Legislative Assembly of Ontario

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SELECT COMMITTEE ON ENERGY

Mrs Sullivan: For some time, the select committee on energy of the Ontario Legislature has added significantly to the dialogue on energy issues in the province.

Most recently, we have seen how intertwined energy issues are with environmental choices facing Ontario. The concept of sustainable development is directly related to energy options.

Over the last three years, the committee has reviewed the initial Ontario Hydro demand/supply planning documents and conducted public hearings which brought together for review by legislators the opinion and studies of experts, interested parties and those affected by alternatives to ensure electricity supply for the next 30 years.

In conjunction with other technical reviews, the select committee's report added to the final recommendations which have been placed by Ontario Hydro before the Environmental Assessment Board.

Most recently, the committee had started work on the greenhouse effect and Ontario's place in the reduction of greenhouse gases to meet national and international protocols. The committee met with international experts and engaged the Royal Society of Canada to conduct research on greenhouse gas emission reduction in the industrial sector, which has the potential of technical and economic feasibility.

More work remains to be done. I call on the government and this House to reconstitute the select committee on energy so that some of the pioneering and important work which has been done to date can continue.

LABOUR DISPUTE

Mr Villeneuve: The strike by French teachers in the Stormont Dundas and Glengarry County Roman Catholic Separate School Board has now continued for more than a month.

With only a few weeks left in the normal school year, many students and parents are worried, and rightly so. They want to know what will happen with the remainder of their school year, they want to know about the quality of education students will receive to complete this troublesome year and they deserve to know.

On 18 April when I questioned the Minister of Education, I was told that the Education Relations Commission had made no recommendation to end the strike. That was almost a month ago. Today some 1,500 students are still waiting. Those hoping to go to college or university are worried that they may not receive adequate instruction to allow them to cope in their new post-secondary schools.

The strike has become a social issue in Cornwall as well. These students cannot get summer jobs because employers do not know when classes will resume. The students are either in the streets or in the malls.

Both sides are still determined, if not stubborn, in maintaining their positions. I know that parents may be reconsidering which schools they want to register their children in next year.

In light of all this, the Minister of Education must resolve this matter before it drags on into the summer. This is more than just a collective bargaining issue; it is a right to a good education by our students in eastern Ontario.

NATIVE ISSUES

Mr Winninger: Last weekend in London an indigenous peoples conference took place at King's College. It was attended by over 400 native and non-native people from across Canada and the United States.

The main recommendation to emerge from this conference was the formation of the Indigenous Peoples Support Network, which was given official status and will now grow quickly. The network includes groups representing churches, organized labour, women, students, peace workers, poor people and the environment. The network will serve as an information and educational clearinghouse.

The local native communities in the London area have enthusiastically welcomed the assistance of $48.5 million offered in our budget. Chief Tom Bressette of the Kettle Point reserve said that our government is taking the initiative that should have been taken long ago by the federal government. This budget provides funding to improve living conditions in native communities, including potable water, sewers, housing and electricity. Money is also provided for child care on reserves, education initiatives and economic development programs. Funds are also allocated to self-government and resolution of land claims. Specific announcements were made last week.

The native community is eagerly awaiting these reforms. The third party will have to take full responsibility for delaying consideration of the budget and for delaying reforms natives have been waiting for so long and so patiently.

TOURISM INDUSTRY

Mr H. O'Neil: Monday 13 May marked the beginning of National Tourism Awareness Week. Across Canada, tourist operators are hosting special events to mark this week. Ontario has much to offer with its clean, safe cities, parks, lakes, diverse multicultural communities and an abundance of attractions.

While I am delighted to stand in this House to recognize this week, I am also distressed to note that the tourism industry in Ontario has suffered greatly. Not only are our tourist operators struggling through the toughest recession since the 1930s, they have also just recently suffered the shock of a provincial budget that will serve to reduce the competitiveness of their industry through tax hikes on gas, alcohol, cigarettes and small businesses.

The tourism industry has been the province's third-largest industry, accounting directly for approximately 160,000 full-time jobs. In 1989, direct expenditures in tourism accounted for close to $11 billion.

Most tourist operators, as the members here know, are small, family-run businesses. They rely on the provincial government to market Ontario as an exciting tourist destination and to make it appealing to out-of-province visitors. They do not expect to be forgotten.

While the rest of Canada is celebrating National Tourism Awareness Week, I too would like to participate in the promotion of Ontario as an ideal tourist destination. We can only hope, though, that the Minister of Tourism and Recreation will give us a reason to celebrate and convince his cabinet colleagues to give tourism in Ontario the importance it deserves.

1340

BRIDGE IN MONO TOWNSHIP

Mr Tilson: I am here today to tell a tale involving the Ministry of Transportation in the township of Mono in my riding of Dufferin-Peel, a tale that is indicative of the free-spending spirit and lack of reasonable and responsible fiscal restraint that this government has become so famous for.

In this case, the township of Mono has requested funding for a one-lane bridge on an isolated road in the area of the Niagara Escarpment at a cost of $148,000, a bridge that is appropriate for the surrounding serene, natural environment of Mono township and that the municipality contends will "adequately and safely handle the traffic volume likely to be experienced in that area for the next 50 years." But the ministry in its wisdom has decided to override the township's preference for a simple one-lane bridge. Instead they have provided funding for a two-lane bridge which will rival structures found on Highway 401.

The expected cost to build this monstrosity is $350,000, of which $300,000 will be spent by the township. This project will be the largest single capital expenditure in the township's 1991 budget. If the ministry had opted for a one-lane bridge, it would have saved the ratepayers of Mono and the province in excess of $200,000.

In addition to this issue of irresponsible government spending, this tale of woe worsens. The decision to mar the unblemished face of the Niagara Escarpment by the affliction of an expensive and unnecessary structure is completely inconsistent with the NDP government's apparent genuine commitment to the environment.

The Niagara Escarpment Commission is faced daily with the challenge to predict the natural and cultural attributes of one of Canada's unique regions. The NEC must contend with many environmental offenders. It looks as though it can add the NDP government to its list.

Unfortunately, this story does not end at this bridge. The Mono township --

The Speaker: You have run out of time.

ROLAND HARDY

Mr Kormos: Good afternoon to you, Mr Speaker.You know --

Interjections.

Mr Kormos: It has been a long time, has it not?

Mr Speaker, you know this is a municipal election year and down where I come from in Welland-Thorold, the heart of the Niagara Peninsula, candidates are coming out and announcing their interest in running for mayor, city councillor and regional councillor.

We were all surprised to find out that Roland Hardy, long-time mayor and politician in the city of Welland, is retiring from public life. The city is going to miss his leadership and his expertise, but perhaps he is going to have more time to spend with his five kids, his eight grandchildren and his five great-grandchildren. Roland Hardy's wife, Vivianne, comes from a family of 13 kids from Saskatchewan, the Beauparlants. The Beauparlant family have been as strong NDP and CCF supporters as any family.

The mayor may not have shared that same partisan affiliation, but none the less he has dedicated 30 years of his life to leadership and contribution to the community. He has made a significant contribution to the positioning and the role of the francophone community in Welland, part of our city, a faction in our city of which everyone is very proud.

We should all be pleased that Roland Hardy is able to enjoy the pleasure of retirement but at the same time feel some sadness as he leaves behind him a distinguished career and many contributions to his community. We thank him, Mr Speaker, and I know you join with me in that regard.

OPP CUTBACKS

Mr Bradley: This is Police Week in Ontario and the Ministry of the Solicitor General has put out a glossy pamphlet about this with a number of items inside.

I can remember in English class learning about something called an anachronism. There is a wonderful poster of Ontario here and it well reflects the composition of the people of the province and shows police officers in a number of different activities. However, there is an anachronism in it. I see here a police officer on a motorcycle and this police officer is wearing a golden helmet.

As the people of this province know by now, this government has cut the funding for the OPP Golden Helmets precision team, much to the chagrin of the traditionalists and people who value that tradition and much to the chagrin of those involved in the tourism field who recognize that the team is a real attraction that brings people from around the world to this province.

In addition to this, there is a Police Week song that has been put out by the Ministry of the Solicitor General. Unfortunately, to accompany this song we will not have the OPP Pipes and Drums, a tradition which has been so important to so many communities and of course to the officers who serve it so well.

I think this material should be withdrawn and corrected or that we have the appropriate funding restored to both of those traditions.

NATIVE HUNTING AND FISHING

Mr McLean: My statement is for the Minister of Natural Resources and it concerns his political interference in the judicial process. Section 2 of the minister's interim enforcement policy states:

"Where status Indian people are hunting in an unsafe manner, or taking amounts of wildlife or fish which put conservation objectives at risk, or possessing amounts of wildlife or fish in excess of what may be reasonably required for personal or community consumptive needs, or are hunting or fishing on private or occupied land without permission, such persons should be charged."

The minister knows that members of the Cape Croker band caught 13,500 pounds of fish from Georgian Bay out of season and above the band's quota. His ministry's $150,000 investigation began in September 1989 because Ministry of Natural Resources officials were puzzled over the decline in the splake population in Georgian Bay. It was determined that the band illegally caught and sold the fish.

The minister's decision to quash charges smacks of political interference in the judicial process. It is a direct contravention of his own interim enforcement policy which clearly states that such persons should be charged. The minister's decision to quash charges is a mockery of resource management and is counterproductive to resolving the legitimate rights of Ontario's native community.

NATIONAL ACCESS AWARENESS WEEK

Mrs MacKinnon: Now in its fourth year, National Access Awareness Week will take place from Sunday 26 May to Saturday 1 June.

National Access Awareness Week was conceived by Rick Hansen. It is a grass-roots initiative to encourage and enlist support of all sectors of society in identifying barriers to the full integration of persons with disabilities into the social and economic life of our community and to formulate and implement plans for the removal of those barriers.

Focusing its efforts on five theme areas including transportation, education, housing, employment and recreation, National Access Awareness Week is a time for communities across Canada to assess the accessibility of services and facilities, to set goals by which progress can be measured over several years, to make practical improvements, and to celebrate what has already been achieved by persons with disabilities and other interested individuals.

1350

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

Hon Mr Charlton: I want to take this opportunity to report on my ministry's progress in preparing legislation to establish a system of driver-owned automobile insurance in Ontario.

Members will be aware that since assuming my portfolio on 18 March, I have devoted much time to working with the automobile insurance review group established on 1 February of this year. In this time, we have consulted with more than 45 organizations or individuals involved with the insurance industry and those concerned with the consequences of traffic accidents. Of necessity, many of those consultations were a duplication of more than 100 conducted by my predecessor.

It is appropriate, I believe, for me to express my appreciation and publicly thank all who have participated in these meetings. I particularly want to thank those who have invested much time and energy in preparing detailed and useful presentations. Many of these presentations have been invaluable in helping our government prepare plans necessary to undertake the reform we envisage.

Our province has some six million drivers and approximately seven million registered vehicles. More than 150 companies and 20,000 people are involved in providing insurance to drivers. We want to develop the most comprehensive and integrated system of auto insurance in North America. It will be a system unique to Ontario.

We believe the reform package we bring in should have major initiatives to improve highway safety, reduce traffic accidents and improve driver training. We have begun working with the Ministry of Transportation to accomplish these objectives. We are also exploring the possibility of offering drivers one-stop shopping for their insurance, vehicle registration and licensing.

This project is one of enormous complexity and requires research, analysis and detailed preparation. It is my intention to ensure that this work is carried out with care and with diligence. With that in mind, I have recommended to my cabinet colleagues, and they have concurred, that more time should be taken to prepare the draft legislation. It is my intention, therefore, to bring in legislation in the fall of this year.

LAND USE PLANNING

Hon Mr Cooke: I want to advise the House about some important new measures this government is taking to foster responsible land use planning in Grey county.

Yesterday my colleague the Minister of the Environment and I met with Warden Milliner and members of county council to discuss land use planning practices in Grey county. The discussion revolved around what the county and the province can do together to protect the environment, encourage better long-range land use planning, and facilitate full public participation in development decisions.

The Ministry of the Environment, through the Ontario Environmental Assessment Advisory Committee, and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs began studying land use planning practices in Grey county in 1989 after residents expressed concerns about growing development in the area. The concerns focus on two important issues: the proliferation of land severances granted without adequate opportunity for public comment, and the potential environmental harm that inappropriate development could bring to Grey county. Our studies, conducted independently, both concluded there are serious problems with land use planning practices in Grey county.

Land severance approvals in Grey county increased dramatically, by some 650%, between 1986 and 1989, despite the fact that they often did not conform to the county's official plan. In addition, land severances were often approved over the objections of several review agencies such as health units and the ministries of Agriculture and Food and Natural Resources.

Good land use planning practices are essential if we are to protect our communities. For that reason, we have asked the warden and councillors of Grey county to take this opportunity to manage growth in a responsible and sensitive way.

To this end, we have asked them to immediately begin restricting the number of severance applications they approve until they prepare a new, comprehensive and environmentally sensitive official plan. We have asked that this new official plan, which will replace the one developed more than 10 years ago for slow-growth rural areas, be in place by September 1993.

In the interim, my ministry will review all applications that are granted to ensure that they conform to approved official plan policies and that they receive the full support of all review agencies. Moreover, no subdivisions will be approved which have the potential to negatively affect the environment or jeopardize the outcome of the new official plan.

To ensure that the new plan reflects our priorities -- that is, responsible growth management that preserves and protects the environment -- a steering committee will be formed with county council representatives and members of the public, to be jointly chaired by municipal and provincial representatives.

We consider good planning that ensures the maintenance and enhancement of environmental quality to be essential to the future of both Grey county and Ontario. We believe the measures we have announced are both necessary and timely. We are confident that, working with officials in Grey county, we will achieve our mutual goal of healthy, planned growth.

RESPONSES

LAND USE PLANNING

Mrs Caplan: With this announcement, the Minister of Municipal Affairs has moved unilaterally, without consultation or warning, to end an important local planning decision in Grey county. Everyone knows that there have been problems in Grey county. In fact, it was the Liberal government that announced a review of severance and zoning bylaws in Grey and prepared an environmental assessment advisory committee report as well.

At the same time, we believe that the NDP's only solution has been to have the province take over responsibility for local planning decisions in Grey county rather than working with the municipalities in developing comprehensive land use planning reform, which in fact was promised during the election.

I have grave concerns about the approach, although I must say that we all want to have better planning with greater environmental sensitivity across the province. The motivation is sound, but the approach, as in most of the responses we have seen from this minister, has been heavy-handed and intrusive, and is taking away from the local municipalities the opportunity for partnership. They do not know what partnership means. They do not know how to do it. They want to bring everything to Toronto and make all the decisions, and that is not in the interest of local electors.

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

Mr Chiarelli: With respect to the Minister of Financial Institutions, this is the first time in the eight months since this cabinet has been sworn in that a Minister of Financial Institutions has either made a statement or introduced a bill. The ministry has been totally consumed with the ideological issue of government-run automobile insurance. In the meantime, nothing is done on pensions, nothing is done with the securities commission, nothing is done to protect financial consumers in this province.

What is the first statement after eight months? It is another broken promise. On 18 March, less than 60 days ago, the Premier stood in this House and said, "We certainly intend to introduce legislation in the spring session." Now the minister stands in his place and says that it will be in the fall. It is another broken promise and more confusion for the public in Ontario.

The Ontario motorist protection plan is working. The reason they cannot draft legislation at the present time is that all the people they are consulting with are telling them that in fact the OMPP is working. All the research that has been done by my office and by other offices and by the industry has indicated that rates are maintaining the levels that have been set, are following the guidelines at an average of 0% outside the greater Metropolitan Toronto area and at an average of 8% within Metropolitan Toronto. The driver is being well served by the OMPP. All consumer reports and reports from brokers indicate that the OMPP is in fact working.

Today the minister talks about consultation. He knows full well the statements that were made several days ago by the Insurance Bureau of Canada, that his caucus refused to meet with the employers of 40,000 people in Ontario on the same day they were meeting with a citizen of the United States, Ralph Nader, who has no obligation to one citizen of this province. Shame on this government for not consulting with the industry. They claim to protect the drivers and they claim to bring in a system that will be economical for the drivers, and only last week they introduced what amounts to a premium increase by taxing premiums by 3% -- and they claim to be on the side of the driver.

Let's see if, when the minister introduces that legislation, his program reduces rates. His Treasurer said in an interview in Sudbury three weeks ago that the only reason for bringing in government-run automobile insurance is if it will lower premiums. The challenge is on the minister's desk. He is going to have to justify this eight-month delay and the tremendous uncertainty he is generating for 40,000 employees in this province.

There are a lot of small business people out there, proprietors in the insurance brokerage industry, who can do no financial planning, no estate planning. The equity of their businesses has been totally eroded by the uncertainty, and the uncertainty is continuing because of the added delay that this government is bringing in at this time. This government has once again shown total incompetence in administration of government.

1400

Mr Runciman: I am responding to the Minister of Financial Institutions on this announcement as well. We disagree. We are not supportive of the announcement he is making, but for totally different reasons than the Liberal Party of Ontario.

Our party cares and is on record about caring for innocent accident victims in this province. We continue to care day after day, unlike the government, unlike the NDP, the socialist slugs over there who professed to care about innocent accident victims a little over a year ago, who conducted a 17-hour filibuster in this House, apparently caring at that time about innocent accident victims. Now we are talking about more than a year after their election as the government of Ontario and they still do not know what they are doing.

This government reminds me of the old story of the dog chasing after the car. When the car stopped, the dog did not know what the devil to do. That is the same with this government. They had no expectation of assuming office and, once they did, they had no real idea of where they were going. Auto insurance is just one indication of that.

My major concern in respect to this is its impact on innocent accident victims in this province. We are talking about hundreds of people on a weekly basis, thousands on a monthly basis; thousands of innocent accident victims, people who appeared before us, testifying before the member for Welland-Thorold, who sat there, before the current Treasurer of the province, who expressed concern at length. But now, when they have an opportunity to take decisive action to restore the rights that were taken away by the former Liberal government, they are not moving on it, they are not doing anything. They continue to delay, delay, delay. There is no real justification for it.

I introduced legislation last December which was supported by the majority of socialist members across the floor. But when they have an opportunity -- I am talking about interim legislation that would address that concern, not the other concerns of the current government, but the major concern, as expressed by the current Minister of Financial Institutions.

During that debate the minister said the major problem with the Liberal legislation is the fact that innocent accident victims are not protected the way they should be because they have lost the right of access to the courts. Now he has assumed office like his predecessor, who spoke on this so strongly a year ago and then delayed and delayed, he is doing much the same thing, talking about delaying this until the fall, to some future date.

I do not know how in good conscience the minister and his colleagues in that party can stand in this House today and say they are going to continue to delay that, while people are being injured on the highways every day, every minute in this province. The minister is not addressing innocent accident victims, he is not restoring their rights, he is not keeping the promise he made one year ago and beyond that.

LAND USE PLANNING

Mr B. Murdoch: I would like to address the Minister of Municipal Affairs. This statement that he has produced here today is nothing but a bunch of lies and mistruths. I challenge the minister to prove that these things he says in here are true. I challenge him.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Would the member for Grey come to order, please. A certain level of excitement causes us to be distracted. I realize that and I realize the concerns of the member. I would appreciate it if he would withdraw his remark.

Mr B. Murdoch: I cannot withdraw my remarks, sir. They are not true, right in here. He has stated in here --

The Speaker: Would the member take his seat for a moment.

Interjections.

The Speaker: I would appreciate members' attention for a moment, please.

Interjection.

The Speaker: I am not a betting person.

To the member for Grey, the question for the Chair --

Interjections.

The Speaker: I would very much appreciate it if the Speaker could be given an opportunity to chat for a moment with the member for Grey. The question for the Chair is not one of the veracity of any statement made, but rather the dignity of the House. It is in that regard that I would ask the member if he would reconsider what he has said and would withdraw his remarks.

Mr B. Murdoch: I am sorry. I cannot rescind what I said because it is the dignity of the people over there that I am worried about. They have no dignity over there. When they put mistruths in statements, then I will not retract.

The Speaker: If the member for Grey, upon reflection, is not able to withdraw his remarks, then the member for Grey leaves no recourse for the Chair except to name him. I ask the member one more time if he would consider his course of action and if he would simply withdraw the offending remarks, which offend the practice of the House and have nothing to do with what is true or not true.

Mr B. Murdoch: Maybe you could explain to me what the offending remarks were. I have not said anything offending. All I have spoken is the truth here. I have said the truth, and in here is what is wrong. I have nothing else to say other than I challenge the minister to prove what he said in here, and maybe he had better try something different.

Interjections.

The Speaker: To the member for Grey, unfortunately there were some extraneous sounds. I did not here clearly what he said. Did the member say, "I withdraw the remarks"?

Mr B. Murdoch: No.

The Speaker: You leave the Chair no alternative. I must name the member for Grey. Would the member withdraw from the chamber for the remainder of the day.

Sergeant, would you escort the member from the chamber, please.

Mr B. Murdoch left the chamber.

Mr Nixon: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Ron Lipsett is in the gallery. Perhaps it would be appropriate if he took the seat that has been vacated.

The Speaker: An interesting suggestion. There appears to be a vacancy at this moment.

1410

LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH SERVICE

Mr Chiarelli: Mr Speaker, I am rising on a question of privilege. I would ask your indulgence. It will probably take four or five minutes to get through it, but it is a very serious matter that I think impacts on every member of the Legislature. It has to do with the question of the legislative research service and the confidentiality of that operation, which is under your authority as Speaker as you have the responsibility for the legislative library.

First of all, I want to read standing order 21 with respect to a question of privilege: "Privileges are the rights enjoyed by the House collectively and by the members of the House individually conferred by the Legislative Assembly Act and other statutes, or by practice, precedent, usage and custom." It goes on to say, "Whenever a matter of privilege arises, it shall be taken into consideration immediately."

Also, standing order 140 states as follows:

"The management of the legislative library, including the regulation of admission, hours of operation, maintenance of a catalogue of books, and security and preservation of the collection, is the responsibility of the executive director of the legislative library, subject to such orders as the executive director may receive from time to time from the Speaker or the House."

What I want to refer to is a research request that I made in November and for which I received a written response from the legislative research service. I want to quote very briefly from that and I will give you a copy of this document with the name of the research officer deleted.

It states, "It appears that the ministry" -- and they are referring to the Ministry of Financial Institutions -- "has a new policy under which requests for information are discussed with the minister's office." That occurred, as I say, in November; this document is dated last November.

Last week I requested some research relating to the Ministry of Health and my office was notified yesterday that it would be probably longer than expected because of the new policy -- and this was told verbally over the phone -- requiring some kind of clearance of these requests through the minister's office or through the deputy minister.

Mr Speaker, as you are aware, the legislative library research service is required to be confidential, and I want to refer to some information on that particular point. First of all, in the information which your office provides to members, it states very clearly: "Every request is treated with confidentiality, impartiality and objectivity. All work is prepared to your deadlines."

Even the question of this new process, if in fact it is there, requires additional time and is an imposition on all members from all sides of this House in obtaining their proper research. But the key issue is the issue of confidentiality. In addition, there is another document which is put out under your auspices as Speaker which indicates, "All work performed by the legislative research service is strictly confidential."

I also want to refer to some expert opinion on this from Graham White, who wrote on the Ontario Legislature, saying: "Of greatest significance to backbench MPPs is the library's research staff. Their independence from internal party intrigue renders them particularly valuable to ordinary members." He goes on to say: "Library research services are distinct from caucus research in that they are provided on a non-partisan basis. They are academically, rather than politically, oriented," and, "The Speaker may call upon any ministry or agency of the crown to provide any service or commodity for or on behalf of the assembly that the Speaker considers necessary."

I think this is a very serious matter which affects every member of this Legislature, as I say, including those members who sit on the government side. In fact, in the telephone conversation to my office, it was indicated that a number of ministries have adopted this particular policy of requiring some kind of clearance through the deputy minister's office or through the minister's office, and that includes the Ministry of Financial Institutions, the Ministry of Health -- by which the response was given to me yesterday on my particular research request -- the Ministry of Agriculture and Food and the Ministry of Revenue.

I am reciting the facts as I have received them and as my office has received them. I am not making any allegations. In fact, I believe the research office in the legislative library is triple A excellent. They provide good service. But if in fact the legislative library and the research people, as they work under your direction, under your responsibility, Mr Speaker, have received any new policy -- and those are the words that were used, and I will give you a copy of this, by the research person from the library -- I believe this raises serious questions about the independence of the research staff and about the privileges of the members of this House, who do that research in confidence on behalf of their constituents and on behalf of a whole range of issues.

It is particularly important that if the minister's office becomes aware of research that an opposition member is conducting, it will be tipped off in terms of possible questions, possible issues, possible committee work, and I think it is of the gravest importance.

I would ask you to please report back to this House and set guidelines, and I would also ask you to report whether there is any basis to the statement that is made in this report that indicates a new policy was imposed some time immediately before November.

Mr Speaker, I would ask you to report at the earliest possible date as this infringes on the privileges of members.

Hon Miss Martel: On the same point of order, Mr Speaker: On behalf of the government, I would more than encourage you to do the same thing, and I can point out to all the members of the House that I do not think this is a new process.

When I was in opposition last year, I requested information from the former Minister of Northern Development. At that point in time, the information I requested was checked not only by the deputy minister but by the executive assistant to the minister himself. You can certainly take a good look at this, and I encourage you to do so.

Interjections.

The Speaker: One at a time would be helpful.

Mr Elston: On the point of order, Mr Speaker: The issue which the individual has raised is obviously a question that she has put to the deputy minister's office. It is just a bit different from what has been raised here. The instrument used here for research purposes is the Legislative Assembly, and it seems to be a clear difference from what has been expressed by the member for Sudbury East, who has had her point of view put in other ways in other days. In this case, I think the privilege which has been raised is a valid one. We ask only that you examine it and report. I do not think it is fair that she be allowed to join some kind of political search and destroy, as it were.

The Speaker: To the member for Ottawa West, I appreciate the information you have brought to my attention.

Interjections.

The Speaker: I would appreciate it if a number of members, including the government House leader, would contain themselves.

Interjections.

The Speaker: I say to the member for Ottawa West, obviously impartiality and confidentiality are two keystones to our library service. I will certainly take a look at the concerns you have brought to my attention and will report back to you as soon as I can.

1420

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Ms Poole: On a point of personal privilege, Mr Speaker: I feel that the rights of members of this assembly are being undermined. The tradition as well as the precedent in this House has been that an announcement is made in the Legislative Assembly when the ministry announces a new policy, when it spends significant money on a special program or when it releases a report. In fact, as you are well aware, we have a special time in the House when we can have statements from ministers and responses from the opposition. Yet we now have as a regular occurrence the Minister of Housing choosing to make announcements by way of press release rather than the appropriate way, which is to bring it to the attention of members of this Legislative Assembly.

In the past six months, other than the Minister of Housing's announcement relating to the introduction of Bill 4, he has made only one announcement in this House, and that on home sharing. On the other hand, he has had press releases on a $35-million housing package to boost employment, the low-rise rehabilitation program, a pilot project regarding rooming houses, the rent control consultation and anti-recession funding.

The two latest examples occurred on 18 April and 14 May. On 18 April, the minister issued a press release announcing he was changing the eligibility of refugee claimants for subsidized housing, and yet there was no announcement in this House. Then yesterday, 14 May, the minister released the ministry's report on the results of the rent control consultation, again through a press release and not through this Legislative Assembly.

I am an opposition Housing critic, and I and the Conservative Housing critic are put at a severe disadvantage. Furthermore, I say that members of this House are entitled to share in this information. We should not have to wait a week to 10 days to get this press release through the Ministry of Housing in a plain brown envelope, if we get it at all. Is the reason that the minister is afraid to face opposition responses in the House? Is it because he wishes to hide things, such as the fact that the minister had the permanent rent control legislation in its second draft 10 full days before the consultation period ended?

Mr Speaker, I bring this matter to your attention today and I ask that you deal with it and prevent it from recurring.

The Speaker: To the member for Eglinton, while I appreciate her concerns, she will be disappointed to know that it is neither a point of privilege nor a point of order. The matter she brings to my attention is one which is a courtesy and is not covered by our standing orders.

ORAL QUESTIONS

TAX INCREASES

Mr Nixon: I have a question I would like to put to the Treasurer having to do with the gas guzzler tax. With the many problems he is facing with this difficult budget, this perhaps is the most immediate one since it affects the auto manufacturing industry in Ontario, which is being hit by substantial reductions in sales and by layoffs commensurate with those reductions.

Since the Treasurer inherited a tax, which I think he voted against originally, that covered only a minimum number of cars, and by coincidence many of them manufactured offshore, and he has extended this tax so that it covers over 200 models, including many that are used by commuters and others, is he now aware of the difficulties that particular initiative is having in the manufacturing community and with those people who are contemplating the purchase of new cars, and is he giving any further consideration to rolling back that particular announcement, at least to the levels that they were before he adjusted them?

Hon Mr Laughren: I am aware, of course, of the concerns being expressed by both the organized work force, represented by the Canadian Auto Workers, and by the industry on the tax. I hasten to add I will be meeting with them tomorrow to discuss an alternative proposal that I understand they will be making to me, which I will be interested in hearing.

I would point out to the Leader of the Opposition, though, that less than 1% of the vehicles produced in Ontario are affected by the gas guzzler tax. As well, less than 3% of the vehicles produced in any one plant are affected by the gas guzzler tax, so I still need to be persuaded, quite frankly, that there is going to be anything other than a minimal impact on employment levels in the province.

Mr Nixon: I understand from news reports that Bob White of the Canadian Auto Workers, the president of Ford and other representatives of the manufacturing side have gained an audience with the Treasurer on rather short notice. In fact, I understand they are both going to be there tomorrow and that the manufacturers' association is going to be able to appear before the Progressive Conservative budget review, so there is going to be a lot of interest in this matter.

Will the Treasurer indicate his view on one of the stated alternatives, that is, that the government enter into funding of a joint program with the manufacturers that is designed to remove the old cars, the gas guzzlers more than eight years old which do not have the catalytic converters reducing the emissions, from the roads? Is that his contemplation, or will he give some consideration to removing this tax which is obviously not in the best interests of the workers or the finances of Ontario?

Hon Mr Laughren: I think the proposal that the leader of the official opposition talks about is an interesting one. However, there are certain pitfalls in that proposal too and before making any final pronouncement on it -- I do not want to foreclose it, but one of the problems with it is that very often people who are of low or at least modest income who drive an older car, when they trade in their car they do not trade on a brand-new one; they trade in on a newer used car. I am concerned that this kind of proposal would discriminate in favour of people of higher income, who would be in a position to buy a new car. As well, I am concerned that it is a proposal that simply would provide a financial incentive for people who might be trading in their car anyway, regardless of any kind of incentive.

Mr Nixon: I would just like to thank the Treasurer for his useful response. I wonder if he is aware that people on all sides of this House hope he will give the sort of consideration that I believe his experience and stature, if I may refer to that, would warrant in at least contemplating the rolling back of this tax, which I think would be seen by the Treasurer and his colleagues and certainly on this side as a judgement that is based on probably inadequate information that was provided to him. Would he not consider a rollback? Obviously he would want to talk to his friends in the CAW and the representatives of automotive manufacturing tomorrow, but would he not consider that at least this is one change in his budget which would be a sensible one and well received by many thoughtful people in the community?

Hon Mr Laughren: I appreciate the question, but I do not want to indicate to the leader of the official opposition that I am inclined to do what he suggests. I do want to talk to people about it.

I would remind the leader of the official opposition that this is a tax that very closely parallels the gas guzzler tax in the United States. There are some differences, and we have gone down a little lower in the threshold of fuel consumption than they have in the United States. At the same time, the maximum in the United States is higher than it is in Ontario, so I think there are some problems with that proposal.

In conclusion, we do want to send a strong signal out there that environmental protection and energy conservation remain very high priorities with this government.

Mr Nixon: I have another question, but I hope in the consideration of the Treasurer he realizes that the environmental considerations would really remove the old cars from the road. He is nodding, and I appreciate that. Actually, I own a couple of them, and if there is a couple of thousand bucks in it, I would like to know.

1430

YOUTH EMPLOYMENT

Mr Nixon: I have a question for the Minister of Education, which has to do with youth unemployment. The statistics associated with youth unemployment are becoming a matter of severe concern. The minister would be aware that the unemployment rate for people in that category is 15% and rising rapidly, with 215,000 fewer employed youth since the NDP government took office.

In this connection, can the minister explain to the House why she was not able to get additional significant funding for the Futures program and related programs that are designed to give young people an employment opportunity, short-term or otherwise, accompanied by some opportunity for training and retraining, which are so obviously essential components of any modern program?

Hon Mrs Boyd: We were able to continue our commitment to that program. We quite agree. I think the government would say that we have not been able to put as many resources into that specific area as we might have liked. That is true of many of the programs that we have tried to bring forward, because of the fiscal situation.

We are doing what we can in that area and do see some crossover in that group of people in terms of the kinds of initiatives that we will be taking with respect to the other programs of work and employment. They are certainly a targeted group. We are extremely concerned about the lack of opportunity and the lack of motivation that sometimes makes for young people. We will be coming forward over the year with initiatives within communities that encourage young people to look at retraining and to look at remaining in school as an alternative to the kind of unemployment they are facing.

Mr Nixon: The minister would now be aware that fully one third of our youth are high school dropouts at some stage and that one of the startling figures, I believe, in statistics generally available is that 15% of those people are functionally illiterate. The honourable minister's colleague the Minister of Community and Social Services is probably aware of the pressure on our social programs that comes from people who enter the workforce with little or no ability or skills, particularly if they are functionally illiterate.

I appreciate the minister's response in her statement of concern, but since the budget of the province has increased this year by 13.4% and many people who are footing that bill, or at least looking to the responsibility to foot it in the future when the deficit becomes payable, are wondering what the priorities are, would the minister not feel that in her position she should continue to attempt to have a priority based on improving these training and retraining programs which have only grown this year at 2% rather than the average 13.4%? Why has she failed in this particular?

Hon Mrs Boyd: While it is true that in the particular programs controlled by my ministry that the member is referring to that is indeed the increase we were able to achieve, there are other programs which in fact have substantial new dollars added to them, some in the Ministry of Community and Social Services, which will deal with exactly the problems that the Leader of the Opposition has suggested. I would say very clearly that we need to look at the overall programming in this area in order to see that we have a strategic scheme that is designed to try and deal with this over the broader spectrum rather than to deal with programs only in specific areas.

The illiteracy concern is definitely one that is very much a concern of mine. Certainly our ministry will continue to press for additional support, both from our own government over the coming years and from the federal government.

Mr Nixon: I just want to ask the minister if she is aware, and I am sure she must be, that a program that was brought forward under the initiative of the previous government, called Futures, is one that should be brought to her immediate attention. I am noticing in the estimates that there is funding for only 1,500 young people in this regard. It is to give them employment and ancillary, additional education, well-designed.

If the minister would care to rework it and rename it, there is no problem with that, of course. I just hope she will not dismiss it, as it appears she has, because of the substantial underfunding. I compare that number of 1,500 people helped with the number of 215,000 young people who are unemployed since her government took office last October.

Is the minister aware of that program? Is she satisfied that only 1,500 people are being dealt with? If not, is there some reallocation of funds, either in her ministry or one of the ancillary ministries, that can be brought into play? Because this problem of youth unemployment is emerging as one of the most serious ones.

Hon Mrs Boyd: Of course I am aware of the program. This government took action very early in our term to supplement the funds that were available to that program, because in fact when we took office there was a very substantial underfunding of this program. We did what we could. However, we saw that as a move in a longer-term plan to try and work through the system, through the Ministry of Skills Development, through the Ministry of Community and Social Services, through the labour adjustment fund, to try and have a much more comprehensive plan.

Indeed, the Leader of the Opposition is quite right. I am disappointed in the numbers we are projecting that we can serve with the amount we have been able to allocate. I can assure him that our commitment will be to find as many ways as we can to supplement that number and indeed to supplement the kind of assistance we can give to young people.

TAX INCREASES

Mr Harris: My question is to the Treasurer. So far this week we have had both the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology and the Premier tell us that they do not believe the gas guzzler tax will have any impact on jobs. I believe the Treasurer's tax is a job guzzler tax. Bob White, the backroom Premier and head of the Canadian Auto Workers, believes it is a job guzzler tax. Ken Harrigan, the chairman of the Motor Vehicle Manufacturers' Association, believes it is a job guzzler tax. In fact, he says this tax, coupled with a 3.4-cent-a-litre gas tax, is nothing other than "kicking the auto industry while it's down." Will the Treasurer finally admit what everybody in the auto industry is saying, that his gas guzzler tax is destroying jobs and should be scrapped?

Hon Mr Laughren: I am sure the leader of the third party heard my response to the leader of the official opposition -- at least I hope he did -- because I am not convinced, quite frankly, that the gas guzzler tax will have the impact on employment or the sale of vehicles that others do. However, one reason I want to meet with both the CAW and industry representatives tomorrow is to make sure that I do have all the facts straight.

When this matter became somewhat of an issue in the province, I did go back to the officials and asked them to recheck the figures to make sure that we had not made a mistake, because it is possible to make an error in assessing the impact of any tax change. I know that when the numbers came back to me there was no change in what the impact on jobs or production would be, so I would have to be convinced that it is much more serious than I presently think it is.

Mr Harris: I did hear the Treasurer's response to the leader of the Liberal Party. I am not asking him to give out free cars or free fridges or anything; I am just saying scrap the tax.

Clearly there is a tax revolt going on in this province. The taxpayers are furious. Today commuters on their way into work -- and it appears as though for the rest of the day and perhaps when they are attempting to try to get home -- are finding out just how mad the truckers are about the Treasurer's budget. The gas tax has dealt what is perhaps the final blow to an industry that was already reeling. Trucking companies are closing daily and hundreds of truckers are out of work because the Treasurer's budget has made the cost of doing business in Ontario too high for them to compete.

Other than pointing the finger at other levels of government, which I admit have some responsibility, what solutions --

Interjections.

Mr Harris: Listen, once I clean up the province, take it over and get it in shape, maybe I will try the country. Right now, it is the province.

The Speaker: And the supplementary?

Mr Harris: Other than pointing the finger at other levels of government, what solutions does the Treasurer have to ease the Ontario portion of taxes that are contributing to truckers losing their jobs in this province?

1440

Hon Mr Laughren: I will take seriously the admonition of the leader of the third party not to blame the federal government's policies of free trade, deregulation and a high Canadian dollar for the woes of the trucking industry.

I would remind the leader of the third party that the Minister of Transportation in Ontario took a very major step and acknowledged in a very serious way, by putting a moratorium on the issuance of new licences, that we do recognize the problems in the trucking industry and we know they are serious. That is why we have taken some action. We have taken that action, we have increased surveillance, we have increased fines.

I would simply -- and I mean this only in a rhetorical sense -- ask the leader of the third party, not that I expect him to answer, what in the world has the federal government done to help the trucking industry?

Mr Harris: I do not know what they have done to help but I know the Treasurer was in a position to help and he was in a position to hurt. He took the option of hurting by increasing the gasoline tax and putting a death knell into the trucking industry. Today it is the truckers and the auto workers. Tomorrow a group of angry taxpayers is coming to Queen's Park at noon, we hear, to tell the Treasurer just what they think of being saddled with a $35-billion bill.

The Treasurer has caused a tax revolt in this province by completely ignoring the taxpayers and giving us a budget that is 180 degrees in the wrong direction. His budget is costing taxpayers in more ways than one. He is not saving jobs; he is destroying jobs. The government promised that when it made a mistake it would admit it. Will the Treasurer admit now that he has made a mistake?

Hon Mr Laughren: Not only will I not admit that I made a mistake; I would put to members that the budget which the leader of the third party continues to malign, for reasons I do not understand, is a budget that raised some taxes but did not touch the personal income tax, did not raise the corporate income tax, did not raise the retail sales tax and did not impose the retail sales tax on the GST. At the same time, we decided that the severity of the recession in Ontario this year should be our number one priority and we decided that rather than gut the programs in health and education and social services, which that party would like to see us do, we would fight the recession this year.

Mr Harris: I do not know. The Treasurer seems to think throwing people out of work is helping the recession. I disagree.

Interjection.

Mr Harris: Some day they will let the member on the list. He should not worry.

My second question is to the Treasurer. This morning I chaired the first session of the task force on his budget direction. Unfortunately, his chair was empty, much like his commitment to create new jobs in this province. I would like to share a few of the comments that I heard.

Kevin O'Leary, president of SoftKey Software Products, began his company in his own basement in 1983. He built it up to a business that employs 200 across the country. Last week he was forced to pull some of the jobs that he was creating out of Ontario. Mr O'Leary said, "I don't think Bob Rae is going to be happy until we're all on welfare."

What does the Treasurer have to say to Mr O'Leary and all other small business people who believe that his budget is forcing their businesses and their jobs out of this province?

Hon Mr Laughren: I just want to emphasize to the leader of the third party that the Premier and this government will not be satisfied until everybody who is on welfare in this province has a job. That is our goal, not what he seems to think it is.

Interjections.

The Speaker: There is certainly a high level of excitement. Some modicum of verbal restraint would be in order. Perhaps we could hear the response from the Treasurer.

Mr Turnbull: We want fiscal restraint.

The Speaker: The member for York Mills, calm.

Hon Mr Laughren: I will try to be non-provocative, Mr Speaker.

I assume that the Conservative Party in Ontario is not going to go the way the Conservative Party in Alberta did and divorce itself from the federal Tories. Keeping that in mind, I assume then that the leader of the third party has also talked to Ottawa about its decision to cut $100 million out of the Canadian job strategy. That is certainly not very helpful to anybody in this country.

Mr Harris: I am too busy here in Ontario. I have my hands full; I can tell the Treasurer that. The Treasurer says his goal is to have everybody off welfare. Obviously my goal is very similar. I just do not see why he wants to throw them all out of work first.

This morning the task force heard from Lawrence Tapp, president of the Lawson Mardon Group. It employs more than 7,500 people. Mr Tapp said: "I find fault with the fact that the government could not find any areas worth cutting. It most certainly has failed to confront the need for spending priorities."

I was pleased to read in a number of this morning's papers that the Treasurer had seen the light and that he now realizes that cutting government spending might be a good idea, but only as a last resort. I think that is a big move for him.

Why does the Treasurer insist on pushing Ontario to the wall? Why does he insist on throwing us out of work before controlling spending? I would like him to explain to Mr Tapp and to others like him who want to do business in this province today why he ignored any spending cuts and any sign of any form of restraint in this budget.

Hon Mr Laughren: First of all, the leader of the third party is factually incorrect. We went through a process of reducing, reallocating and cutting over $700 million worth of program expenditures for 1991-92.

Second, the leader of the third party does not seem to be able to acknowledge the fact that by fighting the recession this year, we have maintained, saved and created over 70,000 jobs this fiscal year.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Of course no one would try to be provocative either in the questions asked or the responses given, but at the same time it is a little difficult for the Chair to hear exactly what is being said.

Hon Mr Laughren: I will conclude quickly. I just want to say that the leader of the third party cannot stand up one minute and call for expenditures to create jobs in this province, and the next minute stand up and complain about expenditures. I wish he would get his lines straight.

Mr Hayes: On a point of privilege, Mr Speaker: I have spent 27 years in the auto industry and working very hard for the people in there to get decent health and safety --

Interjections.

Mr Hayes: I am going to make a point here.

Interjections.

The Speaker: We will take a 10-minute recess.

The House recessed at 1451.

1501

The Speaker: The leader of the third party had a supplementary. The Treasurer has just returned.

Mr Harris: As the Treasurer is wending his way back to this much calmer Legislature I would, by way of final supplementary, say this to him. The people who spoke with us this morning say they are losing business as a direct result of his budgetary policy. A number of them acknowledge that there are other factors and that there is a cumulative effect. This budget is part of that cumulative effect. That means Ontario is losing jobs. I could go on at length with examples from our first day of hearings alone. There is no way I can accommodate all the people who want to tell the Treasurer how his budget is hurting them, which I believe points out the need for full public hearings.

If the Treasurer will not today commit to full public hearings on his budget, will he at least agree to come to our task force tomorrow where we will give him a position of prominence to listen to what the people have to say about his budget?

Hon Mr Laughren: First of all, I do not understand how anyone can say that a budget that maintained or created 70,000 jobs is costing jobs. That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. As a matter of fact, one reason we have a $9.7-billion deficit in this province is that we made a determination to fight the recession and maintain jobs in the province. What the leader of the third party is saying makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

I understand that there are always people who do not like budgets. I can remember being in opposition, and I never met a budget I liked either. But I can tell the leader of the third party that I listened very long and very carefully, the standing committee listened long and carefully before the budget, and the budget in large measure reflects the fact that we listened so carefully to people who appeared before us.

TRUCKING INDUSTRY

Mr Nixon: While the Treasurer is in attendance -- and this seems to be a day on which we can put some useful questions to him and are getting some useful answers -- the trucks have now got double circles around Queen's Park. They have been in Ottawa; they have stopped Highway 401. I do not know how I am going to get back to Brant county tonight, etc.

When the Treasurer has responded to the problems from the trucking industry, as has the Minister of Transportation as well, I think they have very properly indicated there is a broad range of difficulties having to do with deregulation, which was proposed by the government of Canada and implemented here. But it has to do with taxation more than anything else.

It was indicated that the Prime Minister, in response to questions today or yesterday, said, "Go and see Bob Rae; he just raised the tax on diesel fuel." We know that in the federal budget just a few weeks ago, the federal government raised those same taxes. Is it not possible for the Treasurer, a man of substantial stature in this connection, I would say, to sort of cut through some of this baloney, meet with his colleagues but also with the federal people, and respond to the needs of the trucking industry in some sort of concrete way to give them some hope that they can continue in their operation and maintain the jobs? This is really a catastrophe.

Hon Mr Laughren: I do not quarrel with the leader of the official opposition's assessment of the industry. It is in trouble in the province, no question about that. I think if he is fair, he would acknowledge that we took a major step when we put a moratorium, up to 24 months, on the issuing of new licences. That was a major commitment we made to the trucking industry.

I still do not believe that the problems of the trucking industry are central to the tax structure in this province. We know there is some difficulty there, but I think it has a lot more to do with the competition within the industry -- simply too much -- that is causing the problem. I remain to be convinced that central to their problems is the tax structure in this province.

Mr Nixon: I am sure the Treasurer is aware that he is not the first Treasurer who has had to respond to this problem. Without commenting in detail on that, I would say that it is worse now. Raymond Cope, who is president of the Ontario Trucking Association and whom many people have met, certainly in the government, is quoted in today's Toronto Star as saying, "Governments don't seem to realize this is an industry on fire." I believe he is correct.

Certainly they were smouldering even this time a year ago, when certain other actions might have been taken, but we were doing, as we say in this business, the best we could.

Glengarry Transport just went into bankruptcy last week with hundreds of jobs, not in Toronto but in the outlying areas. It is true wherever we go. I am afraid the Treasurer and his colleagues are going to have to contemplate some action. Is anything being done other than the moratorium on licences that he has referred to?

Hon Mr Laughren: Nothing specific is being done other than the moratorium, plus the other measures I mentioned in response to an earlier question about monitoring --

An hon member: Increasing enforcement.

Hon Mr Laughren: Increasing enforcement, monitoring the payment of taxes and so forth. I believe as well that the Minister of Transportation is going to be meeting with the truckers this afternoon and I am trying to rearrange my schedule to join him at that meeting.

Mr Nixon: We know how busy you are.

Hon Mr Laughren: Yes, you know busy I am. I do not mean to dismiss the problems of the trucking industry with a wave of the hand by indicating that it is not tax-based. I do realize there are very serious problems in the trucking industry, and I think it is important that we sit down and talk to them.

TVONTARIO

Mr Runciman: I have a question for the Minister of Culture and Communications. Last month the Public Policy Forum held a tribute dinner to honour four individuals for their contribution to the country. Tickets were $150 a plate plus the GST. A table for 10 cost $1,605.

It has come to our attention that one of these tables was occupied by TVOntario officials, including Chairman Bernard Ostry, and the Deputy Minister of Culture and Communications. This dinner was to honour Sylvia Ostry, the chairman of the Centre for International Studies at the University of Toronto and the wife of the TVOntario chairman.

Can the minister assure the House today that each and every TVOntario official paid for the tickets out of his or her own pocket and not with taxpayers' money?

Hon Mr Marchese: I was not there. Mr Speaker, I --

Interjections.

The Speaker: We now know where the minister was not. Would you let him explain some more?

Hon Mr Marchese: The member raises a question about whether individuals have paid out of their own pockets. I am presuming that might be the case. I will find out and inform the member.

Mr Runciman: Yes, ignorance is bliss. That is the theme of that government over there every time one of these questions arises.

As supplementary, a number of allegations have surfaced in regard to expenditures by the chairman of TVO. One anonymous letter stated that his executive bathroom was regrouted four times to get the colour just right, and that a surveillance system has been installed outside his office doors. Even more disturbing is the allegation that the program production budget has been raided to pay for executive expenses.

I wish, Mr Speaker, I could provide the minister with information to substantiate those expenditure claims, but as you know, TVOntario is exempt from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. We have called TVO to ask for an expense account breakdown for the board of directors and the executive management committee. The general counsel has stated that our request has to be in writing and we have to say why we want it. Of course, there is no guarantee as to what, if any, information they might agree to release. That is ridiculous. We are talking about the public's right to know about the expenditures of tax dollars and contributed dollars.

The Speaker: And the supplementary?

Mr Runciman: Will the minister commit himself today to requiring Bernard Ostry to appear before the standing committee on public accounts so we can have a full public airing of this matter?

Hon Mr Marchese: With respect to the question he raises, what I want to say to the House is that the Provincial Auditor is doing a review and audit of a number of expenditures that have happened at TVO. I am anticipating a lot of the questions that the member raises today and that others have raised in the past will be addressed by that audit.

I would want to make sure that we have the results of that audit, and we will have them soon. As soon as we have the answers to those questions, we will know how to deal with it. We will provide the results to the members regarding those allegations and questions. That is all I would like to say to that.

1510

WASTE MANAGEMENT

Mr Fletcher: I have a question for the Minister of the Environment which pertains to the banning of future municipal waste incinerators in the province. Given the environmental and health hazards as well as the cost and effectiveness of incineration, I think this was a bold and necessary step that was taken by the minister, something that previous governments would never do. There are municipalities that still have this option written into their plans, and I am wondering if the minister intends to clarify for these municipalities whether these plans will be followed through, or if she is going to make it more clear for them.

Hon Mrs Grier: That is a good question and I appreciate the opportunity to clarify for municipalities which are undergoing a waste management master plan that this government indeed does not favour incineration as one of the alternatives to be considered. We have, as the member knows, embarked upon an aggressive program of reduction, reuse and recycling, and that is our preferred alternative to the disposal of municipal solid waste.

I know members will also be very pleased to learn, as will municipalities, that I have asked the ministry to review the waste management master planning process, a process that has been very frustrating for a lot of municipalities across this province. I hope soon to be able to indicate some changes and improvements to that entire process.

SMALL BUSINESS

Mr Mahoney: My question is -- it must be his lucky day -- to the Treasurer. It has to do with small business in the Premier's Ontario, or what is left of it. It will not deal with what this government has done for small business, which is absolutely nothing, but rather with what this government is doing to small business, which is driving it out of this province.

For the Treasurer's information, businesses with fewer than 50 employees have accounted for 77% of the net job creation gain in Ontario between the years 1978 and 1987; that is 700,000 jobs. However, he has ignored that fact. The NDP, in fact, has dismantled the parliamentary assistant's committee for small business, which acted as a conduit under our administration for that small business community. In fact, the small business advocate seems to have disappeared from the face of the business community. The government has put a surtax on and has hiked the tax rate on over 6,000 small businesses in the province in 1991-92.

The Speaker: And the question?

Mr Mahoney: We are projecting a 30% increase in gasoline taxes over the next eight months. Diesel taxes have gone up and we are seeing the result of that surrounding this building at the present moment --

The Speaker: An interrogative part.

Mr Mahoney: -- and these taxes and other taxes will only exacerbate the cross-border shopping dilemma which affects small business in a major way.

Mr Speaker, thank you for your patience. It was important to lay out the scenario so that the members opposite understand.

Does the Treasurer realize that while his expenditures for this government went up 13.4% this year, small business is not able to spend its way out of the recession and is looking for some relief from this government? What is the Treasurer doing for them?

Hon Mr Laughren: I have been in the Legislature now for over 19 years and have watched very carefully the attitude of all three parties to the small business community. Having looked at it very carefully and very objectively, there has never been a government in this province that has regarded the small business community as seriously and as being important as we do.

People who are equally as objective in this matter as I am would agree that the anti-recession program we brought in for $700 million, plus the large local component which pushed it up to almost $1 billion in spending, benefited the private sector enormously in this province. So I think people who say we have not done anything for the small business sector are simply not being fair-minded.

Mr Mahoney: I am quite impressed that the Treasurer answered that with a straight face with that kind of a comment. I am astounded at that. What he is doing for small business people is simply making them smaller and in more time he will continue to do that until they are obliterated from the face of the business community in this province.

The fact is that in his budget the Ministry of Industry, Trade and Technology received a 0% increase when in reality the rest of his spending departments are up 13.4%. How in God's name can he stand there and say that he takes small business seriously or that he cares about its concerns? How can he stand there and say he cares about small business when in the month of April bankruptcies in this province were up 68%? The facts would tend to show that what he is saying is not accurate. I would not go so far as to say it is not true; perhaps he is not totally informed of the statistics and the serious problems faced by small business in this province.

Would the Treasurer just stand up and give us one example of what he is prepared to do as the financial genius for this province to help small business stay in business in the next four years until we can get the members opposite out of government?

Hon Mr Laughren: I appreciate the plaudits from the member opposite, but he is one of the few people in the province who think I am a financial genius. I certainly do not think so.

The member opposite asked me to give him an example of what this government has done for small business. I would say to him that this year the Ministry of Industry, Trade and Technology's ongoing programs are guaranteeing $46.5 million in loans for some 3,400 new businesses through the new ventures program for providing $69.5 million in Ontario Development Corp's direct loan assistance to more than 300 firms.

We have in the budget as well, if he wants to refer directly to the budget, a $57-million program called the manufacturing recovery program that we believe will be of a direct and enormous assistance to small business in Ontario. It is simply not true that we are not helping small business. We are doing everything we can.

1520

HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION

Mr Arnott: My question is to the Minister of Transportation and it concerns the Red Hill Creek Expressway. As the minister is well aware, the situation concerning the expressway is not going to go away. Today's rally is evidence that this is a situation which must be dealt with and must be dealt with soon. It is obvious to everyone that the existing road system in Hamilton-Wentworth is not adequate to meet the needs of the community. That is why the expressway was proposed in the first place.

In the minister's response to my letter of 11 March he replied in part, "Some residual benefit may be realized from the works undertaken to date in the community on the local road systems, and I have committed this ministry to financially support project completion and restoration of these work areas."

Can the minister explain to this House what roadwork he was referring to and how these roads can possibly assume the role of an expressway?

Hon Mr Philip: I am pleased that the honourable Conservative critic has asked that question because it gives me an opportunity to express some concerns that I have. I am sympathetic to some of the people, whom I gather earlier he took credit for organizing, in his speech, who were before the Legislature. But I am also sympathetic to the more than 600 people who on Saturday, in their own time, turned out to the valley because they feel deeply about the environment.

This year alone, we have transferred a 10% increase to the municipal allocations to Hamilton-Wentworth. We are working with them now on a plan and we have had several meetings to develop a whole infrastructure to service that area. I can tell the member that the meetings are going very well with the regional chairman and his staff.

Mr Arnott: That response was interesting, because the minister knows full well that there is no viable, environmentally acceptable alternative, or any alternative, to the route on the Red Hill Creek Expressway.

The minister has told the people of Hamilton-Wentworth that if they can come up with the money themselves they can build their own expressway. Can the minister tell me how on the one hand he can say that the government funding for the expressway is being withdrawn because of environmental concerns, yet on the other hand he is willing to allow the expressway to be built if the people in Hamilton come up with the money themselves?

Hon Mr Philip: I answered this to the honourable member and to the critic for the Liberal Party some time ago. I have no legal right under any statute in Ontario to stop a municipality from building any roadway that it has the legal right to build. If the people of Hamilton-Wentworth and their democratically elected government wish to build that expressway, I have no legal right to stop them and it would be completely improper for me to do that.

Earlier today at the rally, both the Liberal critic and the Conservative critic were outside telling the Ontario people that they do not care about the environment, that the environmental considerations have to take second place. I can tell them that with this government, environmental considerations do not take second place.

LANDFILL SITE

Mr Duignan: Later on this afternoon I will be presenting a petition on behalf of over 12,000 residents of my riding who are concerned about a proposal by Reclamations Systems Inc to create a landfill in the Acton quarry, a quarry owned by United Aggregates Ltd. Will the minister please state her position on this proposal?

Hon Mrs Grier: I am glad to have an opportunity to do that and I was glad earlier today to have an opportunity to meet with representatives from the member's riding who I know are very concerned about this particular proposal.

The proposal is that there be a waste management site within a quarry in the Niagara Escarpment. That proposal was designated under the Environmental Assessment Act by my predecessor, the member for St Catharines, the honourable minister as he then was, a proposal that is going through the environmental assessment process. What the people of that area would like me to do is to unilaterally and arbitrarily say that this cannot go through the process. Under the Environmental Assessment Act, that option is not open to me.

A review of the documents submitted by RSI is being undertaken by my ministry. When that is completed, it will be put out for public comment, and RSI have the right, under the Environmental Assessment Act, to a hearing if in fact the proposal gets that far.

Mr Duignan: In the town of Halton Hills, a citizens' group called Protect Our Water and Environmental Resources and many other interest groups in Halton believe that the Acton quarry is not only a poor place but a wrong place to put garbage. If the minister finds that the Acton quarry is indeed an inappropriate site for garbage and that it is unsafe because of the water table, will she ensure that no environmental assessment hearing will take place?

Hon Mrs Grier: I thought I explained in my first answer to the member's question that it was not open to the minister to decide whether or not an environmental assessment hearing would occur. As I explained to the representatives of that area this afternoon, I think it would be very dangerous if in fact a minister could unilaterally make that determination. We have an Environmental Assessment Act that is for the protection of the environment and the protection of the people of this province.

There have been many cases when I have supported the need for an environmental assessment, and I support the right of the proponent in this place to have an environmental assessment hearing. I regret that the town of Halton Hills has been informing people that we were on the verge of a hearing. Let me assure the member and those who are concerned that we are a very long way from a hearing on this project and that a great deal more review and work will have to be done before it goes to a hearing.

SKILLS TRAINING

Mr Conway: I have a question to the Treasurer, and it concerns the budgetary policy which he announced here some two and a half weeks ago. Like all of my constituents and, I am sure, all members of the Legislature, I was quite encouraged to read on page 6 of the Treasurer's budget the commitment of the government and the recognition of the government that training is going to be very important to achieving sustainable prosperity for Ontario into the 1990s.

Accepting the wisdom of that assertion, I then went on to read very carefully and reread the budgetary speech on several occasions, and I am looking for any new initiative which the Treasurer might have undertaken to support, I think, a very important part of the wealth-creating aspect of the much-troubled Ontario economy. I cannot seem to find any specifically new initiative that would support what I think we all accept as a first principle of economic recovery for the 1990s.

Can the Treasurer help me find in this budget, which calls for a year-over-year increase of some 13.4% in public expenditures, any new initiatives to support a highly desirable public policy objective such as retraining?

Hon Mr Laughren: No. However, before I be so categorical, the statement the member opposite referred to, on page 6 of the budget, does indicate our determination to improve the level of training in the province. There are negotiations going on with the federal government and the whole question of training and better co-ordination. I will have to leave with the member opposite the assurance that we are working within government to put together a very serious proposal and effort on the whole question of training in the province.

Mr Conway: I accept what the Treasurer said, and I say again that his government has increased or intends to increase public expenditures by some 13.4% in the coming fiscal year, that is, the fiscal year 1991-92. He has admitted that there are no new initiatives yet indicated to deal with a centrepiece of economic recovery, which is the training account.

I was struck a few days ago in reading the Quebec provincial budget, wherein we see a very different kind of fiscal policy. We see a budgetary plan that is much more constrained in terms of public expenditures; we see a deficit that is roughly one third of that which is planned by the Rae government in Ontario. But against the backdrop of that fiscal conservatism and that restraint and a much tighter control on budgetary deficits, I read in the Quebec budget that a new initiative that contemplates some $100 million at maturation, a very innovative program, a very worker-friendly program in support of new training, is contemplated.

Is the Treasurer of Ontario not concerned to see next door in Quebec a much more creative, immediate and worker-friendly training program against the backdrop of a very different kind of spending program, and would he not consider that the time has come in Ontario, without spending any more money, to reorder our accounts of $52 billion to try to at least match what our compatriots in Quebec are doing that ought to give some real concern to those interested in and concerned about job creating in Ontario?

Hon Mr Laughren: I cannot disagree with the emphasis that the member opposite puts on training. I would emphasize, however, that if there is one area in which the provinces and the private sector and the federal government do not have their act together very well, it is in training. I think there is a lot of overlapping and, I suspect, waste, on the whole question of training. I feel very strongly, as the member does, that it is terribly important that we get training co-ordinated properly with other jurisdictions. I am not blaming anybody for this; I think it is just the way it has evolved over the years, although I was frankly very interested in the Quebec model as well.

Before we take any major steps, though, we want to make sure we have some coherence to the whole training system in the province, including the use of the colleges, in which the member has an abiding interest, and the private sector and government, to make sure there is some logic in the whole question of training in the province.

1530

OATHS IN COURTS

Mr Harnick: My question is for the Attorney General. I notice today in his daily quote he indicates that there seems to be developing in our courts a problem related to swearing on the Bible before a witness gives evidence. The Attorney General has indicated that there have been some complaints from those who do not want to swear on the Bible, and that the complaints have been sporadic.

The Attorney General knows that the courtroom procedural manuals which are held by every courtroom in the province contain some 17 to 18 different oaths which may be sworn. These include secular oaths, the saucer oath for the followers of Confucius, the Gita for Hindus, the Koran for Muslims, the Torah for Jews and the Bible for Christians, among many others.

The Attorney General indicates that the problem is one of sensitivity to the various oaths being available, and the sensitivity is at the initial level. As I understand what he means by initial level --

The Speaker: Would you finish your question, please.

Mr Harnick: I am almost there.

The Speaker: Immediately, please.

Mr Harnick: He means the initial level being the court clerks or crown attorneys or registrars. As I understand it, they all work for the Attorney General. Why does he not just give them proper instructions and stop creating a problem where none exists?

Hon Mr Hampton: Apparently the member for the Conservative Party is not sensitive to the complaints that might come from the followers of other religions.

The point I made with the press yesterday is that we look into complaints that come from individuals from time to time. We look into the nature of those complaints. We have found that in some cases, not all courthouses or not all tribunals across the province may have particular religious texts. We have also found some situations where individuals were not advised before they took the oath that they had a choice as to swearing an oath on a Bible or swearing an oath on some other religious text, or a simple affirmation.

Apparently, however, the member for the Conservative Party does not think these are important issues and does not believe the multicultural community or minorities should have their problems looked at and addressed.

KATHLEEN POOLE

Ms Poole: On a second point of personal privilege, Mr Speaker, and I am sure this one will be much more successful: All members of this House are aware of the enormous personal sacrifices which we make as members of this assembly, probably none greater than the sacrifice of time with our families, so I hope members will bear with me today when I wish my daughter, Kathleen, a happy 13th birthday.

The Speaker: I am not sure it is a point of privilege, but it certainly is important.

CONTRACT SERVICES

Mr Tilson: On a point of privilege, Mr Speaker: I would like to correct the record and apologize to the House and to the member for Renfrew North.

On Wednesday 8 May I implied that in 1990 the member for Renfrew North, a former Minister of Education, had not used a speech that was prepared for him to respond to the throne speech. In fact the year was not 1990, it was 1989, and the speech was delivered by the Minister of Education to respond to the throne speech. Although my general concern for the lack of guidelines by the government and the use of contract speeches has not changed, I do apologize to the House and to the member for Renfrew North.

Mr Conway: I very much appreciate the point, because as my colleagues of some duration around here will know, it is not my style to contract out for speeches. Perhaps I should. I think on one or two occasions it might have been done, but I wanted the record to be straight that I certainly did not contract out for a speech to be written for me for purposes of this Legislature.

PETITIONS

UNION REPRESENTATION

Mr Runciman: I have a petition signed by 302 residents of my riding of Leeds-Grenville.

"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 Ontario Public Service Employees' Union bargaining unit workers employed in the province of Ontario provincial psychiatric hospitals are requesting representation rights on community advisory boards of the provincial psychiatric hospitals; and

"Whereas the Minister of Health has recently added consumer group representation on said community advisory boards;

"Therefore the following undersigned citizens of the community of Brockville and area request that the OPSEU workers employed at the Brockville Psychiatric Hospital be given representation rights on the community advisory board of the Brockville Psychiatric Hospital."

I want to indicate my full support for this petition and the request of the petitioners.

DECENTRALIZATION OF GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

Ms Haeck: A petition is on behalf of 2,000 of my constituents requesting that the Ministry of Government Services support the relocation of the Ministry of Transportation to the downtown core of St Catharines.

Pursuant to standing order 35, I hereby affix my signature to this petition and present it to be duly filed.

TAX INCREASES

Mr J. Wilson: I am pleased to present a petition today to the House, in particular because I am the critic for Tourism and Recreation for the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party. The petition reads as follows:

"Whereas the tax increases imposed by the 1991 budget for the province of Ontario will have a negative effect on firms and businesses in border communities and in particular those engaged in the retail and tourism trades;

"We, the undersigned, respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct one of its committees to hold public hearings in Ontario border communities on the proposed tax increases."

LANDFILL SITES

Mr Duignan: I am pleased to present to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario a petition signed by 12,444 residents of my riding.

"Whereas the Halton region has its own proposed landfill site; and

"Whereas the Acton quarry landfill is on the Niagara Escarpment, declared by the UN as a biosphere reserve; and

"Whereas all landfills will leak; and

"Whereas proponents did not thoroughly examine the alternative sites, and therefore have abused the environmental process; and

"Whereas RSI proposed to bring garbage from all over Ontario to the proposed site; and

"Whereas the citizens of Halton are not a willing host for garbage;

"We, the undersigned, firmly object to the proposal by RSI to locate a dump in the United Aggregates quarry in Acton of Halton Hills, Ontario."

For four years now the citizens of Halton Hills, part of my riding, have been fighting to keep garbage out of the Niagara Escarpment, and a group called POWER started collecting signatures on a petition to oppose the landfill site that puts the drinking water at risk; it is a petition to which I affix my signature.

DAY CARE

Mr McLean: I have a petition addressed to the Minister of Community and Social Services. It reads:

"We, the undersigned, request that the minister take action immediately to rectify the further salary inequity announced 31 January 1991 for early childhood educators.

"We believe that freedom of choice, pay equity and non-discrimination are the backbone of our democratic society. Furthermore, parents must retain the right to select the day care of their choice."

That is signed by several people, and I have also affixed my name to it.

1540

PARLIAMENTARY PROCESS

Mr Kormos: I have a petition. It is addressed to the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it reads:

"Mike Harris, listen up, make your point and get on with it. We are tired of his stalling.

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

"Whereas the Progressive Conservative members of the Legislature have been using various tactics to delay and obstruct the business of the House; and

"Whereas the grandstanding of those same Progressive Conservatives is wasting legislative time and taxpayers' money and;

"Whereas the Progressive Conservatives are fighting for their political lives at the expense of working people here in the province of Ontario,

"We call on the Legislature to get on with the business of the public and, in particular, the debate of the employee wage protection program, Bill 70, which will help laid-off workers get their wages, vacation pay, holiday pay, termination or severance pay owed to them."

A number of people have signed this. I have signed it. I am giving it to Njeri Campbell, one of our great pages, to take down to you right now, Mr Speaker.

DAY CARE

Mr Jackson: I have a petition which indicates, "Whereas Bob Rae promised the moon and the sun in the last provincial election, all we have seen is the member for Welland-Thorold as the Sunshine Boy and somebody's moon out of the Premier's office," but I refuse to table that petition.

The one I do wish to table is addressed to the House and it is from Glendale Day Nursery in Hamilton. These are parents and workers and it says:

"We, the undersigned, request that the Minister of Community and Social Services take action immediately to rectify the further salary inequity announced by her government 31 January 1991 for early childhood educators in this province.

"We believe that freedom of choice, pay equity and non-discrimination are the backbone of our democratic society. Furthermore, parents must retain the right to select the day care of their choice in Ontario."

I support that, I have signed my name to that, and I support those families in Hamilton who apparently could not find a member to table their petition for them.

FRENCH-LANGUAGE SERVICES

Ms Haeck: I have a second petition. This is on behalf of 124 of my constituents regarding repeal of the French Language Services Act of Ontario, and I hereby present it to be duly filed.

BUDGET

Mr Tilson: I have a petition for this House that states that:

"Whereas the 1991 budget of the province of Ontario proposes measures which would substantially increase the provincial debt and the provincial deficit; and

"Whereas the 1991 budget of the province of Ontario imposes $1 billion in new taxes on consumers and workers; and

"Whereas the policy proposed in the 1991 budget would further undermine the competitiveness of Ontario firms,

We, the undersigned, do respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario to refer the 1991 budget in its entirety to a standing committee of the Legislative Assembly for public hearings around the province."

PARLIAMENTARY PROCESS

Mr Drainville: It is with a heavy heart that I come to this House today to present this very sobering petition.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Progressive Conservative Party has usurped the power and position of the government through undemocratic use of the standing orders of the assembly;

"Whereas the Progressive Conservative Party has cost the taxpayers of Ontario $290,000 per day over the period of their childish and misguided activity;

"Whereas the Progressive Conservative Party has wasted well over $2 million of the taxpayers' money; and

"Whereas the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party has characterized himself as a tax fighter when he and his party are really only tax wasters, we the undersigned citizens of the province of Ontario ask that the obstruction of the assembly end and that the first budget of the NDP government be allowed to be debated."

DEER POPULATION

Mrs MacKinnon: I have a petition signed by over 400 residents of Lambton county to the Minister of Natural Resources.

"We, the undersigned, do humbly petition the minister to take immediate action on reducing the size of the deer population in the Pinery Provincial Park to a size that does not damage the flora and fauna of the park, thereby reducing the motor vehicle accidents on the area highways, reducing damage to vegetable growers' crops and residential landscaping and reducing the likelihood of residents and tourists being exposed to Lyme disease."

I have affixed my name to this petition.

DAY CARE

Mr Tilson: I have a petition addressed to this House and to the Minister of Community and Social Services.

"We, the undersigned, request that the minister take action immediately to rectify the further salary inequity announced 31 January 1991 for early childhood educators.

"We believe that freedom of choice, pay equity and non-discrimination are the backbone of our democratic society. Furthermore, parents must retain the right to select the day care of their choice."

PARLIAMENTARY PROCESS

Mr Johnson: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the third party is most certainly unsure of its purpose in the Legislature and obviously does not know whether its members want to support or oppose its own bills, nor do they know whether they want to adjourn the House or not at any given time;

"Therefore we, the undersigned citizens of Ontario, request that the government of Ontario do what is necessary to stop the third party from wasting time and money by unduly delaying the legislative process."

Mr Ruprecht: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I listened with great care to the member for Prince Edward-Lennox-South Hastings reading his petition. I would like to know, Mr Speaker, if you could intervene and tell us how many people actually from Ontario signed this petition and where this petition came from. Where did it originate from? We could all get up here and read petitions until we are blue in the face, but what really is the test and maintains the test of time is who signed the petition, how many people signed the petition and where do these petitions come from?

The Speaker: To the member for Parkdale, I would draw his attention, and indeed the attention of all members, to section 35 of the standing orders which carefully delineates all the responsibilities of the members in terms of presenting petitions. It reads in part that a brief statement outlining the purpose of the petition should be provided, not editorial comment.

DAY CARE

Mr Villeneuve: I too have a petition to His Honour the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislature of Ontario.

"We, the undersigned, request that the Minister of Community and Social Services take action immediately to rectify the further salary inequity announced 31 January 1991 for early childhood educators.

"We believe that freedom of choice, pay equity and non-discrimination are the backbone of our democratic society. Furthermore, parents must retain the right to select the day care of their choice."

This is a very legitimate petition signed by some 40 people from the Hamilton area.

REPORT BY COMMITTEE

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

Mr Jackson, on behalf of Mr Runciman, from the standing committee on government agencies presented the committee's eighth report.

The Speaker: Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr Jackson: No, thank you.

The Speaker: That is very polite.

Pursuant to standing order 104(g)14, the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

1550

INTRODUCTION OF BILL

BUDGETARY EFFECTS STUDY ACT, 1991 / LOI DE 1991 SUR L'ÉTUDE DES EFFETS BUDGÉTARES

Mr Harris moved first reading of Bill 101, to require the Minister of Industry and Trade to conduct a study on the effect of the 1991/1992 Ontario Budget on certain industries.

M. Harris propose la première lecture du projet de loi 101, pour exiger que le ministre de l'Industrie et du Commerce effectue une étude sur les effets du budget de l'Ontario de 1991/1992 à l'égard de certaines industries.

Mr Harris: I move that leave be given to introduce a bill entitled An Act to require the Minister of Industry and Trade to Conduct a Study on the Effect of the 1991-92 Ontario Budget on the Agricultural and Related Services Industries, the Fishing and Trapping Industries, the Logging and Forestry Industries, the Mining Industry, the Quarrying and Oil Well Industries, the Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries, the Quarry and Sand Pit Industries, Mineral Extraction-Related Services Industries, the Meat and Meat Product Industries, the Poultry Products Industry, the Fish Products Industry, the Fruit and Vegetable Industries, the Dairy Products Industry, the Feed, Bread and Other Bakery Products Industry, the Miscellaneous Food Products Industry, the Soft Drink Industry, the Distillery Products Industry, the Brewery Products Industry, the Tobacco Products Industry, the Rubber Products Industry, the Plastic Products Industry, the Leather and Allied Products Industry, the Footwear Industry, the Primary Textile and Textile Products Industry, the Wool, Yarn and Cloth Industry, the Miscellaneous Textile Products Industry, the Carpet, Mat and Rug Industry, the Clothing Industry, the Hosiery Industry, the Sawmills Industry, the Planing and Shingle Mill Industry, the Veneer and Plywood Industry, the Sash, Door and Other Millwork Industry, the Other Wood Products Industry, the Household Furniture Industry, the Office Furniture Industry, the Pulp and Paper Industry, the Paper Box and Bag Industry, the Other Converted Paper Products Industry, the Printing and Publishing Industry, the Platemaking Industry, the Typesetting and Bindery Industry, the Primary Steel Industry, the Steel Pipe and Tube Industry, the Iron Foundry Industry, the Non-ferrous Smelting and Refining Industry, the Power Boiler and Structural Metal Industry, the Ornamental and Architectural Metal Product Industry, the Stamped, Pressed and Coated Metal Industry, the Wire and Wire Products Industry, the Hardware, Tool and Cutlery Industry, the Heating Equipment Industry, the Machine Shop Industry, the Miscellaneous Metal Fabricating Industry, the Agriculture Implement Industry, the Commercial Refrigeration Equipment Industry --

Mr Mammoliti: You have all the students leaving.You're boring them.

The Deputy Speaker: Order.

Mr Perruzza: Wait until the hammer comes down, boys.

The Deputy Speaker: Order. The member for Downsview, would you please take your seat.

Mr Harris: I hope I did not lose my place. I do not want to have to start over here.

The Aircraft and Aircraft Parts Industry, the Motor Vehicle Industry, the Truck, Bus Body and Trailer Industry, the Motor Vehicle Parts and Accessories Industry, the Railroad Rolling Stock Industry, the Shipbuilding and Repair Industry, the Small Electrical Appliance Industry, the Major Appliance Industry, the Record Players Industry, the Radio and TV Receivers Industry, the Electronic Equipment Industry, the Office, Store and Business Machines Industry, the Communications Industry, the Energy Wire and Cable Industry, the Battery Industry, the Cement Industry, the Concrete Products Industry, the Ready-mix Concrete Industry, the Glass and Glass Products Industry, the Refined Petroleum and Coal Products Industry, the Chemicals Industry, the Plastic and Synthetic Resin Industry, the Pharmaceutical and Medicine Industry, the Paint and Varnish Industry, the Soap and Cleaning Compounds Industry, the Toilet Preparations Industry, the Jewellery and Precious Metal Products Industry, the Sporting Goods and Toy Products Industry, the Sign and Display Industry, the Floor Tile Industry, the Linoleum Industry, the Coated Fabrics Industry, the Residential Construction Industry, the Commercial Construction Industry, the Air Transport and Related Services Industry, the Water Transport and Related Services Industry, the Truck Transport Industry, the Urban Transit Systems Industry, the Interurban and Rural Transit Systems Industry, the Pipeline Transport Industry, the Storage and Warehousing Industry, the Telecommunications Broadcasting Industry, the Telecommunication Carriers Industry, the Electric Power Systems Industry, the Gas Distribution Systems Industry, the Wholesale Trade Industry, the Retail Trade Industry --

Mr Mills: On a point of personal privilege, Mr Speaker: As you and everybody here knows, these proceedings are being watched throughout the province of Ontario. I take exception to being part of a government that represents people here to be so ridiculous, as is going on. This is just absolutely awful. It reflects on me, the stupidity and --

Mr Carr: Take a look at the budget if you want stupidity, Gordon. Your grandkids are going to be bankrupt.

The Deputy Speaker: Order, please, the member for Oakville South.

This is not a point of order. The member for Nipissing is within his rights.

Mr Harris: If the member is disgusted with that government, he can come over here. Unfortunately, we have lots of room over here.

If I could carry on, I do not know whether I lost my place here or not. I think the Retail Trade Industry was the last one.

The Banking Industry, the Credit Unions and Other Deposit Institutions Industry, the Trust Institutions Industry, the Other Financial and Real Estate Institutions Industry -- I am grouping a lot of these together so it will not take too much time.

Mr G. Wilson: Mr Speaker, I would like to have a point of personal privilege and break into the inaction of the House to commend the work of the pages in this session. In particular, I would like to mention Sarah Lambert from my riding.

The Deputy Speaker: This is not a point of order. Please take your seat.

Mr Harris: If there is unanimous consent, I do not mind stopping if we would like to have a few words about the pages. If you would like to have unanimous consent of the House, Mr Speaker, I would be prepared to leave the floor to the member for Kingston and The Islands if he wishes to commence.

The Deputy Speaker: You have requested whether there is unanimous consent for the member for Kingston and The Islands to speak. Is there unanimous --

An hon member: No.

1600

The Deputy Speaker: I heard a no, so there is not unanimous consent. The member for Nipissing.

Mr Harris: As long as those watching understand that it was the member of the New Democratic Party who did not wish to carry on. To continue:

The Insurance Industry, the Business Service Industry, the Educational Services Industry, the Health Services Industry, the Accommodation and Food Services Industries, the Amusement and Recreational Services Industry, and the Personal and Household Services Industry, and that it now be read the first time.

The Deputy Speaker: Mr Harris has moved that leave be given to introduce an act, the Budgetary Effects Study Act, 1991, An Act to require the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology to conduct a Study on the Effect of the 1991-92 Ontario Budget on the Agricultural and Related Services Industries, the Fishing and Trapping Industries, the Logging and Forestry Industries, the Mining Industry --

Mr Miclash: Dispense.

The Deputy Speaker: Dispense?

Mr Harris: No. I want to make sure I did not miss anything.

The Deputy Speaker: -- the Quarrying and Oil Well Industries, the Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries, the Quarry and Sand Pit Industries, Mineral Extraction-Related Services Industries, the Meat and Meat Product Industries, the Poultry Products Industry, the Fish Products Industry, the Fruit and Vegetable Industries, the Dairy Products Industry, the Feed, Bread and Other Bakery Products Industry, the Miscellaneous Food Products Industry, the Soft Drink Industry, the Distillery Products Industry, the Brewery Products Industry, the Tobacco Products Industry, the Rubber Products Industry, the Plastic Products Industry, the Leather and Allied Products Industry, the Footwear Industry, the Primary Textile and Textile Products Industry, the Wool, Yarn and Cloth Industry, the Miscellaneous Textile Products Industry, the Carpet, Mat and Rug Industry, the Clothing Industry, the Hosiery Industry, the Sawmills Industry, the Planing and Shingle Mill Industry, the Veneer and Plywood Industry, the Sash, Door and Other Millwork Industry, the Other Wood Products Industry, the Household Furniture Industry, the Office Furniture Industry, the Pulp and Paper Industry, the Paper Box and Bag Industry, the Other Converted Paper Products Industry, the Printing and Publishing Industry, the Platemaking Industry, the Typesetting and Bindery Industry, the Primary Steel Industry, the Steel Pipe and Tube Industry, the Iron Foundry Industry, the Non-ferrous Smelting and Refining Industry, the Power Boiler and Structural Metal Industry, the Ornamental and Architectural Metal Product Industry, the Stamped, Pressed and Coated Metal Industry, the Wire and Wire Products Industry, the Hardware, Tool and Cutlery Industry, the Heating Equipment Industry, the Machine Shop Industry, the Miscellaneous Metal Fabricating Industry, the Agricultural Implement Industry, the Commercial Refrigeration Equipment Industry, the Aircraft and Aircraft Parts Industry, the Motor Vehicle Industry, the Truck, Bus Body and Trailer Industry, the Motor Vehicle Parts and Accessories Industries, the Railroad Rolling Stock Industry, the Shipbuilding and Repair Industry, the Small Electrical Appliance Industry, the Major Appliance Industry, the Record Players Industry, the Radio and TV Receivers Industry, the Electronic Equipment Industry, the Office, Store and Business Machines Industry, the Communications Industry, the Energy Wire and Cable Industry, the Battery Industry, the Cement Industry, the Concrete Products Industry, the Ready-mix Concrete Industry, the Glass and Glass Products Industry, the Refined Petroleum and Coal Products Industry, the Chemicals Industry, the Plastic and Synthetic Resin Industry, the Pharmaceutical and Medicine Industry, the Paint and Varnish Industry, the Soap and Cleaning Compounds Industry, the Toilet Preparations Industry, the Jewellery and Precious Metal Products Industry, the Sporting Goods and Toy Products Industry, the Sign and Display Industry, the Floor Tile Industry, the Linoleum Industry, the Coated Fabrics Industry, the Residential Construction Industry, the Commercial Construction Industry, the Air Transport and Related Services Industry, the Water Transport and Related Services Industry, the Truck Transport Industry, the Urban Transit Systems Industry, the Interurban and Rural Transit Systems Industry, the Pipeline Transport Industry, the Storage and Warehousing Industry, the Telecommunications Broadcasting Industry, the Telecommunication Carriers Industry, the Electric Power Systems Industry, the Gas Distribution Systems Industry, the Wholesale Trade Industry, the Retail Trade Industry, the Banking Industry, the Credit Unions and Other Deposit Institutions Industry, the Trust Institutions Industry, the Other Financial and Real Estate Institutions Industry, the Insurance Industry, the Business Service Industry, the Educational Services Industry, the Health Services Industry, the Accommodation and Food Services Industries, the Amusement and Recreational Services Industry and the Personal and Household Services Industry.

M. Harris propose la première lecture d'un projet de loi sur l'étude des effets budgétaires, Loi exigeant du ministre de l'Industrie et du Commerce qu'il effectue une étude sur les effets du budget de 1991/1992 à l'égard des industries suivantes : agriculture et services connexes, pêche et piégeage, mines, carrières et puits de pétrole, pétrole brut et gaz naturel, carrières et sablières, industries des services connexes à l'extraction du minerai, viandes, volaille, poisson, fruits et légumes, produits laitiers, aliments pour animaux, pain et autres produits de boulangeries, produits alimentaires divers, boissons gaze-uses, produits de distillation, bière, tabac, produits de caoutchouc, produits en matière plastique, cuir et produits connexes, chaussures, textiles et produits textiles, filature et tissage de la laine, produits textiles divers, tapis, carpettes et moquettes, habillement sauf bas, bas et chaussettes, scieries, rabotage et bardeaux, placages et contreplaqués, portes, châssis, autres bois oeuvrés, industries d'autres produits du bois, meubles de maison, meubles de bureau, pâtes et papier, boîtes en carton et sacs en papier, autres produits en papier transformé, imprimerie et édition, clichage, composition et reliure, sidérurgiques, tubes et tuyaux d'acier, fonderies de fer, fonte et affinage métaux non ferreux, chaudières et éléments de charpente, architecture en métal, emboutissage et fils métalliques et ses produits, articles de quincaillerie, matériel de chauffage, ateliers d'usinage, autres produits en métal, instruments aratoires, équipement commercial de réfrigération, aéronefs et pièces d'aéronefs, véhicules automobiles, carosseries de camions et d'autobus et remorques, pièces et accessoires pour véhicules, matériel ferroviaire roulant, construction, réparation de navire, petits appareils électriques, gros appareils (électriques ou non) phonographes, récepteurs radio et télévision, matériel électronique, ordinateurs et autres machines de bureau, fils et câbles, électronique et communication --

The Deputy Speaker: Dispense?

An hon member: No.

Le Vice-President : -- accumulateurs, ciment, produits en béton, béton préparé, verre et articles en verre, produits raffinés de pétrole et charbon, chimiques, matériel plastique et résine synthétique, produits pharmaceutiques et médicaments, peintures et vernis, savons et composés de nettoyage, produits de toilette, bijouterie et orfèvrerie, articles de sport et jouets, enseignes et étalages, dalles, linoléum et tissus enduits, construction domiciliaire, construction commerciale, transport aérien et services connexes, transport par eau et services connexes, camionnage, transport en commun urbain, transport en commun interurbain et rural, transport par pipeline, entreposage en emmagasinage --

Mr Ruprecht: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I have been sitting in my place and listening very attentively to your reading of the various industries, and I am just wondering if you could perhaps spare us the constant repetition of these industries and start from the back.

The Deputy Speaker: Thank you for your sympathy, but the procedures require that I read the bill both in English and French, and I shall do so.

Télécommunications, transmission, énergie électrique, distribution de gaz, commerce de gros, commerce de détail, banques, caisses d'épargne et autres institutions de dépôt, sociétés de fiducie, autres agents financiers et immobiliers, assurances, services aux entreprises, services d'enseignements, services de soins de santé, hébergement et restauration, services de divertissement et loisirs, services personnel et domestiques.

The House divided on Mr Harris's motion, which was agreed to on the following vote:

La motion de M. Harris, mise aux voix, est adoptée :

1619

Ayes/Pour-57

Abel, Arnott, Boyd, Bradley, Brown, Carr, Cooke, Cooper, Coppen, Cunningham, Drainville, Duignan, Elston, Eves, Farnan, Gigantes, Grandmaître, Haeck, Hansen, Harnick, Harrington, Hayes, Hope, Jordan, Klopp, Lankin, Lessard, Mackenzie, MacKinnon, Malkowski, Mammoliti, Martel, McGuinty, McLean, Miclash, Morrow, O'Connor, Offer, Owens, Perruzza, Phillips, G., Poirier, Rizzo, Ruprecht, Scott, Sola, Sutherland, Turnbull, Villeneuve, Ward, M., Wark-Martyn, Waters, White, Wilson, G., Wilson, J., Winninger, Ziemba.

Nays/Contre-4

Kormos, Murdock, S., Wilson, F., Wiseman.

The Deputy Speaker: I would like the House to recognize in the west gallery the select committee on minority issues of the Netherlands Parliament. Welcome to Ontario.

Mr Mammoliti: On a point of order, Mr Speaker --

The Deputy Speaker: Order, please. I cannot listen to your point of order immediately. I have to listen to your point of order after the clerk at the table has read the whole bill.

Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Journals: This is a bill entitled An Act to require the Minister of Industry and Trade to Conduct a Study on the Effect of the 1991-1992 Ontario Budget on the Agricultural and Related Services Industries, the Fishing and Trapping Industries, the Logging and Forestry Industries, the Mining Industry, the Quarrying and Oil Well Industries, the Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries, the Quarry and Sand Pit Industries, Mineral Extraction-Related Services Industries, the Meat and Meat Product Industries, the Poultry Products Industry, the Fish Products Industry, the Fruit and Vegetable Industries, the Dairy Products Industry, the Feed, Bread and Other Bakery Products Industry, the Miscellaneous Food Products Industry, the Soft Drink Industry, the Distillery Products Industry, the Brewery Products Industry, the Tobacco Products Industry, the Rubber Products Industry, the Plastic Products Industry, the Leather and Allied Products Industry, the Footwear Industry, the Primary Textile and Textile Products Industry, the Wool, Yarn and Cloth Industry, the Miscellaneous Textile Products Industry, the Carpet, Mat and Rug Industry, the Clothing Industry, the Hosiery Industry, the Sawmills Industry, the Planing and Shingle Mill Industry, the Veneer and Plywood Industry, the Sash, Door and Other Millwork Industry, the Other Wood Products Industry, the Household Furniture Industry, the Office Furniture Industry, the Pulp and Paper Industry, the Paper Box and Bag Industry, the Other Converted Paper Products Industry, the Printing and Publishing Industry, the Platemaking Industry, the Typesetting and Bindery Industry, the Primary Steel Industry, the Steel Pipe and Tube Industry, the Iron Foundry Industry, the Non-ferrous Smelting and Refining Industry, the Power Boiler and Structural Metal Industry, the Ornamental and Architectural Metal Product Industry, the Stamped? Pressed and Coated Metal Industry, the Wire and Wire Products Industry, the Hardware, Tool and Cutlery Industry, the Heating Equipment Industry, the Machine Shop Industry, the Miscellaneous Metal Fabricating Industry, the Agriculture Implement Industry, the Commercial Refrigeration Equipment Industry, the Aircraft and Aircraft Parts Industry, the Motor Vehicle Industry, the Truck, Bus Body and Trailer Industry, the Motor Vehicle Parts and Accessories Industry, the Railroad Rolling Stock Industry, the Shipbuilding and Repair Industry, the Small Electrical Appliance Industry, the Major Appliance Industry, the Record Players Industry, the Radio and TV Receivers Industry, the Electronic Equipment Industry, the Office, Store and Business Machines Industry, the Communications Industry, the Energy Wire and Cable Industry, the Battery Industry, the Cement Industry, the Concrete Products Industry, the Ready-mix Concrete Industry, the Glass and Glass Products Industry, the Refined Petroleum and Coal Products Industry, the Chemicals Industry, the Plastic and Synthetic Resin Industry, the Pharmaceutical and Medicine Industry, the Paint and Varnish Industry, the Soap and Cleaning Compounds Industry, the Toilet Preparations Industry, the Jewellery and Precious Metal Products Industry, the Sporting Goods and Toy Products Industry, the Sign and Display Industry, the Floor Tile Industry, the Linoleum Industry, the Coated Fabrics Industry, the Residential Construction Industry, the Commercial Construction Industry, the Air Transport and Related Services Industry, the Water Transport and Related Services Industry, the Truck Transport Industry, the Urban Transit Systems Industry, the Interurban and Rural Transit Systems Industry, the Pipeline Transport Industry, the Storage and Warehousing Industry, the Telecommunications Broadcasting Industry, the Telecommunication Carriers Industry, the Electric Power Systems Industry, the Gas Distribution Systems Industry, the Wholesale Trade Industry, the Retail Trade Industry, the Banking Industry, the Credit Unions and Other Deposit Institutions Industry, the Trust Institutions Industry, the Other Financial and Real Estate Institutions Industry, the Insurance Industry, the Business Service Industry, the Educational Services Industry, the Health Services Industry, the Accommodation and Food Services Industries, the Amusement and Recreational Services Industry and the Personal and Household Services Industry / Loi exigeant du ministre de l'Industrie et du Commerce qu'il effectue une étude sur les effets du budget de 1991/1992 à l'égard des industries suivantes : agriculture et services connexes, pêche et piégeage , mines, carrières et puits de pétrole --

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: Dispense? Dispense.

1630

ORDERS OF THE DAY

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS AMENDMENT ACT (EMPLOYEE WAGE PROTECTION PROGRAM), 1991 / LOI DE 1991 MODIFIANT LA LOI SUR LES NORMES D'EMPLOI (PROGRAMME DE PROTECTION DES SALAIRES DES EMPLOYÉS)

Resuming the adjourned debate on the motion for second reading of Bill 70, An Act to amend the Employment Standards Act to provide for an Employee Wage Protection Program and to make certain other amendments.

Suite du débat ajourné sur la motion visant la deuxième lecture du projet de loi 70, Loi portant modification de la Loi sur les normes d'emploi par création d'un Programme de protection des salaires des employés et par adoption de certaines autres modifications.

Mr Harnick: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: When this debate adjourned the last time this was on the order paper, I believe I had the floor.

Some hon members: That's right.

The Deputy Speaker: On your point of order, please.

Mr Harnick: I believe I had the floor and I still had time, and I wonder when the debate begins whether I do not still have the floor and whether I cannot continue.

The Deputy Speaker: Your time is granted. Please go ahead.

Mr Harnick: I believe that we cannot properly consider this bill until we properly review the budget, and I therefore move adjournment of the debate.

1705

The House divided on Mr Harnick's motion, which was negatived on the following vote:

Ayes 7; nays 70.

Mr Drainville: Mr Speaker, on a point of order: I know that on a point of order we have to be very direct and to the point, so the point I would like to make is that it is the birthday today of the honourable member for Oxford. I realize we are not allowed to do that in the House, but I just thought that it might be of interest to some of the members.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Villeneuve): It is officially not a point of order, but I am sure it is a point of very important information to all members of this House.

Mr Elston: It is against all odds that the honourable member for Oxford has survived this long, although we all know he has the wind to blow out every candle and most of the cake when it appears.

The Acting Speaker: I want to thank the honourable member for Bruce for this very valuable advice.

Mr Harnick: The budget still occupies my mind and I move adjournment of the House.

1736

The House divided on Mr Harnick's motion, which was negatived on the following vote:

Ayes 10; nays 62.

The Deputy Speaker: I would like to recognize a former member of this House, Andy Brandt.

Mr Ferguson: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Under the standing orders there is no provision at all in the regulations of the House for the naming of political parties or campaigns, but I want to suggest that next time they should run as the Tax Wasters of Ontario. That is what they should be calling their campaign.

The Deputy Speaker: This is not, as you know, a point of order.

Mr White: On a point of privilege, Mr Speaker: I realize that the means by which the vote is taken is simply a number. However, I would like to make it clear on the record that neither I nor any of my colleagues on the government side, nor for that matter the official opposition, is dedicated to not working, as the third party is.

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: Order, please.

Mr Harnick: This is a horrible budget which should be properly considered by the public. Therefore, I move adjournment of the debate.

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: Order, please.

Mr Harnick: This is a horrible budget. I move adjournment of the debate.

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: Order, please.

Mr Eves: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I have been watching the clock. You have not stopped the clock once. There are 32 seconds left on that clock. You have stopped the clock to call for order. The member's time should not be elapsing while people over on the other side are screaming while you are trying to gain order. The member has the floor. He has 32 seconds left.

The Deputy Speaker: Order, please. It is the prerogative of the Chair to stop the clock. In this instance, I will not stop the clock.

Mr Harnick: There are 32 seconds left on the clock. I have moved twice to adjourn this debate. That is what is before the House at this particular moment.

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: I apologize. I could not hear a word.

1810

The House divided on Mr Harnick's motion, which was negatived on the following vote:

Ayes 9; nays 54.

The House adjourned at 1811.