferent to environmental protection. There are those who prefer not to believe the statement made in the throne speech that this province "has in place the most extensive and rigorous environmental laws of all the industrial jurisdictions in North America."

Mr. McClellan: Who told you that?

Mr. O'Connor: I will get to that.

There are those -- sitting right over there -- who do not wish to recognize that no other jurisdiction on this continent has done more to research and control the acid rain problem than Ontario.

For the benefit of those individuals, I refer to a report card on the environmental and conservation programs and the environmental assessment laws of the Canadian provinces prepared and released by the Canadian Nature Federation in the spring of this year. The CNF said its report card was "really an indication of a government's commitment to environmental protection."

Some members of this House may be dismayed to learn that the government that received the highest mark from the CNF, the government that emerged as being the most concerned with environmental protection, was none other than the Ontario government.

Mr. McClellan: Where were all those people on May 2?

Mr. O'Connor: Shall we name any other names?

There is no question that if the measures the government has proposed in the throne speech are adopted and implemented, we will improve significantly on our already successful record on environmental protection.

In that the two parties opposite have also advocated such steps as the creation of an environmental superfund, the proclamation of the spills bill and tougher fines and penalties for violators, we could reasonably expect that they would lend this program their enthusiastic support. We seek it, ask it and expect it of them.

This province's strong economy and record of effective public sector management have enabled the government of Ontario to provide its citizens with a broad range of high-quality, accessible, social, education and health services. These factors will enable this government to effect further improvements to the services it supports through 25 reforms which may be implemented without major tax increases and without placing an onerous burden of debt on future generations.

In the education field the government intends to increase, through the general legislative grants, the province's share of public school financing to ensure that the costs of maintaining excellence in the system are not borne by the property taxpayers. The government will also introduce legislation to extend full and equitable funding for the secondary separate school component of our public school system. This government has undertaken to provide those members of the public who wish to express their views on this legislation with the opportunity to do so, free from any arbitrary time constraint.

The government has again given its assurance that non-Roman Catholic teachers will have fair access to employment and tenure in Roman Catholic schools and that the extension of funding will not compromise in any way its commitment to public schools generally.

Again, in that both the Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party have publicly expressed full support for the extension of funding to secondary separate schools, above the grade 10 level, it is hoped that this House will be able to successfully address this complex issue.

The government has also indicated it will undertake a major reform of the way in which this province finances its health care system. As members are aware, the health care system in our province is financed through general tax revenues and Ontario health insurance plan premiums, although the latter cover less than 20 per cent of the total health care bill.

The government will freeze OHIP premiums at their current level and will increase premium assistance. These measures will be of direct benefit to low-income families and to those 2.7 million Ontarians who already receive some form of government premium assistance.

Having worked with senior citizen volunteer agencies in my own riding for approximately 15 years, I was very pleased that the government declared its intention to appoint a minister for the elderly to co-ordinate and consolidate all services and programs for the elderly currently provided by its ministries and agencies.

I think members will agree it is important that we act now to address the public policy challenges that will result from the demographic shift towards an ever-ageing population. The assignment to one minister of the responsibility for services for senior citizens could improve the design, implementation and delivery of programs and services.

The announcement that significant new funds will be allocated to the homemakers program is also very welcome. In the past fiscal year, this government invested $5.7 million in home support services and spent $7.2 million in support of the homemakers program. This was money well spent.

These programs not only help to keep senior citizens and the elderly in their own homes where they can lead independent lives but also help to reduce the cost of institutional care that would otherwise be incurred.

Also, this government is to be commended for promising to protect senior citizens from any income loss they might suffer as a result of the modification of the indexation of old age security payments, which was introduced in the May federal budget.

I have touched on only a few of the more than 90 different initiatives, programs and reforms which this government proposed in the speech from the throne. I have not made mention, for example, of the $100-million quality education fund which this government would establish to support post-secondary education, nor have I mentioned the rent review initiatives, the $40-million farm operating credit assistance program or the rural employment assistance program.

Interjection.

Mr. O'Connor: The honourable member noticed. Good for him.

Time does not allow for even a partial review of the many legal and procedural reforms which this government has proposed to make our justice system more responsive, our Legislature more effective and our public service more accountable and efficient. No doubt these and other issues will be addressed by members of all three parties during the course of this debate. However, I believe the proposals I have had the opportunity to address demonstrate that this government has developed a prudent and progressive agenda for Ontario in the next two years.

4:40 p.m.

This administration has articulated a strategy that will enable this province to achieve a sustained growth and will create 200,000 new jobs in this province this year. Those goals will be attained without abandoning our commitment to responsible public sector management which has given this province, in per capita terms, the lowest deficit, the smallest and most efficient public service in the country, and a triple-A credit rating.

This government has proposed major reforms of our social and environmental policies that will help improve the quality of life for all our citizens. We have put forward for the approval of this assembly new measures that will give all the people of this province an equal opportunity to participate in the economic, social and political life of our community.

This government has proposed a program for action which, because it speaks to the needs and interests of the people of this province, will have the support of the people of this province. Should our Liberal and New Democratic friends take the time to review seriously the agenda the government has put before this House, they will find there is much in it they can support.

Through the throne speech we do not offer the members opposite, nor do we seek, an entente cordiale such as they have negotiated between and among themselves. What we do offer is the opportunity to work together to implement a responsible and progressive program for the social and economic betterment of this province. What we do offer is the opportunity for all members of this assembly to engage in a process of full and open consensual decision-making and debate, a process governed only by the mandate we have received from the voters and our common interest in building a better future for the people of this province.

Mrs. Marland: It is a great pleasure and a privilege for me to second the speech from the throne. The speech is a sound and progressive document. It proposes change and growth based on the strengths of our people and our economy. I believe it is an appropriate response to the needs of the 1980s and gives the kind of direction our people want.

This is my second day in this Legislature. I want to take this opportunity to thank the people of Mississauga South for their confidence in electing me. I shall strive always to be worthy of their support and trust.

I would also like to thank someone else, my predecessor Mr. Doug Kennedy. Doug Kennedy has represented Mississauga South for 18 years. His family has roots sunk deep in the public and business life of Mississauga and Peel region going back to 1919 when his uncle Tom Kennedy began his 36 years as a member of this House, including being Premier.

Doug is highly respected in Mississauga, as is his brother Harold, who is a city and Peel region councillor. I know Doug has many friends here as well. Doug Kennedy set a high standard for himself when he entered public life. He has lived up to that standard and has set an example of dedication and commitment that I hope to follow.

It is customary for members of the provincial parliament to speak at this time about their ridings. I certainly will take advantage of this opportunity. I am proud of Mississauga. I have served in the municipal government for 11 years; four on the public school board and seven on the city and region of Peel council. I have watched my city grow to our present population of 350,000.

May I tell you, Mr. Speaker, that Mississauga is still a city on the move. In fact, we have just celebrated our 10th anniversary, and in that period we have had 100 per cent population growth.

People used to think of Mississauga as a suburb of Metro Toronto, but this is no longer the case. Five years ago the majority of Mississauga workers did commute. Today Mississauga is a centre of business and industry in its own right. Today Mississauga is a city that people commute to rather than commute from. More than half the people who live in Mississauga work there as well.

Mississauga is the home of new growth industries. In 1984 alone, our commercial and industrial growth exceeded $176 million, while residential development surpassed $186 million. We are the international headquarters of Northern Telecom and we have the leaders in computer technologies, such as Control Data and Sperry.

Mississauga is the location of our province's investment in biotechnology, Allelix. We are also home to the Sheridan Park research community, helping business and industry throughout Ontario develop new products and processes. Of course, Atomic Energy of Canada is also in Mississauga, along with the head office of Dupont, Canon and the Nissan automobile company.

Mississauga is a growing city -- in fact, the fastest-growing city in Canada today. We are sharing the pattern of growth that is found throughout Ontario thanks to the sound management of Progressive Conservatives. For example, thanks to this government's commercial area improvement program, the Streetsville, Clarkson and Port Credit business improvement areas are implementing major renovations and facelifts to their downtown business and retail sections.

The throne speech continues this tradition of sound management in positive and progressive fashion. This speech contains programs to work with people, not to restrict them. This speech gives our people the direction they want in order to broaden their horizons and have the chance to succeed on their own terms. This speech tells the people of Ontario that we believe in them. We are giving the private sector the support and the confidence to create 200,000 new jobs this year. Job creation and job security are key concerns. Why? Because joblessness is still too high. We can do better.

This speech gives us the chance to show real leadership and bring about a real improvement in unemployment. This speech displays the faith the Premier (Mr. F. S. Miller) has in our province and our people. We believe the potential of our province is limitless. We believe our people, given the skills and the opportunity, will create the jobs, the growth and the prosperity we need and have come to expect.

Let it be clearly understood that a strong economy is good not just for business; a strong economy is good for people as well. A strong economy is not just a matter of trade and technology; it is a fundamental instrument of social policy. Let others talk about dividing up the economic pie into thinner and thinner pieces. Our goal is to increase the size of the pie and to provide a greater share for all.

4:50 p.m.

Social programs simply cannot substitute for policies that result in sound, sustainable and appropriate growth. The throne speech underlines this point well. Social advance without a strong economy would be a cruel illusion and would only add to the deficit. Social advance without the economic power to drive it would be little more than a practical joke on those who are the most vulnerable in our communities. Social advance without economic advance would be an irresponsible policy that can only result in hurt rather than healing.

The strong performance of our economy is a great social achievement. It creates opportunities for the disadvantaged to advance. It helps families gain the means to educate their children, for the average worker to achieve the security of home ownership and an adequate pension.

A strong economy has enabled government to raise funds for positive public works, to raise funds for programs ranging from health care to scientific exploration, as well as care for the needy.

After all, what is the goal of a strong economy? A strong economy is encouraged not just to create more and more. The goal of a strong economy is to win a greater measure of social justice for our people.

This is a Progressive Conservative viewpoint and that is the goal of this speech from the throne. We intend to give all Ontarians the tools to get control of their own lives, to set meaningful personal goals and to participate in the growth of our communities to whatever extent they wish.

This speech establishes a new measure of justice and opportunity for workers, for women, for senior citizens, for young people and for the unemployed. This speech re-establishes the Progressive Conservative commitment that our province is a place of opportunity for everyone.

Building on the achievement of past governments, our Premier is putting us on a new plateau for growth, opportunity and individual respect.

Let us take a look at the work place. The people of Ontario look to us to ensure that the benefits of labour are fairly shared and that our laws keep up with the changing realities of the work place and the job, with 11 concrete proposals to strengthen security and justice at work.

Security and justice are especially of concern for women. Outdated barriers and attitudes to women in the work place put down not only women, they put down us all. They make no sense and they are not fair. Women have their contributions to make. To unnecessarily limit their chances for promotion and responsibility only robs our province of the insight, potential and energy that women bring to the work place.

Two years ago, the federal government appointed Judge Abella to study employment opportunities in 11 federally owned corporations and crown corporations. This study was to take in four groups: native people, the disabled, visible minorities and women.

Judge Abella was charged with the job of devising measures to remedy the effect of past discriminations. Judge Abella's report was released last October. It contained 117 recommendations designed to roll away the barriers that limit and restrict career opportunities.

Partly in response to this report and in response to our own needs, the Ontario government will take action to provide more opportunity for economic and social advancement for these special groups.

Ontario will advance employment equity programs in the public sector. These programs will not only include crown agencies, but will also extend to those who receive transfer payments, such as hospitals, school boards, municipalities and post-secondary institutions.

The new Ministry of Skills Development will consolidate employment and training services for women, minorities and the disabled. Our goal is equity in the work place. Our goal is to ensure that everyone has the chance to participate and to make a contribution. This is our goal and this is how we will achieve it.

This government will appoint a compensation equity commission. The commission will be a real working body with representatives from business, labour and government. The commissioners will immediately set to work to abolish pay inequities for women and will assist the province in bringing in equal pay for work of equal value in the Ontario Public Service, in crown corporations and in the broader public service, commencing March 31, 1986.

This government will set up a policy of contract preference for those who do business with Queen's Park valued at $200,000 a year or more and have in effect or undertake to implement effective employment equity programs for visible minorities, native people, the disadvantaged and women.

We Progressive Conservatives are proud of the contributions we have made in securing equality and justice for women in the work place. From the creation of our first human rights legislation in the early 1950s, the drafting of the Ontario Human Rights Code, the setting up of the women's bureau in the Ministry of Labour, up to today with the securing of the Charter of Rights and the appointment of a Minister responsible for Women's Issues, we have provided leadership for women who work.

The federal Charter of Rights will act vigorously to enforce and extend accepted principles of equality throughout Ontario. Anything less than equal pay for equal work is clearly discrimination. Anything less is not only unfair, it is also illegal. Current equal pay legislation in our province provides equal pay for equal work. The Premier has committed his government to bringing in equal pay for work of equal value in the provincial public service. This will be a testing ground to develop a fair, workable system.

Since 1983, Progressive Conservatives have tried to get widespread support to broaden the current equal pay provisions. We have tried to open the door and to bring in reform in a meaningful way, step by step. Others have condemned this sensible approach and demanded more radical action. We continue to believe it would be premature, unhelpful and counterproductive for Queen's Park to define immediately what value in the work place means. That would only result in division and not in the harmony and spirit of co-operation that is essential to the successful introduction of equal pay for work of equal value.

As a result, we have given the compensation equity commission the responsibility to encourage wide public debate and discussion on this issue. Equal value legislation strikes right at the heart of the contract established between an individual worker and his or her employer. This legislation cannot be introduced without widespread public understanding and support.

I believe the government's approach is a sensible one. It will begin the debate that is needed on this issue in the place where its effect will be the greatest, in the private job market of Ontario. The best solution for equal value must come from the people themselves and not be enforced from on high. We will then be able to progress, having the experience gained from introducing equal value legislation in the public service, to erect a fair, reasonable and competitive framework for work and compensation.

5 p.m.

However, wages are not our only concern. The Premier and the government will continue the comprehensive review of the Workers' Compensation Act. We will see continued action to ensure that compensation is fair, that pensions are reasonable and that adjustment and reinstatement rights for injured workers are protected.

Working with other senior governments in Confederation, we will bring down a pension benefits act this session. This act will include the vesting of pensions, assured pension portability, minimum employer contributions, improved survivor benefits, both before and after retirement, and the extension of private pension coverage to part-time workers as well as the removal of sexual discrimination in the calculation of pension benefits. We will work with governments and private business to ensure pensioners receive some protection from inflation.

Let me say at this point that this government is concerned about the impact the federal budget will have on the income of our seniors. These are the people who helped build our communities. They deserve justice. The government will increase its tax grant program for seniors to help compensate them for inflation-related losses in income. We will do more than this. We will make strong recommendations to the government of Canada to compensate fully those pensioners receiving the guaranteed income supplement from the effects of inflation. We will do justice to our pensioners and to all who contribute to pension programs.

We will strengthen justice in the work place. We will strengthen job security. We will protect unorganized workers through amendments to the Employment Standards Act. We will give unorganized workers with three or more years of service the right to contest an unjust dismissal before an impartial tribunal.

We will provide greater protection from technological change through the Labour Relations Act. We will ensure workers have advance knowledge of all technical improvements. We will also frame right-to-know legislation to provide confidence to Ontario workers that hazardous substances in the work place will be identified and appropriate action taken to ensure their welfare.

These are the 11 steps the government will take to bring a greater measure of security and equity to the work place. These are good, basic reforms and they will be introduced in a responsible, mature manner. This government will work with all partners in the marketplace to ensure justice for all workers, for all employers and for the community at large.

We are committed to ensuring an equal chance for women, for the disabled, for minorities, indeed for all who have a contribution to make. That is our commitment. The members can see it in the proposals for the work place and also in our proposals for health care. This government will establish an advisory task force to review health care services for women in Ontario. Women have unique health care needs. This distinguished task force will ensure that those needs are served and served well.

This government will extend our assistive devices programs to help disabled adults better pursue their goals in the community. This government will appoint a minister for the elderly to supervise the full consolidation of all programs set up to serve our senior citizens. We will develop an overall plan and a comprehensive network of services to provide for seniors living in their own homes.

We will develop a far-reaching, community-based care system that will expand community programs and limit the growth of unnecessary institutional services so that our seniors who want to remain active in the community and family life can do so in a manner that respects their dignity and their life-long contribution to the community. This government will provide significant new funds to our homemakers program to increase services available at home, not just for the elderly but for the disabled as well.

Housing continues to be a key concern of this government's social programming. Despite the challenges of high inflation and population growth over the last 10 years, the public and private sector have achieved more than a modest degree of success in keeping pace with consumer demands, but the success of our economy means new growth. One can see that every day throughout Mississauga. In my riding of Mississauga South new communities, new neighbourhoods and new residential growth are adding to the Mississauga skyline.

There is housing in Ontario, but we must ensure there is an adequate supply of housing for people with moderate incomes. This is especially important with rental housing. This month we will ask the Legislature to consider basic reforms to the Residential Tenancies Act. These reforms will reduce to four per cent the maximum rent increase permitted without review.

We will establish a practical rent registry. We will do this and more, keeping in mind the needs of the landlord, especially the small landlord, and not create excessive regulations that will only result in harm to both tenants and the community as a whole.

A key concern is the supply of rental accommodation. This supply must be expanded. As a result, this government has announced a five-year, $400-million rental supply fund to encourage private, co-operative, nonprofit and convert-to-rent projects.

The popular Ontario housing rehabilitation program will be reintroduced and the systems will be provided to help those who are now tenants to purchase their first home. These programs will help provide the rental and housing accommodation our people need. More than this, these programs will provide a sound base for growth in the construction industry. They will mean jobs as well as housing.

One of the dreams that newcomers to our province cherish is the chance to own a home. This is a dream they share with all Ontarians. Our policies are geared to make that dream a reality. Ontario is still the province of opportunity.

Mr. Martel: Despite the Tories.

5:10 p.m.

Mrs. Marland: I am glad the member is back. A basic strength of our province is the fact that Queen's Park has defended and continues to defend individual rights and liberties. Any advance, any progress that comes at the expense of individual dignity and freedom is an advance made at too high a cost. What is the role of government, if not to provide for the betterment of the individual and the basic building block of our society -- the family?

I am pleased this throne speech continues to show leadership in the fight against family violence. The Ministry of Community and Social Services has already funded the creation of a centre to study an act against family violence. Forty emergency shelters for battered women and children have been set up across Ontario. In the last provincial budget the funding for shelter services was increased by $3.5 million. Mississauga South is participating in the fight against family violence, thanks to the great work of three energetic women.

Mississauga is the home of Interim Place. This is the first hostel for battered women and their children in Peel region. The program at Interim Place is supported by the Ministry of Community and Social Services, and these programs do work. Already, our Mississauga facility is full constantly, and we are in desperate need of an additional facility in Peel today.

Building on the solid foundation of research and the experience of operating shelters, this government will expand public education activities to ensure that all Ontarians know family violence is not to be tolerated.

We also are continuing to fight against drinking and driving. Our public education programs will be stepped up during the summer months.

We also will address the important subject of adoption information in a discreet and responsible manner that will respect the needs and rights of all individuals and families involved. A commissioner will review current provisions affecting the disclosure of adoption information. Recommendations should be available for the consideration of the legislation this fall.

Also, we will take action to assist the families of divorced parents. A special office will be established to ensure effective enforcement of maintenance and custody orders. I think it is shameless that anyone would abandon the care of a family to the community at large when he or she has the resources to provide for it. This special office will ensure this basic responsibility is enforced.

Justice for women, for the disabled, for the disadvantaged and for senior citizens is the promise of the program outlined in the throne speech. But what about our unemployed youth? It is a fact learned from hard experience that modem economies do not and will not provide acceptable levels of employment by themselves. Jobs can only be created by purposeful government action; that point is beyond debate. What is debatable, however, is the means government uses to create jobs, to provide opportunities and to give people the chance to build their own independence as responsible, self-supporting members of the community.

Fundamentally, governments cannot create wealth. All governments can do is shift wealth around. But responsible government action can set in motion events that will encourage the creation of wealth in the community, and that wealth will lead to new investment, new growth and new jobs.

I agree with the statement in the throne speech that our job creation efforts should be directed towards the small and medium-sized Canadian businesses. Not only do these businesses create the lion's share of the jobs, they are an integral part of a vibrant community and our best expression of home-grown Canadian enterprise.

In Mississauga companies employing nine people or fewer comprise two thirds of the business activity of the city. For a number of years Ontario has been supporting small business through small business development corporations. We have provided these businesses with a means of getting the capital they need to grow. Through the student venture capital program we have successfully launched many young people on careers in the business world.

During the past campaign we spoke of our intention to boost employment in small businesses through a reduction in their tax burden. We intend to give small businesses the strength to put their earnings back to work, to create the jobs we need, the investment we need and the growth we are looking for. These new jobs will mean new opportunity for our young people to start lives of their own.

Through the new Ministry of Skills Development we will continue the good work started by the Ontario skills fund and Ontario Youth Opportunities. The response by the business community to these programs has been pleasing. This response has provided us with the incentive to go further. Since the private sector has demonstrated its willingness to provide greater opportunities for the unemployed, we will budget an additional $100 million to the Ministry of Skills Development to take action in four key areas.

First, public institutions and industry will provide a further 75,000 new training and upgrading opportunities. Second, high school graduates will benefit from a further 30,000 work experience opportunities. Third, firm links will be established between private business and our secondary schools to provide co-operative education experience and prepare our young people for life in the working world. Fourth, a $10-million training access fund will ensure that practical barriers such as transportation, accommodation costs and child care do not stand between an energetic worker or individual and the chance to improve his job skills.

Financial assistance will be accorded on the basis of need, to ensure a fair access to training opportunities. Let me point out that this undertaking is in addition to the 7,500 subsidized child care spaces and other child care programs recently announced by this government.

The throne speech has addressed many key issues. All parties in this Legislature will agree that these issues warrant the attention of the provincial government. All will agree that these issues are of concern to the people of Ontario. We have had an extensive program for environmental action, a key concern for Mississauga with its large shoreline and lakefront development projects at Port Credit. We will see the spills bill become law. This is of particular concern to Mississauga. We do not want another accident and evacuation like the one we experienced in 1979 following the train derailment.

We have action for women, action in the work place, in the courts and with pensions. We have action for seniors. We have a renewed commitment to ensuring seniors have the chance to continue to live in the community and pursue active lives. We have action for young people with new training programs in the schools and improved job opportunities with small businesses. We are taking action. We are establishing a direction for growth, for justice and for equity.

Let me remind all members that none of this work will be easy. It requires sympathy, understanding and support. It requires sensitive leadership, the kind of leadership that is willing and ready to listen to the people rather than marching in lockstep with some prescriptive agenda or rigid philosophic viewpoint.

Real reform in Ontario has not come from coercion but from compassion and consensus. Real reform comes from building bridges of understanding between all partners in our varied and widespread community. The simple passage of a law or a series of laws will not overcome the habits or attitudes of a lifetime. Understanding and education must come first. Bridges must be built. A moderate and balanced approach is essential in setting new directions. This speech gives people the chance to become independent of the state; it sets up a program that liberates their energies. You see, on this side of the House we are more concerned with creating opportunities, with creating a chance for people to be the very best they can, to test their strengths and abilities to the limit.

We are faced with a great challenge in our province. That challenge is changing technologies and changing patterns of world trade. Only by liberating the energies of our people will we have a chance to advance fully and establish ourselves as a new economic power in global markets. Only by liberating our energies can we sustain the growth that has given Queen's Park the revenue to take action in fields such as the environment, services for women and children and improved pension packages for the elderly. Only through a strong economy can we move ahead with the kind of social reform our people want and need and deserve.

The decisions we make here are important decisions. The laws we make here are very important. They affect the lives of millions of our fellow Ontarians. They affect the pattern of growth in our province and throughout Canada as a whole. The speech from the throne is a responsible and responsive package. It shows that we have listened to the people of Ontario. We heard what they had to say on May 2. We heard their message and we are now putting forward a progressive program that deserves the support of this minority Legislature.

What does a minority Legislature mean? It means that all parties should work together. We Progressive Conservatives, as the party that has won the majority of seats in the last election, are willing to compromise. We are willing to make this Legislature work. Our throne speech shows that. We have not been the government of this province under the leadership of five great Premiers by accident. Our mandate from the people of Ontario has been renewed through 13 elections. We won the support of the people for one reason: we earned it.

We have no apologies to make about our record. There is a reason why we are the premier province in Canada, and that is true success. This throne speech builds on that record in a very real way. It is a good example of what being Progressive Conservative means. It is a sound document for our times and provides fundamental leadership for the future.

I am proud to be a Canadian. My family and I are privileged to live in this great province of Ontario with its wealth of blessings and opportunities, and as a member of the Progressive Conservative Party, I am proud to serve in this government. I urge my fellow members to join with me and vote for acceptance of the throne speech.

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

The House adjourned at 5:25 p.m.

June 6, 1985

COMMISSION ON ELECTION CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENSES

VISITOR

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

SPECIAL WARRANTS

WELCOME TO NEW MEMBERS

DISASTER RELIEF

FAMILY LAW REFORM

TRIBUTES TO FORMER SPEAKER

ORAL QUESTIONS

ROMAN CATHOLIC SECONDARY SCHOOLS

FEDERAL BUDGET

ROMAN CATHOLIC SECONDARY SCHOOLS

PATRONAGE APPOINTMENTS

WATER QUALITY

GRAIN FINANCIAL PROTECTION PROGRAM

DISASTER RELIEF

ALTERNATIVE ACCOMMODATION

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT

FLOODING

TIMMINS HOSPITAL

PETITIONS

ROMAN CATHOLIC SECONDARY SCHOOLS

FAMILY BENEFITS ASSISTANCE

PORNOGRAPHIC MATERIAL

MOTIONS

DEPUTY SPEAKER AND DEPUTY CHAIRMAN

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

INTRODUCTION OF BILL

HUMAN TISSUE GIFT AMENDMENT ACT

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE