Hansard Transcript 1993-May-19 | Legislative Assembly of Ontario

Mr Charles Beer (York North): On Sunday, May 30, the 17th annual Persechini Easter Seal Run/Walkathon will take place in Newmarket. This year is a very special year as the event will go over the $1-million mark for the first time. That is an incredible achievement. Literally thousands of volunteers have participated and contributed since the first run in 1976.

Today, the Persechini Run/Walkathon is a highly anticipated event in our community. People from throughout York region and Simcoe county, from Newmarket, Aurora, King township, East Gwillimbury, Bradford, Tottenham, Beeton, Whitchurch-Stouffville, Markham, Richmond Hill, Vaughan and Georgina come out to run and walk and to help kids.

We all know the tremendous job the Easter Seal Society does in improving the lives of children with disabilities and their families.

Joe and Rosalia Persechini have both been a constant factor in ensuring the success of this event. I know I speak on behalf of all those involved in this remarkable fund-raising effort in saying thank you for your leadership and inspiration in helping kids.

CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES

Mr Leo Jordan (Lanark-Renfrew): I direct this statement to the Premier.

In the wake of budget cuts of over 21%, the conservation authorities of Ontario have responded by submitting a comprehensive cost-cutting package that will save taxpayers $100 million per year. This Blueprint for Success was submitted to this government last week and we are yet to hear a response indicating that this government is serious about cost-cutting measures.

In their effort to offload budget reductions on to the conservation authorities, the government has failed to identify its own layers of waste and duplications: $16.5 million per year is wasted because 11 different government agencies are entangled in the provision of land development plans; the same type of duplication wastes $12.5 million in soil erosion and storm water management, $10.5 million in water cleanup programs and $2.5 million in duplicated tree-planting programs. The message: The government has the management problem, not the conservation authorities.

The conservation authorities of Ontario have proposed to provide environmental protection on a watershed ecosystem basis. They have provided you with a policy initiative that will disentangle the web of duplicated services, save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars and provide environmental protection in a way that is locally accountable.

Mr Premier, would you please implement their Blueprint for Success.

HIGHWAY SAFETY

Mr Pat Hayes (Essex-Kent): I rise to make a statement on safety on our highways. I know the Minister of Transportation is keen on improving highway safety because only recently he announced a six-point safety program to discourage drivers from speeding and causing accidents. I welcome his initiative.

What I would like to speak about today is not vehicles that are speeding but vehicles that are travelling slowly. I'm talking about farm vehicles that are not usually capable of travelling faster than 40 kilometres an hour.

Slow-moving vehicles are required by law to prominently display a slow-moving vehicle warning sign to alert motorists. This sign looks like this, and when people stick these signs on their driveways, mailboxes or fenceposts, it causes confusion and can cause accidents.

I think it is important that safety symbols not be abused. The slow-moving vehicle sign is a much-abused symbol in many rural communities. The Farm Safety Association has been lobbying for many years to restrict and regulate the use of slow-moving vehicle signs in order to increase safety and reduce accidents on highways and rural roads.

I urge the Minister of Transportation, who has clearly shown his commitment to highway safety, to give this matter his speedy attention and also urge other motorists to heed this sign when travelling down our highways.

TVONTARIO

Ms Dianne Poole (Eglinton): I'd like to join other members in saluting the efforts of TVOntario's 90 volunteer advisory councillors and board members. The efforts of these community representatives are vital to keeping TVOntario responsive to the educational and community needs of the people of Ontario.

TVO's councillors and board members met in Sioux Lookout recently. The meeting, known as RAP, was a resounding success. Extensive and productive meetings and discussions were held with many representatives and residents of Sioux Lookout, the Northern Nishnawbe Education Council, local elders and organizations like Wahsa, the distance education network serving remote communities in the north.

The volunteer councillors will play a key role in keeping the lines of communication active between the province's native communities. They will meet with bands and first nation representatives in their areas to explore ways TVO can address the native people's educational needs.

I'd like to also note that TVO's audience, as measured by Nielsen ratings, has increased 11.7% this spring over last year.

TVOntario asked me to highlight the incredibly warm, generous and open reception they received in Sioux Lookout. From TVOntario, which is located in my riding of Eglinton, to Sioux Lookout, a great big "meegwetch," which is "thank you."

1340

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Waterloo North): The Ministry of Labour is currently considering reducing exposure limits for approximately 200 substances.

While there is no question that existing exposure limits should be reviewed and amended where there is reasonable scientific evidence that this would help create a healthier working environment, a number of serious concerns have been raised about the government's approach to this issue.

First and foremost, the short time frame, across-the-board approach that the government has taken will be very costly and unmanageable, particularly for small and medium-sized industrial operations. This will have a negative effect on Ontario's industrial base, which is already struggling with the combined effects of the recession, increased competition and other government initiatives.

The government's proposal also does not address the exposure limits in force within our major trading partner and competitor, the United States. Significant variations and standards may impose a cost penalty on Canadian firms which could make them unnecessarily uncompetitive with the US.

I would also like to draw the Minister of Labour's attention to the fact that the Canadian Foundry Association recently indicated its disappointment that it has not been able to meet with the committee responsible for this matter to express its concerns.

Ontario's industries are willing to work with the government and labour towards ensuring that we have a safe and productive work environment. However, it is imperative that there be consultation with all the partners and that the changes be made in a measured, prioritized manner with full regard for the economic impact on employers and employees.

CANADA 125 AWARDS

Mr Bob Huget (Sarnia): Tomorrow evening I have the great privilege of honouring 24 people in my riding of Sarnia who have shown caring and dedication through their many acts of generosity and humanitarianism.

Last year Her Majesty approved the striking of a commemorative medal to mark the 125th anniversary of Confederation. This medal is to honour persons who have made a significant contribution to their fellow citizens, their community or to Canada and who reflect the diverse nature of Canadian society.

Time does not allow me to name all of the recipients or all of their wonderful deeds, but I would like to point out a few of these people: people like Judy Acton, who founded the Sarnia division of the Leukaemia Research Fund after receiving a bone marrow transplant and recovering from leukaemia some years ago; Rose Hodgson, who has dedicated over 60 years to sports and athletics, not just in Sarnia but throughout Canada; and Shelley Ross, who has been disabled for many years and uses a wheelchair. Her experiences have enabled her to help many other disabled people in our community through her involvement with Sarnia Handicapped Aiming for Rehabilitation and Equality, or SHARE. These are but three of the people we will be celebrating tomorrow night.

I thank all the people of Sarnia who helped me in the task of identifying the many individuals deserving of such an award. There are many wonderful people in Sarnia who may not get official recognition for their contribution because, unfortunately, not everyone can receive a medal. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank all those in our community who give of themselves to help others. It is this quality that makes Sarnia the best community in Ontario.

BICYCLING SAFETY

Mr Dalton McGuinty (Ottawa South): I am pleased to announce that on the morning of this coming Sunday, May 23, my young constituents in Ottawa South will be given the opportunity to develop a good understanding of the importance of bicycle safety by attending a child safety bicycle rodeo.

I want to take this opportunity to commend my local Canadian Tire store and my community newspapers, Alta Vista-Canterbury News and the Hunt Club Riverside News, for the leadership role they have assumed in organizing this bicycle safety rodeo.

At the rodeo, young people will have a chance to meet Bert and Gert, the Alert Twins from the Stay Alert...Stay Safe program. In addition, information on safety and cycling will be presented by the Ottawa Police, who will emphasize the importance of bicycle safety and inspections.

I also want to recognize the enthusiasm for cycling in Ottawa South and Ottawa-Carleton generally. This area of the province has the highest rate of bicycle ridership and, further, the highest rate of helmet usage.

I like to think that my constituents and the other people living in Ottawa-Carleton are leaders in recognizing that cycling is healthy not only for the cyclist but for the environment as well. Responsible cyclists, like responsible motorists, need to be constantly aware of what is happening on a shared road and the ways they can protect themselves and others from injury.

The child safety bicycle rodeo will contribute towards the education of our young cyclists in a sport which they can enjoy until their very late years.

Mr Speaker, I am sure you and the other members of this House will join me in congratulating my constituents and in particular Canadian Tire, my community newspapers and the Ottawa Police in their efforts to promote safe cycling in Ottawa South.

BIKE TO WORK WEEK

Mrs Dianne Cunningham (London North): Many of you are aware in this Legislative Assembly that Bike to Work Week is May 17-21.

The city of Toronto is busy making plans for the biggest Bike to Work Week ever. Members of the Legislative Assembly are invited to participate in the Leaders of the Way Challenge. The challenge is to demonstrate a commitment to bicycles as an alternative and environmentally friendly mode of transportation. The challenge will bring together elected representatives from the city of Toronto, Metro and the province as well as members of the business community.

On May 21, participants will gather at city hall at 7:30 am, where the ride will begin. Escorts will accompany them to Metro city hall and then proceed to Queen's Park. A brief awards ceremony will take place, followed by the breakfast.

The goal is simple, and that is to get more people involved, to participate in the event to promote safe cycling.

In London, the Thames Region Ecological Association transportation options planning committee and the London Bicycle Advisory Committee have also been participating in Bike to Work Week.

Members of the cycling community will be gathering tomorrow morning to discuss safety issues. I will be talking about the importance of safe cycling with special emphasis on the fact that bicycle helmets reduce the risk of head injuries by 85%.

Every morning during Bike to Work Week, free breakfasts and free bicycle checkups will be available at the Victoria Park bandshell at 7 am.

We'd like to thank the organizers for supporting ecological and safe cycling transportation as a way of protecting our planet.

CHILD SAFETY

Ms Christel Haeck (St Catharines-Brock): Mr Speaker, I'm sure you have noticed that many members of the Legislature have been wearing green ribbons to commemorate National Missing Children's Day on May 25.

This is Child Find Ontario's second annual Green Ribbon of Hope Campaign. It was organized after some very tragic events in the city of St Catharines concerning the abduction and subsequent murder of 15-year-old Kristen French.

Kristen's fellow students and faculty at Holy Cross Secondary School in St Catharines, in the riding of the member for St Catharines, developed the concept of the Green Ribbon of Hope to symbolize the quest for the return of missing children everywhere. Green is regarded as the colour of hope and the green ribbon idea has been adopted by Child Find Ontario as the symbol for its campaign.

The Green Ribbon campaign runs for the entire month of May, and it is hoped that during this month we can raise public awareness to the issue of missing children in Canada. Each year in Canada, police receive reports of thousands of missing children who are either abducted by parents or strangers or are classified as runaways.

Speaking as one of the members representing the city of St Catharines, I know this campaign and this month have special meaning for all us, particularly today in light of some of the charges that have come down. We witnessed the effect that a missing child can have, not only on a family and friends but on an entire community. We all remember Kristen French. We all remember Leslie Mahaffy. But we must not forget there are other children who go missing day after day in this country. I do hope that we will all remember them.

VISITOR

Mr John Sola (Mississauga East): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'd like to introduce to the House a member of the Parliament for Bosnia-Hercegovina, Dr Ivan Bagaric, sitting in the members' gallery west.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): While the honourable member may not have a point of order, indeed we are always pleased to welcome visiting parliamentarians to our chamber. Welcome.

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

Mr Robert V. Callahan (Brampton South): On a point of privilege, Mr Speaker: My rights as a member to serve my constituents in this House are being seriously affected and my privileges are being denied me in that the elevators in the west end of this building don't operate.

The second point of privilege is equally important, Mr Speaker.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Order.

Mr Callahan: I don't need the elevator, but I do have people who might be disabled, Mr Premier, who might not be able to get up to my office.

The second point of privilege, Mr Speaker, is that the present conditions in my office, where I have a staff member who is pregnant, are unbelievable. We're not allowed to turn on the air-conditioners. We were told they'd be off for four hours; it's now going on five days. Mr Speaker, I would ask that you intervene or look into this and make certain that the workplace is made safe for both of my employees, but most specifically for that one who is pregnant who is going to deliver a child in August.

1350

The Speaker: To the honourable member for Brampton South, while he does not have a point of privilege, indeed the matters which he has raised are ones which I take seriously. Indeed, as quickly as possible we will attend to both of the matters which he has brought to my attention, and I appreciate him notifying me of his concern.

It's time for oral questions. The member for St Catharines.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I don't have a question. I stand on a point of privilege or a point of order. That point is, I would like to seek your permission to ask of the House unanimous consent to have the House sit next week so that we can ask questions of the Premier and members of the cabinet so they won't be able to duck out right after the budget.

Interjections: Agreed.

The Speaker: Wait until I put the question. Is there unanimous consent for this House to sit next week? I heard no.

We think it is now time for oral questions.

ORAL QUESTIONS

HEALTH CARE

Mrs Barbara Sullivan (Halton Centre): I had intended to place my question to the Minister of Health. However, in her absence I will address it to the Premier.

Mr Premier, yesterday your Minister of Health spoke with some pride of a framework agreement that's being negotiated with the Ontario Medical Association to negotiate the quality and delivery and compensation for medical services in Ontario.

There is no agreement now because your government has broken the agreement. Your own Deputy Minister of Health has said that the government would not participate in bilateral negotiations with the OMA, and in fact your government has not set up meetings or provided instructions to your negotiators to do so. You've simply announced so-called expenditure controls that are completely arbitrary, that smack of slash and burn and that will significantly affect patient care.

Doctors in Sudbury are holding information sessions on Thursday and Friday, and across Ontario, people who need emergency services at their hospitals or at other emergency clinics are unsure if doctors will be available since you have cut payments for providing that service.

Premier, you no longer have a working relationship with Ontario's doctors. Will you tell us what your next step is, where you intend to go and what you intend to do now in dealing with Ontario's doctors?

Hon Bob Rae (Premier): I've just chatted with the House leader. My understanding was that the Minister of Health was going to be here today. I was warned that I would have to answer for several, but I thought she was going to be here.

But since she isn't here, I would say to the honourable member that the last point that you put, that there is no working relationship, is frankly quite untrue. No, no; you're shaking your head. I can tell you that I was, even in my travels last week in Thunder Bay and in Sault Ste Marie --

Mrs Sullivan: How about yesterday?

Hon Mr Rae: Well, if the member would stop heckling me for a minute, I might be permitted to answer the question.

Interjection.

Hon Mr Rae: I distinctly heard a heckle. I would say, Mr Speaker --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Order.

Hon Mr Rae: It takes more to raise my hackles than a heckle.

I would just say that I think, in fact, as difficult as it is -- and I'm not pretending for a moment that these are easy decisions -- I do believe there is a strong basis for a good relationship with the medical profession in the province.

The Speaker: Would the Premier conclude his response, please.

Hon Mr Rae: That's the basis upon which we are proceeding: on the basis of discussion, on the basis of negotiation and on the basis of a serious dialogue with the profession -- with the medical association, with the Professional Association of Internes and Residents of Ontario, about the fact that there is a problem which the member's colleague the member for Oriole would certainly know about and which other ministers of Health would certainly know about --

The Speaker: Would the Premier conclude his response, please.

Hon Mr Rae: -- and that is the problem of the oversupply of doctors in some areas and in some specialties and the need for us to develop a better way to deal with the allocation --

The Speaker: Would the Premier please conclude his response.

Hon Mr Rae: -- of this critical group of professionals throughout the province.

The Speaker: Supplementary?

Mrs Sullivan: The Premier's response is so inadequate. The framework agreement clearly is not in existence, despite what the Minister of Health led us to believe yesterday in the House. She indicated that the OMA had not agreed to go to a meeting. In fact, it was her officials who did not set up the meeting and set the place. That's the case and she should in fact review her own correspondence files and have a discussion with her own deputy minister.

The Premier also referred in his response to the new doctors who specialize in paediatrics and family medicine and psychiatry who will, according to the expenditure plan put forward by this government, earn only one quarter of their legitimate negotiated fees if they don't practise medicine where and when and how this government wants them to.

Because of that unilateral, arbitrary decision, most of those doctors who are graduating will not be practising medicine, and if they do so, it will not be in Ontario. In six weeks, some 400 new graduates whom we've trained in our medical schools and of whom we have high expectations will have no place to go. They have purchased practices; they will not be allowed to practise.

The Speaker: Would the member place a supplementary, please.

Mrs Sullivan: They've agreed to work with AIDS patients; they will not be allowed to do so. They have contracted to work with children with cancer; they will not be allowed to do so.

The Speaker: Does the member have a supplementary?

Mrs Sullivan: Mr Speaker, I have a supplementary. On June 2, at the Royal York Hotel, the very place where the social contract discussions are taking place, representatives from US jurisdictions will conduct a hiring hall for Ontario doctors in Toronto. Is your advice to the new doctors, Mr Premier, that they should get in line at the US job mart, pack up their black bags and their skills and get out of Ontario? If that's not your advice --

The Speaker: The member has placed a question.

Mrs Sullivan: -- what is your advice?

Hon Mr Rae: Let me say to the honourable member, obviously that's not anyone's advice. Second of all, why would the Liberal government in New Brunswick, why would the Conservative government in Manitoba, why would the Social Credit government, as it then was, in British Columbia, why would a Liberal government in Quebec, all of whom have been in office and who have had to address this question, why would all the 10 health care ministers, representing three political parties, as well as the national government have agreed that there's a problem with respect to physician supply?

If the Liberal opposition is saying, "Physician supply? No problem. Medical costs? No problem. Hospital funding? No problem," the Liberal Party -- and we heard it yesterday from the leader -- is living in a peculiar cloud-cuckoo-land in which there is no recession, there are no problems with financing, there's no need for a serious reform of the health care system. They're living in a world in which anything goes, let 'er rip, let it all happen. No need for any management; no need for any control.

It is the most implausible policy ever devised by a political party. It might have worked in the 1960s, it might have worked as an opposition strategy in the 1970s, it might have worked as an opposition strategy in the 1980s. I can tell the member, it is not a plausible, serious public policy response to a serious public policy problem. All of her fearmongering, all of the rhetoric, all of the headline-snapping that she might engage in --

The Speaker: Could the Premier conclude his response, please.

Hon Mr Rae: -- isn't going to work.

Doctors are needed in Cornwall, Dryden, Dundalk, Elliot Lake, Englehart, Espanola, Fort Frances --

The Speaker: Would the Premier please conclude his response.

Hon Mr Rae: -- Hearst, Hornepayne, Iroquois Falls, Kapuskasing, Kenora, Kirkland Lake, Marathon, North Bay, Parry Sound, Sault Ste Marie, Sioux Lookout zone, Southampton, Sudbury, Thunder Bay, Tilbury, Timmins, Alexandria, Armstrong --

The Speaker: Would the Premier please take his seat.

Interjection.

The Speaker: I ask the Premier to please take his seat.

Hon Mr Rae: So you're not going to listen. They've already made up their minds.

The Speaker: Order.

Mrs Sullivan: The Premier can put that list on the table, but I will tell you, that list is not the list that went to the internes and residents, and they were not told they could practise in any one of those locations.

Let me also tell you that there are three elements in the discussions of physician supply. There is the mix of physicians, there is the distribution of physicians and there is the number of physicians. The Premier uses words. We now have a group of 400 graduates. If there is a problem with physician supply, it has to be addressed at the beginning of school and not at the end of school.

Mr Speaker, I do have a supplementary, because there are a lot of other arbitrary, unilateral, stupid chops and decisions that are being made by this government that bear no relationship to health outcomes around this province.

1400

Let me tell you one of them. This government has decided that ophthalmologists will not be allowed to do eye tests and to prescribe glasses, although that's part of their scope of practice.

The government has said that no matter what the mental health of the patient, he or she will be limited to two hours of psychotherapy a week.

The Speaker: And the supplementary?

Mrs Sullivan: Those are decisions that should not be made by the minister and the government alone. There has been no involvement with the college, no involvement with CHEPA, no involvement with ICES --

The Speaker: Does the member have a supplementary?

Mrs Sullivan: Yes, Mr Speaker, I do. When did this Premier learn so much about medicare that he can make decisions on his own, unilaterally, arbitrarily, without reference to any expertise? And when did he decide that he can determine how much suffering and inconvenience patients across Ontario can suffer?

Hon Mr Rae: I think patients in northern Ontario are entitled to access to medicare. I don't think the policies that were followed by her government have proven to be effective. I would say to the honourable member that there will be discussions and there will be negotiations, and there will be negotiations and there will be discussions.

There are also, in addition to the issue which the member addressed, over 1,600 doctors who are over the age of 65 in the province who are now billing OHIP over $300 million.

I would say to the honourable member that there is an issue with respect to the supply and with respect to where doctors are practising and to ensure that the citizens across the province have access to good care. These are decisions that are being made in each and every province. We're trying to make them in an effective way and we are asking and encouraging the profession to come.

I would say to the honourable member, as for the points she's making about, "Well, you might want to do it, but this is the wrong time," there's never an easy time to make these decisions, there's never a time. If there was a right time, why wasn't the member on her feet at the beginning of the year, or three years ago when she was in the government, saying, "Now is the time to deal with the issue"?

The Liberal Party failed to deal with the issue. We're having to deal with it and we're going to deal with it in a fair way, in a fairminded way that addresses a serious public policy problem. That's how it has to be dealt with.

TRANSFER PAYMENTS TO MUNICIPALITIES

Mr Bernard Grandmaître (Ottawa East): In the absence of the Minister of Municipal Affairs, I'll direct my question to the Premier. Mr Premier, last Friday your government --

Interjections.

Mr Grandmaître: Oh, there he is.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): The Minister of Municipal Affairs is now present.

Mr Grandmaître: Then I'll direct my question to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Mr Minister, last Friday you told municipalities exactly how much you would be slashing from unconditional grants, a total of $110 million that is gone. They were counting on these dollars, but now it's gone.

Now, six months into their fiscal year, you've left municipalities with two choices. One, they can raise property taxes, or they can cut back or reduce services such as policing and transit to an unacceptable level. For example, your cuts will produce a tax increase in Metro to property taxpayers equal to $200. In my own riding of Ottawa-Carleton, taxes will have to go up by $100.

For your information, Mr Minister, I think municipalities have been fiscally responsible in the last three or four years, but they are being forced to bear the brunt of your incompetence. They are outraged that these cuts are being dictated to them with no chance to even consult you. You won't even meet with them or your Premier won't meet with them.

Mr Minister, what do you have to say to those municipalities and to those horrified taxpayers who are faced with tax increases and also a reduction in services?

The Speaker: Will the member conclude his question, please.

Mr Grandmaître: What will you tell the mayors or the municipal politicians of this province about your incompetence? How can they deal with your incompetence?

Hon Ed Philip (Minister of Municipal Affairs): The real incompetence is the incompetence of the member who asked the question. His figures and facts have no validity whatsoever.

First of all, let me deal with the statement that the Premier won't meet with municipalities. The Premier and I have indicated that we are both prepared to meet with the municipalities, and that has been conveyed to the municipalities.

Since I dealt in the Ottawa press with the misinformation about the Ottawa-Carleton cutbacks, let me deal with the $200 figure, which is an 800% error that the member has made and indeed that Metro staff have miscalculated. They arrived at the $200 figure, which was reported in the Toronto Star, by taking Metro's share of $38 of the conditional, unconditional and social contract and then adding the $12, which is the lower tier of that same amount, on those same items. Then, on the assumption that the municipal property tax is 25% of total property taxes, they multiplied by four and they came up with a figure of $200.

The Speaker: Would the minister conclude his response, please.

Hon Mr Philip: Of course, the public school boards in Metro do not qualify for grants, and therefore you can't take back something which they in fact are not receiving. Furthermore, even if the $50, which is high --

The Speaker: Would the minister please conclude his response.

Hon Mr Philip: Mr Speaker, it was a very long question.

The Speaker: If it is a type of question where there is a detailed response required, the minister certainly can table information. I've asked the member to please conclude his response quickly.

Hon Mr Philip: There is an 800% mistake in the Toronto Star, miscalculations by Metro, and I'm surprised that the member's own research staff did not verify the fact that such a gross error was made by Metro. My staff are working with Metro staff and we're asking them to retract that figure, because they've done a great disservice to the public by issuing that figure.

Mr Steven W. Mahoney (Mississauga West): To the minister: I asked you the other day if you could explain to the municipalities how they're supposed to function after they've already put their budgets to bed, after many of them have announced and sent out tax bills and said to their own residents that there will be a 0% increase in their property taxes this year. In the case of my own municipality --

Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): And mine.

Mr Mahoney: And Margaret Marland's too, of course, and Steven Offer's too and John Sola's too; is that enough?

Minister, in all seriousness, you know they've announced a 1% decrease. Now they're facing the fact that your cuts, done unilaterally, to try to solve your problems, sir, to try to fight the problems of the provincial government, your cuts are being placed on to the backs of the municipal property taxpayers.

Now, you get up and say you had a chat with Alan Tonks and he's not really as upset as he appears in the press. Then we see him on the 6 o'clock news saying he is upset. You say that other mayors around the province have told you that they can handle this. I don't understand this. My mayor, Mayor McCallion, will be here today. I would challenge you to say that to her face, sir. I would challenge you -- and you, Premier Bob -- to tell Hazel McCallion how you helped her solve her budget problems last year because you in some benevolent way gave the city $8 million in unconditional grants. I'm quite sure Mayor McCallion will shake your hand and thank you.

The Speaker: Would the member please conclude his question.

Mr Mahoney: My question to the minister is, what do you say to the taxpayers in Mississauga who are facing either a property tax increase or a dramatic reduction in service in transit, in fire, in public works, in every area? What do you say to those taxpayers, Minister?

Hon Mr Philip: I have no problem in saying anything that is reasonable to Hazel McCallion. Quite frankly, she likes me a lot better than she likes the honourable member, if you want to get right down to it. I'm not sitting around waiting for her to retire so I can run for mayor. Maybe that's part of the reason.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Mr Philip: May I?

The Speaker: Go ahead.

1410

Hon Mr Philip: I don't want to be nasty. The honourable member's a good friend of mine. I like him the same way I enjoy Hazel McCallion's company. But let me say this, Mr Speaker --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I don't believe the question had to do with a popularity contest. Would the minister please respond quickly.

Interjections.

Hon Mr Philip: Chris Stockwell is waiting for a compliment, but he's not going to get it, Mr Speaker. That's going too far even on budget day.

Mr Mahoney: This is serious, you know. You're cutting them off at the knees and all you can do is joke around. This is serious.

Hon Mr Philip: It is serious, and I gave the honourable member a serious answer the other day when he asked the question. In fact, I gave him the figures. I showed him that the figures that both he and the mayor of Mississauga were using were inaccurate and I gave him the actual figures, and I said that I was even willing to sit down with him and explain them to him and he refused then to have that explanation.

No municipality is being asked to take a cutback that amounts to any more than 3% of what would be their tax if they did pass it on to the taxpayer. In fact, in the case of Mississauga, that should not be necessary. It's a very, very small percentage of their total operating budget, in the vicinity of less than 1%, and I can tell you --

The Speaker: Would the minister conclude his response, please.

Hon Mr Philip: -- that in my own ministry we have taken a 10% cut on our wages and benefits and a 15% on overhead. We are not asking any municipality to do more than this government is doing internally, and I think most mayors will act responsibly on that.

The Speaker: Final supplementary.

Mr Hugh O'Neil (Quinte): Well, Minister, some of the people in eastern Ontario may not think as much of you as Hazel McCallion does. From your previous portfolio when you were Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, you are aware of the many layoffs and closures that we have had in eastern Ontario and especially in the Quinte area.

I'd like to relate to you that at a special meeting of the heads of council of the greater Quinte area advisory committee, of which 16 municipalities are members, your government's expenditure control plan and social contract were discussed, and the council represented at this special meeting endorsed the following resolution. That resolution was: "That the greater Quinte advisory committee inform the provincial government that municipalities are not prepared to absorb the provincial cuts and associated costs outlined in the expenditure control plan and the social contract in local municipal budgets."

Minister, I would tell you that every day I have coming into my constituency office people who are losing their houses, are losing their jobs, they don't have food to put on their tables, they don't have clothes for their kids, and yet you are causing them additional pain in what you load them with. I would ask you: How do you propose to assist people in my area to meet these many requirements that you're asking of them?

Hon Mr Philip: The budget will be coming out. It is a budget which creates jobs and will create jobs in eastern Ontario. That's one of the ways in which we intend to assist. Indeed, we have done more to create jobs and to build an industrial strategy than any government ever has. As a matter of fact, there was no industrial strategy before we formed the government, and the companies and the municipalities in eastern Ontario understand that.

The member talks about one municipality that doesn't like sharing the pain. Well, I can tell you that I just received a letter from the mayor of Renfrew saying this is the right course of action to take. "It is good that we finally have a government that has the guts not to mortgage our children." He recognizes that we cannot have 26 cents on the dollar paid to the foreign banks. That's what the mayor of Renfrew has to say, and that's just one of the mayors.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. New question, third party.

Mr O'Neil: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: If the minister had been listening, he would have heard that it was not one municipality, it was a group of municipalities which consisted of 16 municipalities in my area.

The Speaker: That is not a point of order. New question.

FORENSIC TESTING

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): Mr Speaker, I hope you've taken note of the clock and you're putting some time in the bank for the third party in the future.

I have a question for the Solicitor General. In June 1990 the Metro police began --

Interjections.

Mr Runciman: I guess they didn't take up enough time; they want to take up some of our time.

In June 1990 the Metro police began gathering blood, hair and saliva samples from suspects in the Scarborough rapist investigation. Samples from 224 suspects were obtained, including a sample from Mr Paul Bernardo. There appears to have been a 17-month delay between the time Bernardo's sample was obtained in November 1990 and the April 1992 decision of the Metro police to forward Bernardo's sample, along with those of four other prime suspects, to the Centre of Forensic Sciences for testing. More disturbing is the apparent six-month delay between the time the forensic centre received Bernardo's sample and the time it was tested in October 1992.

Minister, do you believe that in a case involving a violent serial rapist, a 23-month delay between the receipt of that sample and its testing was in the public interest?

Hon David Christopherson (Solicitor General): Let me say, first of all, to the honourable member that I believe he knows right well that any matter like this that not only is currently under investigation but in part is a matter in front of the courts cannot be commented on in the House by a minister.

But let me say this in general regarding the kind of testing that the member is talking about. It started around July 1990, indeed, the ability to do that kind of testing, which was new to this province, new to this ministry. There has been a process of staffing up, of gearing up, of being able to do the kind of testing that we need to do, and I think there's an anticipation that indeed as more and more technology is applied to current cases, we'll see more and more of this kind of forensic science taking place with different cases.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): To the member for Leeds-Grenville, I must caution the member in placing his questions that the matter is before the courts and so he should choose very carefully. I realize that the minister chose to reply and I'm not saying that the member is not entitled to a supplementary. What I am saying is that the member, all members, should be aware of the sensitivity of issues which are before the courts with criminal charges involved.

Mr Runciman: Mr Speaker, I appreciate your concerns, but I don't think I'm talking about the particular case. I'm talking about the samples. In this holier-than-thou rhetoric we're talking about, the minister saying anticipation of prompter analyses of these kinds of samples does not address the concerns. I'd like to see some specific response in here today in respect to why that particular sample sat on the shelf for such a significant period of time and what the minister has done.

He has known about this for some time. There were five samples of five prime suspects that were not analysed in a timely fashion. We could be experiencing similar sorts of delays, Minister, and I think it's of critical importance that you respond to how you have dealt with this matter and assure the public at large that this sort of delay will not occur in the future.

1420

Hon Mr Christopherson: Let me say very directly to the member that I think he has an awful lot of nerve standing up there accusing us of being holier-than-thou on this issue or any other issue that's that important to the citizens of Ontario.

Mr Speaker, you have pointed out, I have pointed out and the member knows -- he knows -- that it's not appropriate to comment on the particulars of a case, and I'm not going to cross those lines.

I have answered the question as properly and as fully as I can under the circumstances, and I would suggest that the member ought to look at his own motivation for asking questions like that when there are serious issues that we ought to be talking about and stop playing politics with those kinds of cases.

Mr Runciman: That's nothing less than a garbage response and totally irresponsible in questioning my motivation in raising this issue. I raised it because of the charges that were laid, I grant you, but I'm not dealing with the specifics of this case. I'm dealing with the specifics of the analysis related to five prime suspects in the Scarborough rapes. Many innocent people were victimized while forensic evidence sat waiting to be tested.

You've been minister now for almost four months. You are responsible. I'm simply asking you today to explain what specific steps you've taken to make sure investigations involving sexual abuse of women are handled in a much more professional and expeditious manner. That's what I'm asking you.

Hon Mr Christopherson: I believe that the members of this House know that I have answered these questions as fully as I can.

NORTHERN HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe West): My question is to the Minister of Health. All members should be aware that doctors in Sudbury will not be at their offices tomorrow and Friday because they will be holding a study session at Local 598 of the Canadian Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers.

Over the two-day meeting, doctors will be trying to explain to the people of Sudbury, their patients, what steps they will have to take to further ration health care services in the north. Because the government's expenditure control plan does not even mention underserviced areas in the north, Sudbury doctors are being forced to decide what patients they can serve and what patients they can no longer look after.

Minister, your government's slash-and-burn assault on health care has put the people of northern Ontario in a precarious position. Rationing of physicians' services means that patients can no longer be certain that the services they will need will be available when they need them. Minister, why have you decided to punish the good people of Sudbury by subjecting them to this draconian rationing of health care services?

Hon Ruth Grier (Minister of Health): The suggestion that we are using draconian measures to slash and burn and ration health care is absolutely ridiculous. What we are doing is reforming the health care system at a time when we are also constraining costs, and we are doing it in a way that shifts a lot of the emphasis from the provision of doctors, hospitals and institutions to the determinants of health by investing in housing, in employment, in training and in a number of things that we know determine the health of the population, as well as making a shift from institutions to community-based care.

With respect to physicians, we have identified a saving to be achieved out of the OHIP system and we have indicated that how that is implemented is open for discussion with the Ontario Medical Association. I can't tell why the physicians in Sudbury, who I believe are responsible professionals, who I think want to and I'm sure will provide health care to their customers, are not using their spokesman, the Ontario Medical Association, as the vehicle for discussing these issues with the ministry. That's what we have suggested and that's what we want to see happen.

Mrs Barbara Sullivan (Halton Centre): Because you won't have a meeting.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Order. The member for Halton Centre is not in her seat.

Mr Jim Wilson: In 1986, the Liberal government of the day decided to take down doctors by convincing Ontarians that all doctors were fat cats and that somehow they were ripping off society. The bitter dispute between the Liberals and doctors only served one purpose, and that was to give the Liberals an election issue at the expense of the reputations and credibility long enjoyed and deserved by this province's physicians.

Minister, the withdrawal of physicians' services in Sudbury and also in Renfrew is a symptom of the Liberal-NDP doctor-bashing disease that today threatens one of the most fundamental principles of medicare: accessibility. It is forcing reasonable, kind and caring doctors to take desperate action.

Minister, what steps have you taken to ensure that doctors in Sudbury and in Renfrew are not forced to close their offices and that patients will continue to have access to the medical services that they need?

Hon Mrs Grier: The kind of preamble that the member puts to his question is, quite frankly, very irresponsible and completely misleading to the people of this province who are as concerned about the protection of their health care and of the medicare system in which they strongly believe and support as I suspect the member is and certainly as the members on this side are.

What our government is doing is recognizing that we need to consult with all of the partners in the health care system, of which physicians are a very important partner. We have set up a framework agreement and a mechanism to discuss with those doctors and with their representatives precisely how we can best both manage health care and contain the costs. For the member to suggest that any doctor is being forced to withdraw his services is quite simply and categorically wrong.

Mr Jim Wilson: In response to my question on Monday concerning the government's draconian decision to lock out 2,500 doctors now in training and 400 physician graduates, the minister replied, "I have said, on a number of occasions in this House and elsewhere, that we have made a number of proposals to the Ontario Medical Association, proposals that didn't come to it as any surprise."

My leader, Mike Harris, and I met this week with OMA president Dr Mike Thoburn, who made it very clear to us that the government's expenditure control plan came completely out of left field and caught the OMA and others totally off guard. This fact is again confirmed in a letter I received today from Dr John Wright, who was watching question period on Monday. Dr Wright says the following about the minister's response to my question:

"The minister tried to foist responsibility for the 25% payment to resident medical graduates on the council of the OMA. This is an utter lie. There was never any discussion of a drastic reduction such as 75% discount or that it should be applied to all people in all areas of the province."

Minister, the OMA says that your ministry did not discuss the 75% fee cut for new family physicians, paediatricians and psychiatrists; you say that it was discussed. Minister, who is telling the truth?

Hon Mrs Grier: In view of that question, I hope you will give me the indulgence of reading to the member and to all members from the Ontario Medical Review of February 1993, which states:

"The OMA has been acutely aware of the rapidly changing health care environment throughout Canada and has been analysing physician resource issues intensively at the joint management committee and at other levels of the association. Building on the direction that it set at its June 1992 meeting, council authorized the OMA negotiating committee to explore the following initiatives:

"more effective regulation of access to licensure for international medical graduates;

"reasonable short-term differentials in the OHIP schedule for first-time participants in the plan which may involve incentives and disincentives and which may be based on geography and specialty;

"reasonable incentives" --

Interjection.

The Speaker: Order, the member for Willowdale.

Hon Mrs Grier: -- "to promote voluntary retirement for physicians nearing or past traditional retirement age;

"development of a voluntary retirement pension plan for doctors; and

"financial and other incentives to encourage physicians to locate and remain in rural and underserviced areas of the province."

1430

GAMBLING

Mr Carman McClelland (Brampton North): My question is for the captain of the floundering ship Casino, the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations. Minister, a year ago, in last year's budget, your government introduced the casino project. Since that time, we have been asking you to carry out studies that would indicate the impact of a casino on the city of Windsor specifically and on the province as a whole.

The people of Ontario need to know and they want to know, Minister, what will this do to charities? What will the impact be on the horse racing industry, which employs some 54,000 people in the province? What will this do to crime rates and the policing needs in the city of Windsor? Minister, you've apparently done no comprehensive studies. Obviously, you don't care enough to do that.

I think it's shameful, and so do many other people, Minister, that your government is so desperate for big bucks that the gambling casino may bring in that you're prepared to jeopardize and gamble with the social fabric of this province. Minister, is this just another sign of your government's total incompetence or do you simply not care?

Hon Marilyn Churley (Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations): Certainly, I'm aware of the concerns that the member opposite expressed. He's also aware that we have commissioned a number of studies, one of which in fact directly involves a study on the social effects of the casino, including problem gambling. We want to assess the readiness of the social service agencies in Windsor in terms of whether they're prepared to be able to deal with any support services that can crop up when you have the number of visitors to a city increasing. It's not just to do with the casino itself. When you have a number of visitors coming, there are obviously going to be some concerns that will arise out of that. We are commissioning a study, and it should be ready fairly soon.

Mr McClelland: Therein lies the essence of the problem with the way you're handling this: You're commissioning studies and you're already well under way and you don't know where you're going and you don't know the impact and you don't know what you're doing. That's why, as you look around you to your right and to your left and in front of you and to cabinet colleagues, they're upset with it, and they know that you have abandoned the ideals that your party once stood for.

Minister, the only reason that the city of Windsor had some hope in terms of the casino project was because it was desperate economically because your government has dropped the ball in a significant way. You've blown it economically; you took away 400 good jobs, good government jobs, Ministry of Labour, that were going to go to Windsor, and you've tossed them aside because you're prepared to gamble and roll the dice with the economy of the city of Windsor. You've left them with virtually no other choice.

It's a desperate move by your government. Sadly, it's a government that used to have some ideals, led by a man who called the former Premier a liar. We know what he said. We know what the now Minister of Natural Resources said about gambling.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Would the member place his supplementary, please.

Mr McClelland: You had ideals, you had something you believed in and you've thrown it out. Minister, is your government so desperate for dollars that you're prepared to go for the big buck of the gambling dollar and sell your souls and sell your ideals and the things that you used to believe in for a little coin?

The Speaker: Does the member have a supplementary? Minister.

Hon Ms Churley: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I think, first of all, that the member really has to put one casino in Windsor in perspective and remember that over the years various kinds of gaming in Ontario have grown. The whole gaming industry in Ontario is worth about $4 billion today, and that includes charitable gaming, which includes church basement bingos all the way up to big monster bingos; it includes horse racing, which I believe the member supports and so do I and we on this side of the House; it includes lotteries.

We also know that there are people going to the United States every year and spending $500 million. Many of them have said they will stay here and spend their money here. We know that Americans will come to spend their money here. There are other jurisdictions looking at and in the process of building casinos.

What we've done is said we'll move very slowly and carefully, and that is in fact what we have been doing. As I said before, we've received praise from around the world in terms of the process that we have followed --

The Speaker: Could the minister conclude her response, please.

Hon Ms Churley: -- in setting up the casino in Windsor.

SOCIAL CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS

Mr David Johnson (Don Mills): My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Mr Minister, I've received a copy of the letter that you have sent to the mayors of Ontario describing what they should do in terms of the expenditure control program. Unfortunately, it doesn't answer the many questions they're raising. I might also add that the mayors have been given almost no voice at the social contract table.

For example, the mayor of the town of New Tecumseth has asked, can the municipalities negotiate a pause day, a day without pay, a day without work, with their employees to offset the costs of the expenditure control program or do they have to hold that in abeyance to offset the costs of the social contract?

The municipalities recognize your expenditure problems, and many of them are prepared to help deal with those problems, but they're asking, when will you sit down with them, when will they get the answers for their questions from this government?

Hon Ed Philip (Minister of Municipal Affairs): The answer of course on the social contract is that they are at the table. Unlike Conservative governments in other parts of the country that have simply slashed and told them exactly what kind of cuts they were going to take, the municipalities are at the table. They are able to provide opportunities. In fact, the whole concept of that $285 million is based on the assumption that after those cuts are made they will be offset by various savings within the municipality.

I can tell the honourable member, in terms of the $4 billion that we have saved, in his own municipality of York the total expenditure control amounts to 1.04% of its total operating expenditures. I cannot believe that in the case of the municipality of which he was the mayor --

Interjection: East York.

Hon Mr Philip: I'm sorry; East York is actually even less than that; it's 0.69% of the operating expenditure -- if he had been mayor at the present time, could not find ways of finding that kind of money.

We're all part of the problem and we're all part of the solution. I'm sure that he, if he were mayor now --

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Could the minister conclude his response, please.

Hon Mr Philip: -- would be working with us to try to find that kind of money and savings.

Mr David Johnson: I'm happy to realize that the minister realizes that I was the mayor of East York rather than North York. But it's a pity that the minister doesn't realize that AMO, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, has said over and over again that it has no mandate to negotiate on behalf of the municipalities. They have said that time and again, but unfortunately, I guess if the minister won't speak to them, then the minister wouldn't know that.

Mr Minister, the question remains: There are questions that have not been answered. The municipalities are looking to have their questions answered. You and the Premier have not sat down to discuss these questions with the municipalities. The mayor of Mississauga is still waiting for a return phone call.

For example, the municipalities are saying, because they're halfway through their fiscal year, will the cuts have to be twice as severe to take that into account? They're asking the question, will the cuts hold in the first quarter of 1994 or must all the cuts pertain to 1993? These are questions they need the answers for. They don't believe that the social contract will be finalized on June 4.

The Speaker: Could the member conclude his question, please.

Mr David Johnson: Again, Mr Minister, when are you going to provide those answers? Will you provide those answers right now, or when will you sit down and discuss these issues and provide the answers to the municipalities?

Hon Mr Philip: The member seems to be getting mixed up between our fiscal year and the municipal fiscal year. In fact, Michael Decter has said that he's quite willing to discuss that with the municipalities.

With regard to his earlier preamble, I can only say that both the Premier and I have said that we're quite willing to meet with the municipalities. I return phone calls to every mayor. I do not have any notice of a call from Hazel McCallion that I have not returned and I can assure you that I always return Mrs McCallion's phone calls; I'd be afraid not to.

Quite frankly, we have a very good working relationship since the time in which I was the Minister of Transportation when I was able to work with her on a number of projects. So that simply is not accurate.

1440

COMMUNITY RECREATION FUNDING

Mr Noel Duignan (Halton North): My question is for the Minister of Culture, Tourism and Recreation. While we, at least on this side of the House, unlike the Liberal opposition, recognize the importance of dealing with the provincial debt and renewing our economy, many local recreation departments are having serious problems regarding funding for their recreation facilities.

For example, Halton Hills has been attempting for many years to secure provincial funding for the Acton arena, which is also going to be used as a senior citizens' centre. Because it's so old, they're required to spend a lot of money on annual upkeep, which money could be used towards a new arena.

My constituents are expressing a lot of concern about the impacts of cuts to recreation funding announced under the expenditure control plan. There is considerable anxiety about the effect of this restraint measure on recreation for municipal grants under regulation 797, Madam Minister.

My constituents need some reassurance. What can you tell me and them today about what these measures will mean for them?

Hon Anne Swarbrick (Minister of Culture, Tourism and Recreation): I appreciate that in fact, as the member has stated, there is a lot of concern and anxiety right now in communities across the province around what will happen with recreation grants in their communities. In fact, I met last night with about 150 representatives of provincial sports and recreation organizations and certainly knew that that anxiety did exist in that room.

I would like to say that the staff and the volunteers I met with last night were certainly a number of the many, many staff and volunteers in the recreation and fitness and sports fields across this province who provide invaluable assistance to communities in developing the level of fitness and quality of lives that we share in Ontario.

I think it's fair to say that, both as taxpayers and as recreation and sports activists, they felt quite reassured in fact to learn that what had in the past been a total of about $12.2 million in the community, recreation and development program funds in the former regulation 517 municipal grant funds is being sustained at a level of $8.4 million as a result of our expenditure control program. In fact, I think they felt quite relieved to know that that money in fact will be distributed in what we feel will be very fair ways --

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Would the minister conclude her response, please.

Hon Ms Swarbrick: -- that will protect small communities as well as protect groups that are very much in need of that money.

Mr Duignan: Madam Minister, while I appreciate the answer to my question, I still need my answer a little more completely. Can you please tell me and my constituents the specific nature of the programs that community groups and municipalities will be able to apply for in the future?

Hon Ms Swarbrick: I regret that I can't actually give the proper details right now and certainly wouldn't be able to in the short amount of time that would be allocated here, but I can assure the member for Halton North that we are right now working out the details as to what the criteria for those programs will now be and I hope, over the next few weeks, to be able to release fully what those criteria will be.

RESIDENTIAL ACCOMMODATION REPORT

Mr Joseph Cordiano (Lawrence): I'm delighted to have an opportunity to ask the Minister of Housing a question today. Minister, it's been 10 months since you tabled the Lightman report on unregulated residential accommodation -- 10 months, Minister -- and we haven't heard a thing about this report, a report, I might add, that contains 148 useful recommendations.

As you very well know, the report is very important to the residents of rooming houses and rest and retirement homes. Minister, it is 10 months since you commissioned Mr Lightman to do his report. Can you tell us, how much did it cost to do this report and what is it you're doing with this report, if anything at all?

Hon Evelyn Gigantes (Minister of Housing): I welcome the question from the new critic for Housing for the Liberal Party and I'm very pleased to answer a question about the Lightman report.

As he points out, it is a report of great significance. It is a report which has, for the first time, provided government with an analysis of the rest home situation in this province affecting the lives of about 50,000 people, which puts an economic perspective on the whole situation in which they're living and calls upon the government to take action.

It has 148 recommendations, as he notes, and it has been the subject of very intense work among ministries because it affects interministerial responsibilities in many areas. I'm pleased to be able to tell the member that I expect to be able to move it forward through the cabinet process very shortly.

Just to answer his other question about the cost of the report, I don't have those figures available now. I'd be glad to provide them at another time.

Mr Cordiano: I might say that even the author of the report, Mr Lightman, has roundly criticized your lack of action on this matter. As a matter of fact, Minister, Mr Lightman attended a protest outside your office, I believe it was on May 5, to tell you that you haven't taken any action.

Minister, have you no real concern for the expediency with which this needs to move forward? Certainly you must admit that the lives of many thousands of people, as you pointed out, are affected. Minister, you yourself commissioned this report which you're not taking any action on. So I wonder, if you're not going to do anything useful with reports, why bother commissioning them in the first place, if they're simply going to sit on the shelf?

Hon Ms Gigantes: I agree with the member that there is no point commissioning reports if there is no action to be taken on them, and in fact I want to assure him that this report is being taken very seriously by this government and will be the basis of action.

I am also very pleased that Dr Ernie Lightman, who has worked on the report, continues in his interest and advocacy on behalf of the 50,000 people who are in a situation which hasn't been examined by government adequately before. I'd like to tell him that when this government moves, we expect to move in ways that will improve the lives of those people for the first time in Ontario.

LAND REGISTRATION

Mr David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel): I have a question for the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations. Last week, Madam Minister, you told us that the company that's responsible for automating the land registry office, Teranet, is in deep financial difficulties. You assured the House that you would be continuing the process, notwithstanding the fact that RDO breached its contract with the government and has failed to come up with the $14 million to your government.

My Speaker, Mr Question -- My question, Mr Speaker, to the minister is, how is your government going to continue this process? Are you going to allow Real/Data to continue in this arrangement notwithstanding the fact that they have breached their contract with you?

Hon Marilyn Churley (Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations): This is a repeat of last week's question, Mr Speaker. As I said then -- the situation is the same as last week -- RDO is continuing in its efforts to obtain the required investment to meet the requirements in the partnership. They are keeping us informed, as I informed the member next -- last -- week. We both seem to be having trouble with our words here today -- as I informed the member last week.

It's not surprising. It's disappointing but not surprising in this economic climate that our partner has been having difficulties in terms of raising the funds. We think it is fair to give them some time to work on the problem. It is difficult to find patient money right now -- we recognize that -- and the economy being what it is, it's a longer-term investment. But they are out there looking for investors, and we are optimistic that they will be found.

In the meantime, the government will continue serving the public, and that's what we're focusing on, so the public won't be hurt by this.

Mr Tilson: The problem, Madam Minister, is that this deadline has passed now three times, and the last time was Friday. So we've now gone by three deadlines, and this company now owes your government $14 million. I don't know how many more deadlines you're going to give them. Can you now tell us what your latest deadline is?

Hon Ms Churley: I don't have a specific deadline. We are, as I said, optimistic that RDO can find new partners. The whole concept, the Teranet concept, is a good one, and we believe that, shortly, there will be new investors.

I will keep the member informed and in fact will keep the House informed as to the results of their ongoing looking for investors. But I do want to reassure him that there is no bailout here. The government is not giving the company any more public money, and we are continuing the services that benefit the government and the public in the meantime.

1450

FLUOROCARBONS

Mr Jim Wiseman (Durham West): My question is to the Minister of Environment. My question today has to do with the draft regulations on CFCs that you announced in this House on Monday.

Mr Anthony Perruzza (Downsview): What are CFCs?

Mr Wiseman: Chlorofluorocarbons.

Minister, as you know, there are very serious concerns that Ontarians have about the ozone depletion, and earlier this week you made reference yourself in this House to the high UV levels that many of us are worried about as summer approaches. I have heard it suggested that the draft regulations dealing with chlorofluorocarbons will not make their important contribution, as you've suggested, in the struggle against ozone depletion substances, in particular because these regulations do not address the problems of halons. Minister, what is your response to these allegations?

Hon Bud Wildman (Minister of Environment and Energy): The member is quite right. The regulation on CFCs and HCFCs and HFCs will in fact be effective, and it will take about 60% to 70%, perhaps as much as 90%, of the fluorocarbons out of the atmosphere in Ontario and will protect us from ultraviolet radiation. This is of great concern to all us, particularly those of us who have children, as we approach summer.

But in terms of the question of halons, as I said on Monday and told the Friends of the Earth and the industry last week, we are prepared to move on the regulation that will cover halons that are used in fire extinguishers and other solvents that are used in the metal industries, and we hope to have a regulation in place which we will be able to bring forward next fall. At that point, this province will lead the country and lead most of the world in that we will have covered 100% of the chlorofluorocarbons in this province.

PETITIONS

BRUCE GENERATING STATION

Mr Murray J. Elston (Bruce): As you know, I have a petition which has over 15,000 names on it, and I have here one instalment that comes from Pickering, Oshawa and other parts of the province that supports the continued operation of Bruce A for the following reasons:

"In comparison to other forms of generation, nuclear energy is environmentally safe and cost-effective. Rehabilitating Bruce A units is expected to achieve $2 billion in savings to the corporation over the station's lifetime. This power is needed for the province's future prosperity.

"A partial or complete closure of Bruce A will have severe negative impacts on the affected workers and will seriously undermine the economy of the surrounding communities and the province."

This is signed, in addition to those who appear here with their original signatures, in support of councils, chambers of commerce, business and labour groups in my riding, and I have affixed my name to the petition.

GAMBLING

Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the New Democratic Party government has not consulted the citizens of the province regarding the expansion of gambling; and

"Whereas families are made more emotionally and economically vulnerable by the operation of various gaming and gambling ventures; and

"Whereas creditable academic studies have shown that state-operated gambling is nothing more than a regressive tax on the poor; and

"Whereas the New Democratic Party has in the past vociferously opposed the raising of moneys for the state through gambling; and

"Whereas the government has not attempted to address the very serious concerns that have been raised by groups and individuals regarding the potential growth in crime;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"That the government immediately cease all moves to establish gambling casinos and refrain from introducing video lottery terminals in the province of Ontario."

I'm happy to sign my name to this petition.

Mr Paul Wessenger (Simcoe Centre): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario which is signed by 190 of my constituents.

"Whereas the Christian is called to love of neighbour, which includes a concern for the general wellbeing of society; and

"Whereas there is a direct link between the higher availability of legalized gambling and the incidence of addictive gambling; and

"Whereas the damage of addiction to gambling in individuals is compounded by the damage done to families, both emotionally and economically; and

"Whereas the gambling market is already saturated with various kinds of government-operated lotteries; and

"Whereas large-scale gambling activity invariably attracts criminal activity; and

"Whereas the citizens of Detroit have since 1976 on three occasions voted down the introduction of casinos into that city, each time with a larger majority than the time before;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"That the government of Ontario cease all moves to establish gambling casinos."

PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE

Mr Gregory S. Sorbara (York Centre): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: My understanding of the standing orders is that if a member presents a petition, he is required to sign that petition and ascribe to its contents.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): The members usually feel an obligation to present petitions when requested by constituents, but there is no obligation to sign or not sign the petition.

GAMBLING

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I have the support of the member for -- no, I won't say that.

I am rising with a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario that reads as follows:

"Whereas the Christian is called to love of neighbour, which includes a concern for the general wellbeing of society; and

"Whereas there is a direct link between the higher availability of legalized gambling and the incidence of addictive gambling (Macdonald and Macdonald, Pathological Gambling: The Problem, Treatment and Outcome, Canadian Foundation on Compulsive Gambling); and

"Whereas the damage of addiction to gambling in individuals is compounded by the damage done to families, both emotionally and economically; and

"Whereas the gambling market is already saturated with various kinds of government-operated lotteries; and

"Whereas large-scale gambling activity invariably attracts criminal activity; and

"Whereas the citizens of Detroit have since 1976 on three occasions voted down the introduction of casinos into that city, each time with a larger majority than the time before;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"That the government of Ontario cease all moves to establish gambling casinos."

I am in agreement with this petition and I'm affixing my signature to it.

PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): I have a petition addressed the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"We, the following undersigned citizens of Frontenac county, members of the Ontario Public Service Employees Union, Local 431, employed at the Kingston Psychiatric Hospital in Kingston, beg leave to petition the Parliament of Ontario as follows:

"The Ontario government must immediately reset its course to build an Ontario society which is fair and just, protecting those who are most vulnerable within it and not scapegoat public sector workers in times of economic difficulty.

"Further, the government must respect these fundamental principles: free collective bargaining, a strong public sector and the strengthening of public services."

I have affixed my signature in support and I'm sending a Decter dollar to the Treasurer.

GAMBLING

Mr Jim Wiseman (Durham West): To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Christian is called to love of neighbour, which includes a concern for the general wellbeing of society; and

"Whereas the damage of addiction to gambling in individuals is compounded by the damage done to families, both emotionally and economically; and

"Whereas the gambling market is already saturated with various kinds of government-operated lotteries; and

"Whereas large-scale gambling activity invariably attracts criminal activity; and

"Whereas the citizens of Detroit have since 1976 on three occasions voted down the introduction of casinos into that city, each time with a larger majority than the time before;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"That the government of Ontario cease all moves to establish gambling casinos."

I affix my name to this petition.

1500

PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): On a point of order?

Mr Gregory S. Sorbara (York Centre): Mr Speaker, I'm rising once again on the point of order that I just raised with you. Given that my friend the member for Simcoe Centre submitted a petition which I agree with, that is, a petition in effect saying, "We are against the casino legislation of the province of Ontario," I once again refer you to section 36(e) of the standing orders. It says that "The signature of every member presenting a petition shall be affixed to the petition."

I look forward to hearing from my friend the member for Simcoe Centre that he has affixed his name to the petition that he just submitted to this Legislature. If he wants to say that he doesn't agree with the contents of the petition, that's fine, but the standing order --

Hon Brian A. Charlton (Government House Leader): Mr Speaker --

Mr Sorbara: I'm sorry, sir, I have the floor.

Hon Mr Charlton: Point of order.

Mr Sorbara: I have the floor on a point of order.

Hon Mr Charlton: You've made your point.

Mr Sorbara: I have not made my point, I say to the government House leader.

The Speaker: Order. Would the member for York Centre address the Chair, please.

Mr Sorbara: I'll just say to you, sir, that the standing order requires that the signature of the member presenting the petition be placed on the petition.

I think it's within the right of the member to disclose, at the time of the presentation of the petition, that he does not agree with the contents of it and that's fair game, but he did not tell us that his signature was affixed to the petition and it ought not to be submitted.

The Speaker: There's a distinction here and it's in terms of the practice.

Hon Mr Charlton: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Just so we can clear this up very quickly, the member submitted his petition with his signature affixed to it. The table did not return the petition because his signature was affixed to it. The member is not obliged to make that statement when he addresses the petition as long as he has affixed his signature, which he did.

The Speaker: That's correct. The member's signature indicates that a certain person has presented the petition. The member is not necessarily considered as a petitioner. If the member wishes to be one of the petitioners, then indeed the member may affix his signature, in addition to the top of the page, placing it on the other lines alongside the other people who have petitioned.

There is a distinction, but the signature is required simply to indicate that a particular member is presenting a petition to the House, the distinction being between that process and being a petitioner.

Mr Sorbara: On the same point of order.

The Speaker: I would remind the member that the clock is running, but if he has something additional -- we're not debating this.

Mr Sorbara: Sir, I think it's only appropriate to bring up points of order respecting petitions during the time allocated for petitions.

In my eight years in this House, it seems to me to have been the practice that when members are presenting petitions they in one way or another indicate their support or their lack of support for the petition. The government --

Interjections.

Mr Sorbara: The duplicitousness of the government members is apparent in this matter and --

The Speaker: Would the member please take his seat. Indeed it is not necessary for a member, when presenting a petition, to indicate whether or not he or she supports the petition. What is required is to sign --

Mr Sorbara: As long as you want to talk out of both sides of your mouth, that's fine.

The Speaker: Petitions. The member for Bruce.

BRUCE GENERATING STATION

Mr Murray J. Elston (Bruce): I do support this petition and my name is affixed to it. As you know, Mr Speaker, there are more than 15,000 people who have signed this petition.

Hon Brian A. Charlton (Government House Leader): How many of the 15,000 are you, Murray?

Mr Elston: Pardon me? Not that many. Actually, this group of signatures is from Scarborough, Oshawa, Whitby, Bowmanville, Colborne, Whitby, Bobcaygeon. I have them from all over the province, and they are in support of the Bruce A nuclear power station. They support it for the following reasons:

"A partial or complete closure of Bruce A will have severe negative impacts on the affected workers and will seriously undermine the economy of the surrounding communities and the province."

As I've said, along with business, labour, school and other groups, I support this petition and affix my signature.

GAMBLING

Mr David Johnson (Don Mills): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the New Democratic Party government has not consulted the citizens of the province regarding the expansion of gambling; and

"Whereas families are made more emotionally and economically vulnerable by the operation of various gaming and gambling ventures; and

"Whereas credible academic studies have shown that state-operated gambling is nothing more than a regressive tax on the poor; and

"Whereas the New Democratic Party has in the past vociferously opposed the raising of moneys for the state through gambling; and

"Whereas the government has not attempted to address the very serious concerns that have been raised by groups and individuals regarding the potential growth in crime,

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"That the government immediately cease all moves to establish gambling casinos and refrain from introducing video lottery terminals in the province of Ontario."

It's signed by 11 residents of Metropolitan Toronto, mostly in the Don Mills riding, and I affix my signature as well.

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

Mr Wayne Lessard (Windsor-Walkerville): I have a petition from several members of the community of Windsor and Essex County area with respect to Bill 164, and they're petitioning that Bill 164 be withdrawn.

BRUCE GENERATING STATION

Mr Murray J. Elston (Bruce): "We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"When discussing the future of Bruce A, to consider that the undersigned are in full support of the continued operation of all of the units at Bruce A. Furthermore, we support the expenditure of the required money to rehabilitate the Bruce A units for the following reasons:

"A partial or complete closure of Bruce A will have severe negative impacts on the affected workers and will seriously undermine the economy of the surrounding communities and the province."

I have affixed my name to this petition. I support it. The signatures on this particular petition originate from Tiverton, Goderich, Ripley, Mississauga, Kincardine and other places in the province, along with more than some 15,000 other people in the province.

GAMBLING

Mr Bill Murdoch (Grey): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the New Democratic Party government has traditionally had a commitment to family life and quality of life for all citizens of Ontario; and

"Whereas families are made more emotionally and economically vulnerable by the operation of various gaming and gambling ventures; and

"Whereas the New Democratic Party government has had a historical concern for the poor in society who are particularly at risk each time the practice of gambling is expanded; and

"Whereas the New Democratic Party has in the past vociferously opposed the raising of moneys for the state through gambling; and

"Whereas the citizens of Ontario have not been consulted regarding the introduction of legalized gambling casinos despite the fact that such a decision is a significant change of government policy and was never part of the mandate given to the government by the people of Ontario;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"That the government immediately cease all moves to establish gambling casinos by regulation and that appropriate legislation be introduced into the assembly, along with a process which includes significant opportunities for public consultation and full public hearings as a means of allowing the citizens of Ontario to express themselves on this new and questionable initiative."

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

Mrs Marland from the standing committee on government agencies presented the committee's second report.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): I'm very happy to present the second report and I hope that the people who are appointed by the contents of that report will serve this province to the best of their abilities.

The Speaker: Pursuant to standing order 106(g)(11), the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

LAND LEASE STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1993 / LOI DE 1993 MODIFIANT DES LOIS EN CE QUI CONCERNE LES TERRAINS À BAIL

On motion by Mr Wessenger, the following bill was given first reading:

Bill 21, An Act to amend certain Acts with respect to Land Leases / Loi modifiant certaines lois en ce qui concerne les terrains à bail.

Mr Paul Wessenger (Simcoe Centre): It's with great pleasure that I've been able to move first reading of this bill, because I think probably the county of Simcoe has the largest number of mobile home units and land-lease lots in the province of Ontario.

The principal purpose of the bill is to provide additional statutory protection to tenants who lease land for use as the site for a mobile home or a land-lease community home. To this end, the bill amends the Landlord and Tenant Act, the Planning Act and the Rental Housing Protection Act, and particularly, it brings land-lease community lots under the protection of the Landlord and Tenant Act.

Mr Gregory S. Sorbara (York Centre): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'm wondering, sir, if we could have unanimous consent to have second and third reading of the bill just introduced.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Do we have unanimous consent for second reading? While I appreciate the member's enthusiasm for the parliamentary process, the bill has yet to be printed, so it really would not be appropriate. We need to print the bill so that all members have access to the bill before we start second reading. I'm sure the member's enthusiasm will bring him back to the chamber when we do have second reading.

Hon Brian A. Charlton (Government House Leader): Mr Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to stand down until 4 o'clock.

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous consent for the House to rise until 4 o'clock? Agreed.

For the benefit of members, there will be a five-minute bell beginning at 3:55.

This House stands in recess until 4 o'clock.

The House recessed at 1511 and resumed at 1600.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

1993 ONTARIO BUDGET / BUDGET DE L'ONTARIO DE 1993

Hon Brian A. Charlton (Government House Leader): Government order number 1.

Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees (Ms Deborah Deller): Government notice of motion number 1, Mr Laughren.

Hon Floyd Laughren (Minister of Finance): Mr Speaker, I move, seconded by Mr Rae, that this House approve in general the budgetary policy of the government.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): I beg the indulgence of the House to allow the pages the opportunity to distribute the budget.

Is there any member who has not received a copy of the budget? I note that I think the pages have set a new record for distribution of the budget.

Hon Mr Laughren: Mr Speaker, just before I begin, I wanted to express my appreciation to all of those who helped me in the difficult task of preparing this budget, including my caucus colleagues and cabinet colleagues, but two in particular, the minister attached to the Ministry of Finance, the Honourable Brad Ward, and the Premier himself, for their support and assistance in preparing this budget.

The budget I am presenting today marks a turning point for Ontario. After a terrible battering, our economy is gathering strength. In the past eight months, Ontario's economy has created 98,000 jobs -- almost 90% of them full-time. The pace of job growth so far this year is the fastest since 1988.

Ce budget établit une fondation solide pour la reprise économique.

This budget provides a solid foundation for the economic recovery. We cannot build our future economy on a foundation of debt. We must invest in jobs, make government more efficient and put public services on a sound financial footing. That is what this budget does.

This budget will help put more Ontarians back to work.

We are investing almost $4 billion in capital works -- such as highways, transit services, telecommunications networks, hospitals and schools -- to create jobs and renew our infrastructure.

We are investing more than $1 billion in training and adjustment to help Ontario's workers secure decent jobs in the new economy.

We are expanding Jobs Ontario to help communities invest in permanent job creation.

We are going to overhaul the social assistance system to provide more support to help get people back into the workforce.

At the same time, we are putting our public finances on a sound and secure footing.

For the first time since 1942, our operating spending will actually decline.

We are cutting the cost of running government programs by 4.3% from last year's level.

For every dollar in new taxes, there are almost $4 in savings and reduced costs.

By the end of this fiscal year, the size of government will be reduced by 5,000 employees from two years ago.

Our deficit for this year -- which had threatened to climb to almost $17 billion -- has been cut to almost half that level, at $9.2 billion.

By making government more efficient, we are ensuring that we can keep and improve the essential public services that Ontarians value.

We are maintaining a universal and affordable health care system for all Ontarians.

We are establishing a Royal Commission on Learning so that our schools -- which are among the best funded in the world -- can fully prepare our children for the demands of a changing economy and a changing society.

We have built and are continuing to support North America's most comprehensive pay equity program for working women.

We have expanded our environmental 3Rs program to promote reducing, reusing and recycling, and we will become the first province in Canada to enact an environmental bill of rights.

We are providing $85 million this year -- twice as much as four years ago -- to prevent violence against women and their children and provide services to those who have been affected by it.

This budget includes tax measures that are necessary to put our public finances on a solid footing. I have taken every possible step to make these tax measures fair to the average Ontarian and to minimize the impact on the economic recovery.

I am raising the personal income tax and the surtax. The wealthiest in our society will pay the most.

I am introducing a corporate minimum tax on profitable corporations that pay little or no income tax. All small businesses will be exempt from this tax.

I am closing corporate tax loopholes, eliminating outdated tax expenditures and improving collections. Deductions for expense account meals and entertainment will be cut to 50%.

The retail sales tax rate will not be increased.

I am abolishing the $5 tax on new tires.

I am abolishing the commercial concentration tax.

Not everyone will like all the details of this package. But everyone should know that it is balanced, it is fair and it is necessary.

It balances the need to invest in jobs, maintain important public services and get our fiscal house in order. It takes a three-pronged approach to managing the fiscal challenge -- by reducing the cost of government programs, negotiating a social contract with the public sector, and raising revenues.

This package is fair because it asks all of us to share the cost, and it protects those who are most vulnerable.

It is necessary because we owe it to those who will inherit this province to pass on a strong and productive economy, and vibrant and healthy public services.

We have taken a hard look at our finances and made some tough decisions.

In April I provided the details on $4 billion in spending cuts for our 1993-94 budget. These cuts, and the additional measures I am taking today, are necessary for one reason: We cannot build a solid and sustained economic recovery if we do not invest in jobs and take firm action on the public debt.

Excluding sovereign countries, Ontario has become the largest borrower in the world. On average we borrow more than $1 billion a month. We spend more on interest costs than we spend on our schools. About two thirds of our new borrowing comes from outside Canada -- which means that most of the interest we pay on this borrowing goes to foreign bankers, investors and economies.

1610

Simply to let the debt increase each year at an accelerating rate would be irresponsible. Consumers would know that more and more of their incomes will be taxed away to pay the cost of public debt interest, not just this year, but long into the future. Businesses looking for a good place to invest would be discouraged from locating here. All of us who rely on our health care system and other public services would know that sooner or later there would simply not be enough money to maintain those services. More and more of our tax dollars would go to pay government bond holders in New York, Zurich, Tokyo and elsewhere instead of being invested here in Ontario, in Ontario services and Ontario jobs.

In March I warned that if we did not take action our debt would grow by almost $17 billion in 1993-94 alone. I said that such a debt load was unacceptable to me and to this government. In this budget I have cut that amount almost in half. There will be those who say that Ontario could live with a $17-billion deficit. That view ignores the realities of escalating debt and compound interest. With that high a deficit, even assuming that international bankers would lend us the money, our interest costs would take off.

With the actions we are taking today, they start to stabilize. And we will save almost $5 billion in interest costs over the next three years. That's almost $500 for every man, woman and child in the province, money that will stay in the pockets of Ontarians instead of going to well-to-do bond holders.

Anyone who has let their credit card account get out of control knows how hard it is to pay down the debt when the interest charges keep piling up month after month. It is called a debt trap, and we are determined not to get caught in one.

There will also be those who say that we should have brought this year's deficit down even lower. But that would fatally damage essential public services and undermine Ontario's ability to care for our most vulnerable citizens. In bringing down the deficit at a responsible pace, I am preserving investments in jobs and I am maintaining the services that Ontarians value most.

To me, the issue is not whether we control the growth in debt. The issue is how. The growth in debt must be controlled in a fair and balanced way, protecting those who are most vulnerable. It must be controlled in a way that maintains our investment in jobs and that protects important public services and makes them more efficient. It must be controlled by decisions that are made in Ontario and it must be controlled now.

Almost half of the deficit reduction we have achieved has come from our expenditure control plan. About one quarter is achieved through cost reductions that are being negotiated with workers and employers in the public sector.

For every dollar in new taxes, we have achieved almost $4 in savings and reduced costs. A typical two-income family of four earning $60,000 will be asked to pay an annual tax increase of less than $7 a week.

I think that's a fair balance.

Je pense qu'il s'agit d'un juste équilibre.

Our budget invests to put Ontario back to work. After a long period of stagnation and uncertainty, the economic recovery is taking hold. The job picture is improving. In the past year, Ontario has accounted for two thirds of Canada's net new jobs.

Ontario's export-based manufacturing sector, no longer strangled by a severely overvalued dollar, has strengthened. So far this year, Ontario's international exports are up by more than 11% over the same period last year. Canadian auto exports have risen by 26% over the same period. Manufacturing shipments have risen by more than 6%. Who says business in Ontario cannot compete? Who says Ontario workers are not among the best and most productive in the entire world?

Although consumers have been cautious, they too are responding to the improving economy. The Conference Board of Canada's index of consumer confidence rose by 7% in the first quarter of 1993, and retail spending has risen gradually. Investment is rising as business prepares to take advantage of Ontario's solid economic future. Ontario manufacturers plan to increase investment spending by close to 30% in 1993.

Even though the job picture is improving, unemployment is still unacceptably high. That is why the cornerstone of our economic package is to support investment that will strengthen the recovery and create jobs.

Since we took office, our top priority has been to invest in jobs.

Through the sector partnership fund, we are working with business, labour and associations to create and maintain permanent jobs in eight key sectors -- automotive parts, aerospace, computing, construction, green industries, residential furniture, telecommunications and tourism -- with more sectors to be added in the coming months.

We have negotiated sectoral training agreements with industry, labour and the federal government to provide training and skills upgrading for an estimated 37,000 workers in the electrical and electronics, auto parts and steel sectors.

We are providing tax support for labour-sponsored investment funds that have already raised over $100 million to invest in small and medium-sized companies. In the coming year we will be reviewing proposals to expand and improve this program.

We are working with leading financial institutions to establish an investment corporation that will direct critical financial capital and expertise to Ontario's growth companies. There are banks and other financial institutions that recognize they have a responsibility to participate in the renewal of Ontario's economy. Together we are going to provide a means to make that happen.

We are supporting Ontario Hydro's plan to freeze power rates this year and keep increases at or below the rate of inflation for the rest of this decade, providing a crucial foundation for a sustainable economic recovery.

Over the past year, Jobs Ontario has shown what public investment in job creation can do. This program has helped put thousands of Ontarians back to work. It has provided training and jobs for welfare recipients. It has provided work experience for young people. It has built valuable public infrastructure in communities all across Ontario.

In this budget, we are once again investing in jobs.

We are establishing Jobs Ontario Community Action to support community economic development.

Through Jobs Ontario Capital and other programs, we are launching the most ambitious program of infrastructure investment in a generation.

We are expanding investments in training, including Jobs Ontario Training, to support a skilled and adaptable workforce.

And we are revamping social assistance to help get people back to work and to help working families who have low incomes.

Building on the success of Jobs Ontario over the past year, we are creating a new Jobs Ontario Community Action program to give communities more say in their own economic development.

The people who live and work in communities across this province know better than anyone at Queen's Park the economic development priorities of their cities, towns and regions. Jobs Ontario Community Action will help communities help themselves.

We will invest $300 million in the first three years. The funds for community action come from the consolidation of an array of existing programs and a special allocation of more than $120 million from Jobs Ontario Capital.

This program will mobilize the strengths and talents of business, labour, non-profit organizations, cooperatives, credit unions, local governments, and other groups and individuals to get ideas for job creation off the drawing board.

Jobs Ontario Community Action will help fund capital projects that promote new growth. It will offer loan guarantees to new organizations called community loan fund corporations -- so that local enterprises will have somewhere to turn when they cannot get a loan at the bank.

It will also support local groups in setting up community investment share corporations, so that local businesses have a new source of equity investment. It will help build the capacity of communities to formulate their own economic development plans by helping to fund feasibility studies and marketing programs. And it will provide targeted support for women, aboriginal people and other groups so that all parts of the community are included in economic development.

The Minister of Economic Development and Trade will provide additional details on the program and how communities can bring forward proposals.

We are also committing $100 million in capital funding over the next two years to support economic development in the communities affected by the decision to cancel government relocation projects. The Minister of Economic Development and Trade is initiating discussions with these communities to exchange ideas on how this funding can best be used to stimulate investment and create good jobs.

To support further development of the mining industry, particulary in northern Ontario communities, I am providing capital tax relief for junior mining companies issuing flow-through shares to individuals. In addition, we will introduce legislation to allow mining companies to deduct immediately their contributions to reclamation funds for the cleanup of mine sites. This measure will preserve our environmental goals while providing a cash-flow benefit, especially for small mining companies.

1620

This past year we launched a program of infrastructure investments on a scale not seen in Ontario since the 1960s.

We benefit today from the foresight of those who, a generation ago, planned and built our major highways and transit systems, our schools, colleges, universities, hospitals, our water and sewer systems, and our major public buildings. We have a duty to leave a solid legacy to those who will follow us in the new century.

In February, Premier Rae announced a comprehensive 10-year program to renew the province's infrastructure and create more than 100,000 jobs. These investments, to be made in partnership with municipalities and the private sector, will build highways and transit systems, improve water quality and conservation methods, and expand telecommunications networks.

We have initiated the Jobs Ontario Capital program to make strategic investments that support economic restructuring, promote community economic development, encourage social progress and preserve the environment.

More than 1,700 Jobs Ontario Capital projects have been started, and over $400 million has been invested by the province in the past year, creating or maintaining more than 8,400 full-year jobs.

To meet the demand for these strategic capital investments that create new jobs, I am expanding funding for Jobs Ontario Capital by $1 billion, to $3.3 billion over the period 1996-97.

Some of the major investments through Jobs Ontario Capital include the following:

-- The accelerated construction of Highway 407 and the widening of the Queen Elizabeth Way from Hamilton to St Catharines;

-- Work on the Scarborough rapid transit extension, the Sheppard subway, the Eglinton West subway, the Spadina subway extension to York University and the Mississauga transitway;

-- The new science building at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo;

-- The new skills training centre at Durham College in Whitby;

-- The Sudbury Southeast Bypass;

-- One hundred and sixteen new water and sewer projects to protect the environment and support new development; and

-- The Ontario network infrastructure program to improve telecommunications networks that will assist researchers in universities and industries and widen Ontarians' access to information.

We are also working with the private and non-profit sectors to speed up the approval of environmentally sound development projects. In the past year, we have cut the red tape and accelerated approvals for 1,600 development projects with a potential value of $11.5 billion.

In 1993-94 alone, about 14,000 non-profit and co-op housing units will be completed as part of our commitment to affordable housing in Ontario communities. Last year more than one quarter of all the new homes started in Ontario were supported through provincial housing programs.

Under the Capital Investment Plan Act, we are creating three special-purpose crown corporations to carry out investments in transportation, real estate, and water and sewer services. The three crown corporations will work in partnership with municipalities and the private sector to plan and implement new investments as quickly and as efficiently as possible.

We will also create a financing authority to arrange and coordinate domestic and international financing for these corporations, as well as for schools and hospitals, and for the provincial government as a whole. The authority will be asked to explore new ways to finance the province's borrowing needs. We want to discuss opportunities to develop domestic sources of capital with the banks, trust companies, credit unions and other members of the financial community.

Nothing is more important to our future prosperity than the education and training of our young people and our workers. They are our greatest resource.

In February, Premier Rae consolidated into a single ministry the responsibility for providing education and training for Ontarians of all ages -- from children in kindergarten to adults in the workforce.

Despite our financial situation, Ontario has -- and will continue to have -- one of the best-funded education systems in the world. We are investing $9 billion in education and training this year. That includes investments in training and adjustment totalling $1.2 billion -- almost twice the level of four years ago.

We are helping Ontarians to gain the knowledge and skills that they will need to get good jobs. This past year, 353,000 Ontarians enrolled in full-time studies in our colleges and universities -- the largest number in Ontario's history. Another 410,000 students registered for part-time post-secondary courses.

Our reforms to the Ontario student assistance program mean that we will be able to help as many as 177,000 students in the coming year -- 76% more than just four years ago. These reforms will stretch our dollars further and provide the greatest help to those who need it the most.

We must also do everything we can to help Ontarians who are already in the workforce get the skills necessary for well-paying jobs in the new economy. Across Ontario last year, more than 300,000 people received training and placement services funded by the province. This figure includes 88,500 young people and apprentices. This year we will invest $180 million in jobs, training, counselling and educational upgrading for young people through Jobs Ontario Youth and other important programs.

Through Jobs Ontario Training, which was launched last year, employers have already created over 24,500 new jobs. The first 10,000 workers are working as vehicle assemblers at Chrysler and Navistar, as machinists at Linamar, as seamsters at John Forsyth, as research technicians and chemists at Apotex, and in scores of other firms across the province. A year ago many of these workers were relying on social assistance. This is a tremendous example of what investing in people can do, both for individuals and for our economy.

In the coming year we will more than triple our investment in jobs and training under this program, to $329 million. Our aim is to assist another 35,000 to 40,000 unemployed workers. An equal number are expected to receive training through the program's support for those who are currently employed.

We are reducing the barriers that have prevented parents, particularly women, from entering the workforce. The number of publicly supported child care spaces has grown by 6,500 since 1990, to 53,100. Through Jobs Ontario Training and other programs, another 14,000 subsidized spaces will be made available this year, so that more parents, especially women, can participate in the expanding economy.

All this adds up to the largest investment in education and training of any government in Canada. It's good for business. It's good for the economy. But most of all, it's good for people.

C'est bon pour les affaires. C'est bon pour l'économie. C'est aussi bon pour les gens.

While we have taken many steps to help unemployed Ontarians back into the workforce, it is clear that more needs to be done. More than one million people live in households that rely on social assistance for their means of support. That includes a half-million adults who could be productively employed. It also includes one child out of every five. Three quarters of a million Ontarians live in households where, even though someone is working, their income leaves them in poverty.

This year the government will release a white paper on social assistance reform. This reform, which is to take effect in early 1995, will transform social assistance into a system that connects people to education, training, work and volunteer community activity. This overhaul will enable people to move out of the welfare system and into the labour market. We will also address child poverty through this reform.

This budget's investments in people and jobs are an essential part of our vision for Ontario. New industries, new jobs at good wages, young people who finish school with the knowledge and skills they need, and communities that work: That's the future this government is helping to build in Ontario.

Just as we are investing in new jobs, so too are we committed to preserving jobs and public services. Ontario is envied for its comprehensive network of high-quality public services such as health care and education. This government values the dedication and hard work of the people who provide them. Our debt problem means that we have to pursue this commitment to protecting jobs and services in a new way -- by seeking a new social contract with employers and workers in public institutions.

1630

Through the social contract, we are aiming to achieve benefits for all Ontarians by initiating long-term reforms that will modernize public services and put them on a more secure financial footing. We are committed to restructuring services, redeploying workers to new jobs and reskilling workers as the workplace changes.

For employees in the public sector, the social contract can mean greater job security by avoiding the elimination of between 20,000 and 40,000 jobs. It can also mean a stronger role for workers in decision-making, enhanced rights for retraining and redeployment, and improvements in collective bargaining structures.

For employers in the public sector, the social contract can mean more flexible and cooperative processes for managing change.

For the public who use government services and who pay for them, the social contract means that existing services can be maintained at an affordable cost and that resources can be shifted more easily to provide new services as the need arises.

The government is fully committed to achieving the planned $2 billion in savings from the affected sectors in 1993-94. In June, the government will publish a detailed account of how those savings have been achieved.

The savings achieved through the social contract and through our $4-billion expenditure control plan will help us maintain the public services that Ontarians value while making them more affordable.

Ontarians want government to be more efficient. My cabinet colleagues and I are reducing waste. We are putting our own house in order because we believe we must lead by example.

The largest single part of the expenditure control plan -- $720 million -- is being achieved through savings on internal government operations. This represents a reduction of more than 10% in the cost of running government. We are streamlining programs, rationalizing field offices and cutting down on the bureaucratic layers that separate senior managers from front-line service deliverers.

We have cut the number of ministries from 28 to 20. This alone means we will save $40 million this year in overhead costs -- $40 million in savings.

Budgets for consulting, communications, travel and other non-salary costs have been chopped by 24% over the past two years.

By the end of this fiscal year, the number of civil servants will be reduced by 5,000 since 1991-92.

We are establishing separate corporations to manage our real estate in a more cost-effective and businesslike way. We are also introducing legislation that would enable the province, in consultation with municipalities, to provide property assessment services on a cost-recovery basis.

Through these and other measures, the amount we spend on programs will actually decline by 4.3% this year. We are also selling some surplus assets and refinancing others valued at $915 million, and we are introducing measures that will raise about $240 million through fees and levies.

At the same time, we are maintaining adequate funding for the services that Ontarians value and that make Ontario a decent place to live. We are making some deliberate choices in how and where we spend. We are investing in our priorities and we are redressing inequities.

We have legislated pay equity for women in both the public and private sectors. We are providing increased funding towards fair wages for women in the broader public sector.

We are providing $49 million to help meet the needs of aboriginal communities for modern infrastructure and services and to negotiate outstanding land claims and self-government agreements. That's three times as much as was spent just four years ago.

We are investing over $30 million to protect the environment through Canada's most comprehensive program to promote the 3Rs -- reduce, reuse and recycle.

This year we are seeking passage of employment equity legislation that will ensure this province benefits from the skills of all Ontarians.

We have made substantial progress towards implementing the Stephen Lewis report on race relations. Virtually every recommendation is under way or has already been implemented.

For the first time, we are providing stabilization funding for about 20 women's centres that provide support and advocacy for disadvantaged women all across this province.

Our health care system -- the service that affects more Ontarians than any other -- is an achievement in which all Ontarians can take pride. This government is determined to ensure that, years from now, universal medicare will continue to be a sustaining feature of our society.

To save medicare, we have to make it more affordable. And we are doing so.

We are targeting our spending better by no longer paying for services that have little to do with health -- like removing tattoos and reversing vasectomies.

We are encouraging physicians to locate in areas that do not have an adequate number of directors, while restricting growth in cities where there is an oversupply.

We are limiting the use of Ontario tax dollars to buy private for-profit medical care in foreign countries.

We will be reforming the Ontario drug benefit program by asking everyone who benefits from it -- drug manufacturers, pharmacists and consumers -- to contribute to keeping program costs affordable.

We are speeding up the reform of long-term care for seniors and people with disabilities so those who need regular care can find it in their community without having to use expensive hospital beds.

In these and other ways, we are preserving medicare by managing our health spending better. We reduced the growth in health spending -- which averaged 11% per year during the 1980s -- to under 1% last year. That's responsible stewardship. Voilà une direction responsable.

To protect health care and other services and to maintain our investment in jobs, we have made a series of very tough decisions this year. We have achieved $4 billion in savings through the expenditure control plan. Another $2 billion in savings is being contributed by public sector workers and their employers through the social contract.

In recognition of these major contributions, I'm also asking for a contribution from the community that benefits from these services.

These tax increases will not be popular, but they are necessary and they are fair. When they are fully implemented, a two-income family of four earning $60,000 will pay an increase of less than $7 a week. The total income tax burden on that family will still be the third lowest among 10 provinces. And corporations will pay their fair share.

Those with the highest incomes -- the top one tenth of all tax filers who pay the Ontario surtax -- will pay the greatest increase. The Ontario surtax rates will increase to 20% of Ontario personal income tax over $5,500 and a further 10% of Ontario tax over $8,000.

All taxpayers will pay an increase in personal income tax of three percentage points, to 58% of basic federal tax, effective for the 1993 and subsequent taxation years.

The retail sales tax will be extended to sand, soil, clay, gravel, unfinished stone, parking and insurance premiums. The retail sales tax rebate for visitors from outside Ontario will be ended.

We are not increasing the 8% retail sales tax rate. Instead, we are relying on revenue sources that are more progressive and more sensitive to consumer confidence.

To protect low-income families and individuals, Ontario's tax reduction program will be enriched. This year an additional 40,000 people will pay no Ontario income tax and 10,000 will pay reduced Ontario income tax. Since this government came to office, we have reduced income taxes for 270,000 low-income Ontarians -- including 200,000 who have been removed from the tax rolls entirely.

1640

To stop large, profitable corporations from using the tax laws to avoid paying their fair share, I am introducing a corporate minimum tax. But in recognition of the importance of small business entrepreneurship, I am exempting all small businesses. More than 90% of all corporations in Ontario will not have to either calculate or pay the corporate minimum tax. The corporate minimum tax will take effect for taxation years beginning after December 31, 1993. When fully implemented, it is expected to raise about $100 million annually.

Today I am releasing a technical paper that outlines the corporate minimum tax. In keeping with its commitment, the government will consult on the technical details of the corporate minimum tax prior to the introduction of legislation.

I am also eliminating a variety of corporate tax loopholes and reducing the deductibility of meals and entertainment expenses for corporations to 50%. Insurers that have been exempt from the insurance premium tax will now be subject to tax. Along with improved administrative measures, these moves will raise $145 million in a full year.

To level the playing field, beer and wine made in produce-your-own establishments will be subject to a tax of 26 cents per litre, effective August 1. This tax will increase to 31 cents per litre on June 15, 1994, and 38 cents per litre on June 15, 1995. There will continue to be no tax on beer and wine produced in private homes for home consumption.

I understand that nobody likes taxes, but these tax increases are needed to invest in jobs, preserve our services and control the debt. They are an essential part of our economic and fiscal strategy. They are both fair and responsible.

I am also taking steps to improve the enforcement of existing taxes and non-tax revenues.

In response to the Provincial Auditor's report, this year I am assigning 147 staff to tax collection and audit positions to reduce non-payment of the employer health tax and other taxes. When fully implemented, this initiative will result in the recovery of more than $70 million a year in currently uncollected taxes.

New fines management and improved collection services are being introduced to improve compliance with court orders to reduce the incidence of unpaid fines and to improve the collection of outstanding accounts.

I am introducing increases in late-filing penalties and interest. In addition, those who evade payment of retail sales tax or engage in tobacco smuggling may now be subject to a maximum of two years in prison.

I am eliminating two taxes that were introduced by the previous government.

I am abolishing the commercial concentration tax effective at the end of this calendar year. This tax no longer reflects the realities of the Toronto real estate market. The last payments under this tax will be in October 1993.

I am withdrawing the $5 tire tax as of midnight tonight.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Mr Laughren: I've never seen such opposition to the elimination of a tax.

Achieving greater tax fairness is a clear and continuing commitment of this government. The Fair Tax Commission is holding public hearings across the province on the entire tax system and will publish its final report by the end of this year. We remain committed to achieving a fair tax system and we will be working -- on our own and in cooperation with the new federal government -- to make that happen.

For the year just ended, our operating expenditures were $50.2 billion. That is almost $400 million lower than our budget plan. Excluding debt interest and social assistance, our operating expense spending last year increased by less than 1%.

Unfortunately, the slower economy meant that our tax revenues last year were below planned levels. The federal government paid only part of the amount owed to us under the fiscal stabilization program, and some planned asset sales were not concluded by year-end. Consequently, our operating deficit for 1992-93 was $8.4 billion, and our budgetary requirements were $12 billion.

For 1993-94, provincial revenues will total $44 billion. This figure reflects the new revenue measures taken in this budget. Without these measures, revenues would actually have declined by $600 million this year. That's because of the moderate pace of economic growth, the low rate of inflation, the effect of corporate tax loss carrying provisions and the need to repay the federal government this year for income tax overpayments that date back to 1991. In addition, various one-time payments boosted 1992-93 receipts including asset sales and established program financing payments in respect of prior years.

To maintain public services, vigorous cost control has been and will continue to be essential. As a result of the measures announced in this budget, operating spending will be held to $50 billion in 1993-94, which is $3 billion below the target we set a year ago. Excluding public debt interest, our operating spending will be 4.3% lower in 1993-94 than it was last year.

Ontario's operating deficit will be $6.1 billion. Adding in budgetary capital investments of $3.1 billion, our budgetary requirements will be $9.2 billion. Despite continuing fiscal pressures, this level is $2.8 billion below that of the last fiscal year.

Today I'm also presenting a medium-term fiscal plan extending to 1995-96. We remain committed to the goals we set out in our first budget: to reduce the operating deficits steadily as the economy recovers; to reduce the deficit as a proportion of gross domestic product in total revenue; to keep the rate of expenditure growth low; and to stabilize our debt servicing costs.

We remain committed to balancing the operating budget. Because of the impact of the revenue shortfall, we will balance our operating budget one year later than planned -- in 1998 rather than 1997.

The operating deficit will decrease from $6.1 billion in 1993-94 to $2.6 billion in 1995-96. Taking into account capital expenditures, the government's budgetary requirements are projected to decrease from $12 billion in 1992-93 to $4.8 billion in 1995-96.

In conclusion, the goal of this government's economic plan is to invest in Ontario's future rather than borrow from it.

It is a plan for investing in jobs, reducing the cost of government, protecting services and raising needed revenues.

It is a plan that requires courage and leadership, which our Premier, Bob Rae, has demonstrated in abundance, and I thank him for his continuing support.

All of us look to a future with secure jobs and decent incomes, where parents can afford to raise their children in good health and in safe homes, where children go to school ready to learn, where our schools prepare our young people for the challenges they will face and where older people can enjoy a secure retirement. That is the future this budget seeks to build.

This budget puts investing in jobs and economic growth at the top of our action agenda.

It cuts the cost of government operations in ways that preserve jobs and services.

It asks Ontarians who have the most to pay the most, while protecting those who are most vulnerable.

It provides a fair balance, a balance in how much we cut, how much we borrow and how much we tax.

This budget faces reality. It does not put off the tough decisions until another day.

This budget provides a firm foundation for the economic recovery, so that our economic future and the public services we all value will be secure.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Merci, Monsieur le Président.

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Leader of the Opposition): I move the adjournment of the debate, to be resumed tomorrow.

The Speaker: Mrs McLeod moves the adjournment of the debate. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Hon Mr Charlton: Mr Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to return to introduction of bills.

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous consent to return to introduction of bills? Agreed.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

ONTARIO LOAN ACT, 1993 / LOI DE 1993 SUR LES EMPRUNTS DE L'ONTARIO

On motion by Mr Laughren, the following bill was introduced for first reading:

Bill 25, An Act to authorize borrowing on the credit of the Consolidated Revenue Fund / Loi autorisant les emprunts garantis par le Trésor.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour of the motion will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

I declare the motion carried.

Hon Brian A. Charlton (Government House Leader): I move the adjournment of the House.

The Speaker: Mr Charlton moves adjournment of the House. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

This House stands adjourned until 10 of the clock tomorrow morning.

The House adjourned at 1652.

May 19, 1993

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

EASTER SEAL RUN/WALKATHON

CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES

HIGHWAY SAFETY

TVONTARIO

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

CANADA 125 AWARDS

BICYCLING SAFETY

BIKE TO WORK WEEK

CHILD SAFETY

VISITOR

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

ORAL QUESTIONS

HEALTH CARE

TRANSFER PAYMENTS TO MUNICIPALITIES

FORENSIC TESTING

NORTHERN HEALTH SERVICES

GAMBLING

SOCIAL CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS

COMMUNITY RECREATION FUNDING

RESIDENTIAL ACCOMMODATION REPORT

LAND REGISTRATION

FLUOROCARBONS

PETITIONS

BRUCE GENERATING STATION

GAMBLING

PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE

GAMBLING

PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES

GAMBLING

PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE

BRUCE GENERATING STATION

GAMBLING

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

BRUCE GENERATING STATION

GAMBLING

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

LAND LEASE STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1993 / LOI DE 1993 MODIFIANT DES LOIS EN CE QUI CONCERNE LES TERRAINS À BAIL

ORDERS OF THE DAY

1993 ONTARIO BUDGET / BUDGET DE L'ONTARIO DE 1993

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

ONTARIO LOAN ACT, 1993 / LOI DE 1993 SUR LES EMPRUNTS DE L'ONTARIO