L099A - Wed 1 Nov 2000 / Mer 1er nov 2000
ANNUAL REPORT, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER OF ONTARIO
IRISH HERITAGE DAY ACT, 2000 / LOI DE 2000 SUR LE JOUR DU PATRIMOINE IRLANDAIS
STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES
ANNUAL REPORT, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER OF ONTARIO
ANNUAL REPORT, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER OF ONTARIO
ANNUAL REPORT, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER OF ONTARIO
SCHOOL EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES
ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION
The House met at 1330.
Prayers.
MEMBERS' STATEMENTS
QUEEN'S SCHOOL OF BUSINESS
Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands): I rise today to pay tribute to four Queen's University school of business undergraduate students who recently won the prestigious international business competition held in Austin, Texas. They are David Lambie of Orléans, Calvin Lam of Scarborough, Steve Sottile of Thunder Bay and Adria Mucalov of Queensville.
Queen's was the only Canadian team invited to attend the three-day, international competition hosted by the University of Texas and sponsored by the New Jersey-based Gallup Org. Eighteen undergraduate student teams, including defending champions of the University of California at Berkeley, as well as teams from Hong Kong, Scotland, Thailand, Mexico and Brazil, were among those competing. Each team was given 59 hours to prepare a presentation that answered a real business challenge facing the sponsoring organization: "How do we go from a $200-million revenue organization in 2000 to a $1 billion-revenue organization by 2005?"
In addition to winning the overall prize, the Queen's student team was awarded the Students' Choice Award by the other participants. Gallup officials were so impressed by Queen's recommendations that they invited the team to present to the company's executive in the near future.
Queen's School of Business is Canada's leading business school and one of the best in North America. As Dr Margaret Northey, dean at the Queen's School of Business, said, "We aim to prepare our graduates for positions of organizational leadership in the business world, and winning this case competition certainly suggests we're on the right track."
Congratulations, Queen's, on taking top honours.
SIKH RELIGION
Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): November 11 is the anniversary of the birth of Guru Nanak Dev who was born on this day in 1469 in the village of Rai Bhoe Ki Talwandi, Punjab. Sikhs all over the world will join in observing this holy day on their calendar.
Guru Nanak Dev founded a religion that is today practised by more than 20 million people around the world and thousands of people in Canada. Sikhism is a way of life based on universal brotherhood. Its objective is to create spiritual kinship and unity among all peoples. It believes that salvation is possible through devotion to God and a moral, responsible and selfless lifestyle.
Because of their strong beliefs and values, the more than 200,000 Sikhs in Ontario have made and continue to make strong contributions to our province. Sikhs care about education and have a thirst for knowledge, coupled with a strong belief in the equality of men and women. They are family oriented and self-sufficient. They give generously to their own institutions and to causes of the general society. Recently, the Guru Nanak Dev car rally in Brampton raised over $25,000 for the new hospital proposed in my riding.
Let us today reflect on the teachings of Guru Nanak Dev, who proclaimed the oneness of all peoples, religions and cultures. As a Sikh, I'm very honoured be able to bring greetings to my community on behalf of all the members of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario on this important day. Thank you.
ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS
Mr John C. Cleary (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh): Today I'd like to draw to the government's attention the crisis in agriculture. I've heard from farmers across Ontario and they're telling me the same thing: they need help now. Cash crop farmers have been especially hard hit by unseasonably cold and wet weather, low grain prices and now the astronomical increase in fuel.
I have been speaking to David Bryan, a cash crop farmer in my riding, who told me that last year it cost $3 a tonne to dry his corn. This year, with the high moisture content in the corn and increased fuel costs, it will cost $12 a tonne, four times what it cost him last year. I've also been speaking to dairy farmers across eastern Ontario and they tell me that the corn and hay crop produce this year is of such poor quality that milk production has dropped by hundreds of litres.
Commodity prices are at an all-time low, extreme weather has resulted in poor crops, fuel costs continually soar, and now farmers are being hung out to dry by this government. How can a government sit back and watch as farmers across the province are forced out of business and still have hundreds of thousands of dollars for government advertising?
TAKE OUR KIDS TO WORK DAY
Mr Bob Wood (London West): I rise today to recognize national Take Our Kids to Work Day. Today, thousands of grade 9 students in Ontario and the rest of Canada will spend a day at work with a parent, relative, adult friend or volunteer host. Take Our Kids to Work Day is a national program with participation and support from all provinces and territories. This program has three main objectives: to offer students a view of the work world and to give them an understanding of its demands and opportunities; to allow students to see their parents or volunteer hosts in different roles and responsibilities and understand what they do to support a family; and to emphasize that education goes beyond the classroom and that the preparation of younger generations for the future is a community responsibility.
Grade 9 students were selected for a number of reasons. Provincial curriculum guidelines include career education at this level, and it is an opportune time for students to see the practical side of what they've learned in school. Grade 9 students also make course selections for the following year that could have an impact on their future.
I'm accompanied at work today by my godson, Jeremy Marin, who is grade 9 at London Central Secondary School. Jeremy has campaigned for me since he was four years old. I ask Jeremy to stand in the gallery to be recognized, and ask all members to join with me in congratulating all the young people across Canada who are joining their mentors at work today.
JARVIS COLLEGIATE INSTITUTE
Mr George Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale): Last Friday, I had the occasion to attend the commencement ceremony at Jarvis Collegiate, a long-standing high school in my riding going back, incredibly, to 1807. The students at Jarvis Collegiate, the administrators and the teachers have a message for the Minister of Education: it's "stop." It's stop the name-calling and it's stop the divisive tactics which are leading to teachers getting to school with less morale than they ought to.
Jarvis Collegiate is an incredible school. It's marked by the incredible academic performance of students whose beginnings are very modest. Administrators like Pauline McKenzie, the school principal, teachers like Dan Caldwell and Chantal Gionet, incredible students like Julia Lee and Vincent Hong and student leaders like Paul Taylor have come together in a school environment in the middle of Canada's most diverse city and they have achieved extraordinary academic excellence against some of the barriers they face at home. Students who come to that school with challenges around English as a second language meet those barriers head-on. The school is home to the most diverse communities of students who come together to learn and achieve academic excellence and go on to some of Canada's finest post-secondary educational opportunities.
This is what is possible in an education system where our government and our education minister reach out and seek to have teachers who bring everything they can to their job. Instead, the Minister of Education makes it really tough to get up every morning to do your best work on behalf of students.
LABOUR DISPUTE
Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton West): I rise today to give voice to the 200 strikers at the community care access centre, many of whom are here today in the public gallery. They have been on strike now for 23 days, fighting for a decent and just collective agreement. By comparison to their colleagues in other CCACs, they have less benefits and a wage differential of upwards of 15%. As a result of that, I want members of the government to be aware that in 18 months they have lost 30 employees. That has a significant impact on their ability to provide the kind of service they want and that we expect for Hamiltonians. Right now, two case managers are responsible for anywhere between 300 and 450 patients a day. If one of those case managers is away, the other one is expected to carry all those caseloads.
You, the government of the day, have a responsibility to step in. You have provided some money during the VON strike, but it was only toward the deficit and it was only half the deficit at that. These workers deserve decent wages, decent benefits, and they deserve parity. This government has an obligation to step in and provide the dollars and the leadership necessary to resolve this crucial health care issue in the city of Hamilton.
1340
EVENTS IN DURHAM AREA
Mr John O'Toole (Durham): As you know, I routinely get up in the House to announce important community events in my riding of Durham. Well, today is no exception. The most recent event is the upcoming annual Quilt Heritage Week, which runs from November 6 through November 11. It is a no-miss event.
Quilt Heritage Week was started by two local merchants in downtown Bowmanville, Rick and Carole Gould, who wanted to give people an opportunity to view the work done by so many talented artists in this new medium, in the community as well as across Ontario and even as far as away as British Columbia and New England. The Goulds are also working with the Bowmanville Business Improvement Area and with many local volunteers who have contributed much time and effort into making this event an annual success.
This year there are 386 quilts and wall hangings on display throughout Bowmanville's downtown area. I might add that I have a very spectacular quilt displayed in my constituency office at 75 King Street in Bowmanville. It's a must-visit location.
There is also going to be a three-day show at Trinity United Church, as well as ones being coordinated at the Bowmanville Museum by curator Charles Taws at the town hall. The quilt show is also showcasing a quilt which is on display at the Atrium of the CBC building. Also, the Armistice Day quilt will be on display at my office.
I encourage all members of the House to visit the show. It's a must-see; you will enjoy it. Drop into the office when you're there.
TAX REFUND
Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): If the people from Windsor would like to know where my $200 cheque is going, it is going to my local hospital. Let me tell you why. I have people in my riding who are waiting over a year for knee surgery. One individual in particular is now on the welfare system because he can't get his operation on time.
We have a litany of choices of where we could send Ontario tax dollars, including our local schools.
Here's a picture of a boarded-up urinal. Why? Because our Windsor public and Catholic boards have had their maintenance budgets cut by this same government. Here are several pictures of washrooms that aren't working, of hallways that are dirty because they now have schools with one janitor on staff, and students have got to parade through these hallways that ought to have a broom swept through them.
Ladies and gentlemen of Windsor West, if you're curious to know why, I say that there are important places for the Ontario government to put our tax dollars. Our health system and our education system are my priorities, and that's exactly where my tax dollars are going. The benefit is that we even get a tax receipt to boot, over submitting the money to our hospitals, where this government should have given it in the first place, instead of cutting, which was this government's agenda.
ONTARIO ECONOMY
Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): Since June 1995, more than 768,000 net new jobs have been created in the province of Ontario. Cutting taxes, eliminating waste and red tape and building a climate of opportunity and growth continues to achieve real positive results.
I remember when our critics laughed and shook their heads in disbelief. "Tax cuts don't work," they said. "There isn't too much red tape," they said. But the proof is in the pudding.
A company by the name of Great Dane Ltd Partnership from Chicago is holding the official sod-turning of their new trailer manufacturing facility in Quinte West next Wednesday. Once in operation, Great Dane will build approximately 6,000 trailers per year and it is estimated they will employ 500 to 600 local residents.
I strongly believe that it is the climate we've created in Ontario, combined with the co-operation of the newly amalgamated city of Quinte West, that brought Great Dane here. The icing on the cake is that these jobs did not come from Chatham or Ottawa or some other Ontario city, they came from Savannah, Georgia, USA.
I extend my heartfelt congratulations to Mayor Jack Arthur and his council and staff for doing such a marvellous job in welcoming Great Dane Ltd Partnership into the community.
I also commend this government for attracting investment and for providing a better quality of life for hard-working Ontarians.
VISITORS
Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Today many people are celebrating bring your children to work day. With us today in the gallery are children whose parents work at the Ministry of Community and Social Services. I'd like to introduce Chantelle Krurka, Samantia MacDonald, Mark Houghton, Amanda Hopkins, Fauzia Moosa, and from Simcoe North, Nicholas Seymour and Steven Trzoch, both of Orillia. With them are Sylvia Verrecchia and Shamane Halley. I'd like to introduce them and say welcome.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): We welcome all our fine students.
ANNUAL REPORT, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER OF ONTARIO
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I beg to inform the House that I have today laid upon the table the 1999-2000 Annual Report of the Environmental Commissioner.
VISITORS
Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I want to bring to the attention of the House today that we have a delegation here from the wonderful city of Dublin, from the chamber of commerce there. Perhaps we could welcome them.
Mrs Marie Bountrogianni (Hamilton Mountain): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: In the gallery are Pam Clark and Jennifer Wilson of OPSEU Local 274 of the CCAC from Hamilton. Welcome.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The galleries are very full today.
Mr George Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I know all members would want to join with me in welcoming the great big class from De La Salle College school, including the sister of one of our pages. Krystyna Samoraj is here, she's Andrzej's sister. I'd like to welcome them.
Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: This is bring your sons and daughters to work day. We have several sons and daughters who've come to spend the time with MPPs. They are Shaun Tyler, Matt Keiser, Melissa Nester, Suzi Dumitrescu, Jalyssa Mills. I would like to welcome them to the House today.
Mr Dave Levac (Brant): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Not to break with the flow, I'd like to introduce to the House members from Assumption College in the riding of Brant. Some of those students were former students of mine. I see their growth and development. I appreciate the fact that their history teacher-department head, Mr Campbell, has that true sense of democracy and that they want to learn all about this place. I welcome them here to the chamber.
The Speaker: With all our fine guests here today, I'm sure the behaviour of the members will be extraordinary.
Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-East York): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I don't want to be left out of the festivities. I'd like to welcome and introduce Laurie Orett, my constituency assistant, and her daughter Ashley who are here in the west member's gallery today.
Hon Frank Klees (Minister without Portfolio): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Just so that no one else in this place feels left out, I'd like to welcome the rest of the people who are here.
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
IRISH HERITAGE DAY ACT, 2000 / LOI DE 2000 SUR LE JOUR DU PATRIMOINE IRLANDAIS
Mr O'Toole moved first reading of the following bill:
Bill 134, An Act proclaiming Irish Heritage Day / Projet de loi 134, Loi proclamant le Jour du patrimoine irlandais.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
Mr John O'Toole (Durham): With unanimous consent we could pass this today.
With respect to the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, who are visiting the brisk economy of Ontario, I'm pleased to welcome them. This bill recognizes the important contribution of the Irish community and its heritage, which is integral to the work ethic and other manifestations in Ontario today. Also, as an operative part of the cultural mosaic, they really belong to all Canadians with diverse backgrounds. We need to celebrate culture, and certainly our House leader, Mr Sterling, knows how important this is to me. I look forward to speedy passage of this bill.
1350
PUBLIC HOSPITALS AMENDMENT ACT (PATIENT RESTRAINTS), 2000 / LOI DE 2000 MODIFIANT LA LOI SUR LES HÔPITAUX PUBLICS (MESURES DE CONTENTION)
Ms Lankin moved first reading of the following bill:
Bill 135, An Act to amend the Public Hospitals Act to regulate the use of restraints that are not part of medical treatment / Projet de loi 135, Loi modifiant la Loi sur les hôpitaux publics pour réglementer l'utilisation de mesures de contention qui ne font pas partie d'un traitement médical.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-East York): Every day hundreds of seniors are tied up in our public acute care hospitals, not because it's part of their medical treatment, not because they are a danger to themselves or to someone else, but because they are old and they are confused. It happened to my mom. I know what I'm talking about. This bill seeks to produce a scheme of regulation for our public hospitals that would restrict the use of non-medical treatment restraints. We have such laws for nursing homes and long-term-care facilities; we have such laws for psychiatric hospitals; there's no such law for public acute care hospitals.
This bill seeks to move Ontario to meet other jurisdictions in the protection of the frail elderly.
VISITORS
Mr Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): I'd like to welcome the family of Raymond Persaud of the riding of Eglinton-Lawrence. The family is here. A special hello to his mother, brother, sister Natasha, Uncle Paul and a special welcome to Raymond's grandparents, Sheila and John.
STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Hon Helen Johns (Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, minister responsible for seniors and women): As the minister responsible for women's issues, I welcome the opportunity to speak today about the very serious issue of wife assault and domestic violence. The month of November is designated as Wife Assault Prevention Month. The year 2000 marks the 15th consecutive year that the government has observed this month.
Clearly, though we have certainly made progress on issues in those 15 years, domestic violence is still a great concern to all of us. In these past months we have seen a disturbing number of cases of violence against women and children. In some instances they involved serious injuries and in others they involved death.
Violence against women is an all-too-familiar reality in the province. Sadly, we are reminded of that again and again. A tragic incident is reported in the media or perhaps we hear about it even closer to home. We discover that a neighbour or a co-worker or even a family member is personally suffering from abuse.
Domestic violence is a crime. It is a crime that exacts a terrible toll on individuals, on families and on our communities.
Every woman in this province needs to feel safe in her home. Every woman needs to have access to services that can protect her safety.
Women who are in abusive situations are at great risk of both physical and emotional damage. They often fear for their survival. And they are not the only casualties of this crime. Children are also the victims-the silent victims. Again and again studies show that children whose mothers are abused are at a higher risk themselves of abusing. These children often underperform at school and are more likely to have emotional problems. Even more disturbing, boys raised in violent households are far more likely to grow up and repeat the cycle of violence in their own relationships.
This government will not tolerate domestic violence. We have backed up this message with an unprecedented level of funding. Last year the government spent over $110 million on programs and services to prevent and address violence against women. This year we are spending approximately $135 million on this very important issue, and in 2001-02 we are increasing the funding to $140 million.
No other government in the history of our province has dedicated this level of financial support to combat violence against women. We have made this issue a priority because the government is committed to making our communities safer and committed to supporting the women and the children who are at risk from domestic violence.
Ten ministries have been working together to provide approximately 40 programs and services concerning violence against women. These programs go into our schools to assist children affected by domestic violence: programs that train our health professionals and our teachers to recognize the signs of abuse and respond to the situations effectively; programs that are based in the community, that offer counselling for women and children, that offer shelter for women at risk.
Recently this government announced $10 million in funding dedicated to domestic violence; $5 million is being directed toward support for children who have witnessed domestic violence. This year's intervention program is designed to help children understand that the abuse is not their fault and that abuse is wrong. The remaining $5 million will finance a transitional support program for women and their children. This program will help abused women to find the assistance they need to establish new lives for their families, lives that are free from violence.
We also recently announced that, through the Investing in Women's Future program, we are doubling, over the next two years, the funding for women's centres in the province, from $855,000 to $1.9 million. These are centres that help women to reach economic independence. Many of the clients are victims of abuse. But I want to make the point that these are not women's shelters. Women's shelters provide emergency housing for abused women. The centres I'm talking about today are non-profit community agencies that provide services such as counselling and skills training. They are organizations that equip women with the skills they need to become economically self-sufficient, because often it is financial dependency that traps women into dangerous domestic situations.
On the legal front we're also breaking ground. Our government was the first in Ontario and among the first in Canada to create special courts dedicated to domestic violence. In fact, we have the largest and most comprehensive domestic violence court system in this entire country. We are tripling the number of these courts, bringing our total investment to $20 million a year. We are nearly doubling the victim/witness assistance program, a service that offers assistance to victims of domestic violence.
Earlier this fall the Attorney General introduced legislation that promised to toughen restraining orders for alleged abusers and to increase protection for victims of domestic violence. I'm proud of this. I'm proud of the leadership role this government has demonstrated and will continue to demonstrate when it comes to issues of domestic violence.
1400
My colleagues and I are committed to addressing violence-against-women issues in a coordinated, effective strategy. We work with each other and with our partners in the community to ensure that our initiatives meet the needs of those women and children who are at risk. Our government believes that giving women the tools and the support they need will enhance their safety. There is, however, much more to be done, and we will continue to work with community partners and to provide the best services possible for women and their families.
I value the perspective of the community groups that deal with domestic violence on a daily basis. I have met with a number of these groups recently, and I have a great deal of respect for the valuable work that these organizations do in providing services to women across Ontario. I continue to look at ways that we can work together to do more to prevent domestic violence.
Women and children all across this great province have the right to live in safety. This government is determined to protect that right. We have a solid record of achievement in addressing domestic violence, and we will continue to build on it. I look forward to the day when we no longer need Wife Assault Prevention Month because women are finally safe from violence.
Mrs Marie Bountrogianni (Hamilton Mountain): Last year we stood up in this House and proclaimed Wife Assault Prevention Month, and yet, one year later, women continue to die at the hands of their abusive partners. Six women and four children died over this last summer and at least three women were brutally beaten here in Ontario.
What has this government really done over the last five and a half years to deal with this tragedy? Let's review the government's progress. Many women's centres have had their funding cut. On September 21, four centres were notified by fax that their base funding was to be cut by October 1. The rape crisis line has had 5% of its budget cut. It fields 25,000 calls and misses some 50,000 to 75,000 additional calls. Millions have been cut in funding to emergency shelters, and funding for second-stage housing was cut. I want to acknowledge the presence of the delegation from Second Stage Housing in the members' gallery.
By de-funding women's shelters, the government contributed to violence against women. I was at London's Women's Centre two weeks ago. For every woman admitted, two are turned away. There's no room. If these women don't have family and friends to turn to, where do you expect them to go?
Again, what has this government really done to respond to last summer's tragedies? They reannounced last May's $10 million to assist women and children who are victims of domestic abuse. Welcome as this money is, it was taken from front-line services. We need to restore full funding to offer a full spectrum of services. Second-stage housing funding needs to be restored. This is where women and children stay for a significant length of time. This is where counselling should take place. Research study after research study has shown that sending kids out to counselling is not efficient. They don't have the means to get there. Send the counsellors to where the kids are.
The narrow focus of eligibility for the funding that was announced has left out and cut out centres that provide really positive support for women who are not yet ready to enter the work force, especially if they are new to the country, and supports to get information about their communities and how to get involved in them.
Minister, you have abandoned the women who need other forms of support. The funding for job training is welcome, but when you are terrified for your life and for your children's lives, you're hardly in the mental state to be looking for job training. I don't know what world the government is living in-a very nice one, but one that many women in this province just don't share. Women are dying and you are talking about jobs and the economy. They have to be safe first before they apply for these job training programs. Surely this qualifies as common sense in your dictionary.
In September the cross-sectoral group put together a list of emergency measures. My leader, Dalton McGuinty, signed the accord; so did the leader of the third party. You sent a parliamentary assistant; you didn't even have the courage to come yourself. The Attorney General, at his announcement of the domestic violence bill, did not even know about this list. This is hardly a coordinated, effective strategy.
With respect to the domestic violence bill, this is welcome. The Liberal Party welcomes any step toward reducing domestic violence, but what we are learning at the hearings is that the government must ensure that women know about the orders and how to use them; otherwise the bill will fail.
The government must increase its support for community-based women's services and groups: women's shelters, second-stage housing programs, women's centres and community neighbourhood groups that provide first contact; 75% of abused women do not go to the police and will not be assisted by this bill.
Even if women use this new bill, for it to be effective women must have access to adequate legal aid. It's not available now. Interpretation services need to be expanded.
If you really want to make a mark and begin to truly solve this problem, endorse the emergency measures, the way we did, the way the NDP did. As well, educate women on how to use this bill, increase legal aid, increase counselling. One study showed that one in four children in abusive families believe that it's OK for their mother to be abused if the house is messy. None of these children believed that after counselling.
Educate the crown attorneys, court staff, JPs and judges about Bill 117. Experts are telling us at the hearings that it won't work if you don't do this.
Build affordable housing-you washed your hands on this issue-and restore funding to second-stage housing. Where are these women supposed to go?
Without this, women will continue to die; children will continue to live at risk of the same fate or grow up broken, confused, angry, and eventually violent. Nothing will change and we'll be back every November 1 in this House espousing virtuous but vacuous policies, and the tragedies will continue.
Minister, vulnerable people are real people too-very real people. Please, let's all get together and solve this problem in a truly coordinated fashion.
Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-East York): I can't think of anything more inappropriate than what the minister did today. To stand and attempt to list what she calls the achievements of her government on this issue-this from a government that's refused to respond to the emergency demands that have been brought forward and endorsed by over 120 women's organizations and that would save women's lives, save children's lives. This is not a day for celebration of the government's self-claimed achievements. This is a day for mourning.
This is a day for mourning the blight in our society which is domestic violence. This is a day for mourning the deaths of women and children who are victims of domestic violence. This is a day for mourning the lack of response from a government that refuses to hear women's voices.
I have said in this House virtually everything there is to say, to plead, debate, argue with this government to respond to the articulated demands, the emergency measures to be implemented this fall to save women's lives. My colleagues have distributed on my behalf to every member of this Legislative Assembly a list of the 40 women who have been murdered by intimate partners in Ontario since the release of the May-Iles inquiry jury recommendations two years ago. I have read the names of those women and the situations that led to their deaths into the record of the Legislative Assembly so that their names, their lives, could be remembered. I've done that. I think there's hardly anything else left to say.
So I want to use the balance of my time to ask members of the Legislative Assembly to join me in silent remembrance of the women and the children who have died as a result of domestic violence and to reflect on what government must do, the actions that must be taken, to truly make progress in saving women's lives.
The House observed a moment's silence.
Ms Lankin: May our silence move the government where our words have not. Thank you.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I thank the member.
1410
DEFERRED VOTES
MCMICHAEL CANADIAN ART COLLECTION AMENDMENT ACT, 2000 / LOI DE 2000 MODIFIANT LA LOI SUR LA COLLECTION MCMICHAEL D'ART CANADIEN
Deferred vote on the motion for third reading of Bill 112, An Act to amend the McMichael Canadian Art Collection Act / Projet de loi 112, Loi modifiant la Loi sur la Collection McMichael d'art canadien.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.
The division bells rang from 1413 to 1418.
The Speaker: Mrs Johns has moved third reading of Bill 112, An Act to amend the McMichael Canadian Art Collection Act. All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.
Ayes
|
Arnott, Ted Baird, John R. Barrett, Toby Beaubien, Marcel Chudleigh, Ted Clark, Brad Clement, Tony Coburn, Brian Cunningham, Dianne DeFaria, Carl Dunlop, Garfield Ecker, Janet Elliott, Brenda Eves, Ernie L. Flaherty, Jim Galt, Doug Gilchrist, Steve |
Gill, Raminder Guzzo, Garry J. Hardeman, Ernie Harris, Michael D. Hodgson, Chris Hudak, Tim Johns, Helen Kells, Morley Klees, Frank Marland, Margaret Martiniuk, Gerry Maves, Bart Mazzilli, Frank Molinari, Tina R. Munro, Julia Mushinski, Marilyn Newman, Dan |
O'Toole, John Ouellette, Jerry J. Palladini, Al Runciman, Robert W. Spina, Joseph Sterling, Norman W. Stewart, R. Gary Stockwell, Chris Tascona, Joseph N. Tilson, David Tsubouchi, David H. Turnbull, David Wettlaufer, Wayne Wilson, Jim Witmer, Elizabeth Wood, Bob Young, David |
The Speaker: All those opposed will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.
Nays
|
Agostino, Dominic Bartolucci, Rick Bountrogianni, Marie Boyer, Claudette Bradley, James J. Bryant, Michael Caplan, David Christopherson, David Churley, Marilyn Cleary, John C. Colle, Mike Crozier, Bruce |
Curling, Alvin Di Cocco, Caroline Dombrowsky, Leona Duncan, Dwight Gerretsen, John Gravelle, Michael Kennedy, Gerard Kormos, Peter Lalonde, Jean-Marc Lankin, Frances Levac, David Marchese, Rosario |
Martel, Shelley Martin, Tony McGuinty, Dalton McLeod, Lyn McMeekin, Ted Peters, Steve Phillips, Gerry Pupatello, Sandra Ramsay, David Ruprecht, Tony Smitherman, George |
Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 51; the nays are 35.
The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.
Be it resolved that the bill do now pass and be entitled as in the motion.
ORAL QUESTIONS
ANNUAL REPORT, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER OF ONTARIO
Mr Dalton McGuinty (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Premier. Today the Environmental Commissioner issued another damning report on your failure to protect our air and our water. The report makes it perfectly clear that when it comes to protecting our natural environment, you and your government are missing in action. Not only are you not acting when it comes to protecting our environment, you're not even standing on guard; you're not even watching.
Further, the report says that not only are you failing to enforce environmental laws, but you are actually breaking them. Just when we didn't think it was possible for you to achieve an even lower standard when it comes to acting as a guardian of our environment and of our children's heritage, we learn today you have taken it down another notch. The Environmental Commissioner says, "The Ontario Realty Corp broadly disregarded environmental legislation." Premier, I want you to tell us now, how does it feel to be responsible for a government that has gutted the ministry, gutted environmental law, and in fact now is breaking environmental laws?
Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond to the question. Let me say that, yes, we're aware the Environmental Commissioner has released his report today. I want to tell you that we on this side of the House welcome the report. We appreciate that it's thorough, we appreciate its constructive advice, and I want to tell the Legislature that we will carefully consider its recommendations.
While the facts of the matter are that our government has taken unprecedented steps to protect the environment, we recognize that much work needs to be done. We share, for example, the Environmental Commissioner's concern about the environment. We agree with the need for openness and transparency in the development of programs. As you know, Mr Miller served many years with the Ministry of the Environment, so he brings a unique perspective on what's wrong there, and recommendations on what we need to do to correct some of those things. We welcome that, and we think it's very constructive and very helpful.
Mr McGuinty: Premier, the issue here isn't the Environmental Commissioner's record, it's your record, it's your failure to stand up and protect our environment, our children's heritage. Governing is about making a few choices. This report makes it perfectly clear where you stand when it comes to making some very fundamental choices.
When you sold government land on the environmentally sensitive Oak Ridges Moraine, you didn't side with the environment, you sided with the developers, and worse, you broke the law to do it. I'll tell you why this is particularly interesting to me. Back in April, when I raised concerns about the ORC's sales on the moraine, your Chair of Management Board assured me, "The proper steps are being taken."
Well, I can tell you, Premier, we now learn that in fact the proper steps were not being taken. My question to you is, how can Ontarians expect to have any confidence in you and your government when it comes to standing up for the environment?
Hon Mr Harris: Let's hear from the Chair of Management Board himself.
Hon Chris Hodgson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): We on this side of the House do welcome the Environmental Commissioner's report and the opportunity it brings to review and improve current practices. I've made it clear to the Ontario Realty Corp it's my expectation that they comply with the legislation. In fact, when the commissioner first brought this issue to my attention, to my deputy's attention back in May, we took immediate action. I wrote a letter to the chair of the ORC advising of the commissioner's concerns, and I directed the board to ensure that the ORC is following the legislated environmental requirements.
My deputy minister, Michele Noble, wrote to the Environmental Commissioner in July of this year and pointed out, in direct reference to the Leader of the Opposition's question-for example, the deputy minister informed the commissioner's office that the ORC did not market, rezone or subdivide environmentally sensitive government-held lands during the 1999-2000 reporting period. She also informed the office-
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. I'm afraid the Chair of Management Board's time is up. Final supplementary.
Mr McGuinty: It seems to me that the Chair of Management Board doth protest just a bit too much. When it comes to having to decide who we are going to trust here, you or the Environmental Commissioner who stands up for the environment, we are with the Environmental Commissioner.
He specifically said that the Ontario Realty Corp-
Interjections.
The Speaker: Stop the clock. Order. The leader of the official opposition. Sorry for the interruption.
Mr McGuinty: The Environmental Commissioner specifically said that the Ontario Realty Corp, a body for which you have complete and ultimate responsibility, has broadly disregarded environmental legislation. He goes on to say that the ORC, obviously under your direction, appears to view government lands as nothing more than garage clutter. We have a different view on this side of the House and in my party. You should know that we've been working long and hard to put into place a new law that protects the environment and particularly protects the moraine. All along, while we've been working for a new law, you've been fighting to breach the old laws.
I'll ask you again, Premier: how can you expect us to have any confidence when it comes to standing up and protecting our environment?
Hon Mr Hodgson: That was a great speech. Unfortunately, let's stick with the facts here. I quoted the Deputy Minister of Management Board's report, and it is in response to the Environmental Commissioner's report, which we welcome, which has a lot of good advice. We fully expect the Ontario Realty Corp to be in compliance with the laws. I put that in writing to the board back in May, when we first found out about his concerns, and we are taking action. But the deputy minister did point out on July 14, in her response to the commissioner's draft report-she also informed the office that the ORC offered several landlocked parcels in the Oak Ridges moraine that were surplus remnants at the Highway 404 construction for sale to the adjacent owners only. She also pointed out the ORC did transfer one environmentally significant parkway belt parcel, but it was transferred directly to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority.
The Speaker: New question. Leader of the official opposition.
Mr McGuinty: My question is for the Premier. The Environmental Commissioner, in his report today, stated that you still don't have a plan to protect our water. In fact, this is the fifth year running that the Environmental Commissioner in our province laments the fact that your government has yet to produce a comprehensive groundwater strategy. You have ignored all of the warnings that have been put forward in the past.
There's one specific here that I would like you to focus on today. The commissioner has reported that you still don't have a plan to set or enforce environmental laws to govern intensive farms. Despite the fact that seven people have lost their lives in Walkerton, we still today in Ontario don't have a law on the books that's protecting our water and, in particular, we don't have a law governing intensive farming.
Knowing those risks, Premier, why do you continue to fail to act to protect our groundwater?
1430
Hon Mr Harris: You are quite right: there is a dearth of legislation on groundwater across Canada. That is why, even before Walkerton came to light, we had an interministerial committee at the parliamentary assistants' level, from both the Ministry of Agriculture and Food and the Ministry of the Environment, consulting with affected parties and groups, including conservation authorities and environmental groups, on how we could have leading-edge and comprehensive legislation, really the first of its kind in Canada in a substantive way, that would be meaningful for this province. So we began the process even pre-Walkerton, and of course post-Walkerton we've continued those consultations.
To suggest that we have not recognized that we need to do something in this area, particularly in the area of intensive farming, is just not true. We are working on bringing it-
The Speaker: Order. The Premier's time is up. Supplementary?
Mr McGuinty: Coincidentally, the Environmental Commissioner commented on just those kinds of so-called progress reports. He says specifically on page 34 of his report that the government has "misused progress reports as public relations exercises." He's telling us that you're all spin when it comes to actually doing something about the ministry and about the environment.
On the subject of intensive farming, the Environmental Commissioner was very explicit and specific today. He tells us that when it comes to protecting our water, that responsibility lies solely with the Ministry of the Environment. You're telling us you want to download that responsibility on to our municipalities, in the same way you downloaded responsibility for water testing on to our municipalities.
I want to put a question to you now, and it's very direct, Premier: do you not believe, given the advice offered today by the Environmental Commissioner, that responsibility for setting a province-wide standard for intensive farming and its enforcement lies with the Ministry of the Environment and not with our municipal partners?
Hon Mr Harris: First of all, let me correct the record on something the member has talked about. As to his position on the Environmental Commissioner, at first it was the worst choice in the history of environmental protection-no confidence. Now we are pleased to see you have confidence in the Environmental Commissioner. Second, he suggests we are not taking any action. Of course that's very inaccurate and simply not true.
In addition, while we agree with the Environmental Commissioner that this is a matter for the Ministry of the Environment, I'm surprised that you would want us to proceed unilaterally without consulting with farmers, when it will affect them. We on this side of the House do like to consult with all affected parties-
The Speaker: Order. The Premier's time is up. Final supplementary?
Mr McGuinty: The Environmental Commissioner has been very clear on this issue, and you have been consulting for a long time on this matter. We need an answer, and we need it today. The Environmental Commissioner is telling us that responsibility for protecting our water, for setting standards and for making sure we've got a province-wide standard when it comes to intensive farming, must lie with the Ministry of the Environment. You have told us in the past that it's your intention to download this responsibility on to municipalities, in the same way that you downloaded responsibility for water testing on to our municipalities.
What I want to know today, given what happened in Walkerton, given the growth of intensive farming operations throughout the province of Ontario, do you or do you not intend to place full responsibility for establishing a province-wide standard for intensive farming in Ontario? That's the kind of thing that should lie with the Ministry of the Environment and not municipalities.
Hon Mr Harris: We agree with the Environmental Commissioner. I don't know what it is you think we've told you. We've said we're consulting. The legislation has not been brought forward. We are working hard to consult and get it right. I understand that there are those who wish we could retroactively get legislation in place, who wish that former governments had, that our government had. But the fact of the matter is that we are consulting in a very meaningful way. We agree, when it comes to groundwater, the Ministry of the Environment must be the lead agency to develop the legislation to bring forward. I'm just surprised, and I will pass on to farmers, that you don't think they should even be consulted.
The Speaker: New question.
Ms Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): My question is to the Premier. Without even mentioning Walkerton today, the Environmental Commissioner's report gives us evidence that shows your government is guilty of a conscious and systematic policy to not protect the environment and our health. Even your friend Mr Miller says that your cuts to the ministry killed its corporate memory, devastated morale and left it without the expertise needed to protect the environment. Premier, in case you thought you could get away with it, guess what else Mr Miller had to say? He says that the public sees through what you are doing and that their confidence continues to decline.
Now that Gordon Miller appears prepared to tell the truth about your government, are you about to fire him like you fired Eva Ligeti, or will you start protecting the environment by bringing back 500 of the 1,000 staff you fired?
Hon Mr Harris: I'd like to thank the member for the dissertation.
Ms Churley: Premier, listen to what the commissioner had to say.
Every Environmental Commissioner's report since 1995 has called for a coherent, comprehensive groundwater strategy. You haven't done it, Premier.
No effective ecosystem monitoring. You failed to meet your obligation to clean up the Great Lakes.
No strategy on climate change, despite what the minister had to say.
No action on smog, and no support for public transit.
No strategy to curb hazardous waste.
The commissioner's report is called Changing Perspectives. It should be called "You're still screwing up, Premier."
I ask you today, are you going to take this report seriously, and what plan do you have in place to remedy these very serious accusations today?
Hon Mr Harris: I think the previous response was appropriate to the question and the supplementary.
Ms Churley: Premier, when you came into power you gutted the NDP's green Planning Act to help your developer friends, but gutting the Planning Act wasn't enough for you. The Environmental Commissioner says the Ontario Realty Corp treats environmentally significant lands like clutter to be sold off in a garage sale. The law says that the ORC has to go through an environmental assessment process before it sells off such lands. We know that they sold lands on the Oak Ridges moraine, yet there was not one single environmental assessment. It looks like your ORC has been breaking the law, Premier, so I ask you three things: will you call a full, independent investigation, and will you put a moratorium on the sale of all ORC lands, and will you call on your minister responsible for the ORC to step aside until the full independent investigation is complete?
Hon Mr Harris: I think the minister has fully responded to the issue that was previously raised by the Liberal Party. Perhaps the member was so busy drafting her question she didn't hear the response, but Hansard will have it. The same response applies.
I might also indicate that the member talked a lot about groundwater strategy, anti-smog plans. As you know, we've been making announcements on a pretty regular basis on some of the toughest regulations in Canada, including groundwater initiatives, with dollars attached. Those are a number of areas we've taken, including our proposal-and I hope when we do bring in legislation it will be the most comprehensive in Canada. I hope we can count on all members for support.
1440
KING'S HEALTH CENTRE
Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Minister of Health. I want to return to the King's Health Centre and I want to know if today you will tell us when the last inspection took place and what your government found. The public want to know what's going on with the King's Health Centre. It's mired in controversy. There are allegations that cue-jumping took place. There are allegations of contravention of the Canada Health Act. None of those allegations have anything to do with the fraud investigation that's going on, and yet you're hiding behind that fraud investigation, refusing to say anything.
What we do know is that the number of inspections that have taken place, the outcome of those inspections and whether there have been any complaints is being kept under lock and key by your government. You have access to this information and you have a responsibility to share it with the public. The questions that are being raised are reasonable. Will you today tell us when the last inspection of the King's Health Centre took place and what your government found?
Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I don't think the former Minister of Health appreciates the new fraud squad that we have set up within the Ministry of Health, which is made up of OPP officers whereas during the time of the NDP government it was civilians doing the job.
Let me talk to the King's Health Centre. The King's Health Centre does not have a funding relationship with the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. The physicians who are in the King's Health Centre who provide insured services to insured Ontario residents may bill the Ontario health insurance plan. The King's Health Centre is not a private hospital or a licensed, independent health facility. The ministry does not regulate doctors' offices and that has never been the case.
Ms Lankin: Minister, the ministry does receive complaints. The ministry is responsible for ensuring that there are not contraventions of the Canada Health Act. The ministry is responsible for ensuring that there is not cue-jumping when OHIP is involved or when a private clinic and private doctors are providing services to private companies on their contract. All of that is your responsibility.
If it's possible at all that you hadn't heard about these allegations before yesterday, since yesterday you surely should have investigated them. None of those allegations have direct relevance to the fraud investigation. You can't hide behind the fraud investigation. You can demand and should demand, and it's your responsibility as the minister, access to the information of what was in those contracts with those corporations and whether there was a violation of the Canada Health Act. Have you done that? Will you provide the public with those contracts? Will you tell us what your investigations have uncovered, Minister?
Hon Mrs Witmer: I don't think the member clearly understands that there are certain rules and certain regulations, nor does she understand that the Toronto police are currently conducting an investigation and that our fraud squad, our OPP officers, is involved in the investigation. Surely the member must know that all police investigations are conducted at arm's length from the government, as this one is.
ANNUAL REPORT, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER OF ONTARIO
Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): A question for the Minister of the Environment: yet another report has come out. You've seen several reports that have come out that are critical of your ministry. Now the Environmental Commissioner has once again had a report critical of you.
His report, as well as the auditor's report, you'll remember, talks about a failure to do anything meaningful with groundwater; insisting there was a moratorium on water-taking permits when in truth there was not; repeatedly embarrassing Ontario in international forums by balking at meaningful efforts to improve air and water quality; poor leadership in land-use planning, leading to urban sprawl; poor leadership on groundwater contamination; poor leadership on air quality. In fact, he says you claimed you were doing something but these emissions have not been achieved and the emissions have risen dramatically between 1996 and 2000.
Bringing in Valerie Gibbons to do your job and bringing in Paul Rhodes, the Premier's good friend, to be the chief spin-meister, is not going to solve this problem. What is going to solve this problem is getting you the appropriate resources and clout and staff to do the job. Will you now agree with the Environmental Commissioner, who says you do not have (a) the proper funding, (b) enough staff, and (c) the appropriate clout and authority to do your job, and that's why Ontario's environment is in such a mess?
Hon Dan Newman (Minister of the Environment): I say to the member from St Catharines that this government is indeed committed to protecting and improving Ontario's environment, and we welcome the Environmental Commissioner's report of today. The report is very thorough, and it also provides important constructive advice to the government. As always, we will ensure that the recommendations are carefully reviewed and analyzed.
With respect to groundwater-the member raised that question-I want to say to him that he knows there is a $6-million investment this year, over a three-year period, to establish the groundwater monitoring network. We're working with conservation authorities to establish 400 monitoring wells across the province. This monitoring will ensure that we can see water quality parameters being monitored, as well as water levels, to give us information regarding groundwater conditions in our province. In fact, back in 1997 we established the $200-million provincial water protection fund, which helped municipalities upgrade their water and sewage infrastructure. Under that very fund, money was available for groundwater studies.
Mr Bradley: I'm talking about the Environmental Commissioner's report. This person is supposed to be neutral and is neutral. He's provided a report that condemns virtually everything you happen to say.
I've got a solution for you, Mr Minister. I heard some news media people asking you the question, are you capable of doing the job and are you the right person for the job? I want to ask something differently. I believe that a minister cannot do the job if he does not have the appropriate resources. In other words, you've had one third of your staff cut, 45% of your budget, and all your clout taken away. Why don't you go to the Premier of this province, who makes all the decisions, and tell him, as the Environmental Commissioner has, that you want (a) the funding restored to your ministry, (b) the staff restored to your ministry, (c) the clout and authority restored to the ministry, and (d) the morale of your ministry boosted as a result, and if the Premier will not provide that to you, will not give you the tools to do your job, that you will submit your resignation to him in protest?
Hon Mr Newman: The member for St Catharines ought to know there is a thorough review underway right now of the Ministry of the Environment, headed up by Valerie Gibbons, coming forward with recommendations on ways that the Ministry of the Environment can better serve the needs of the people of Ontario and the environment of this province. We're constantly looking for new and innovative ways to deliver environmental protection, and I very much look forward to her report. But it's quite interesting to see the member for St Catharines talk about the Environmental Commissioner when just last December he was referring to him as a lapdog.
WIFE ASSAULT PREVENTION MONTH
Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): My question is for the Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation. Today marks the first day of Wife Assault Prevention Month. We in this House all know this is an extremely important issue to many, many constituents. Indeed, it has been identified as the number one issue by police in Scarborough.
I wonder if you could please tell the women of my riding of Scarborough Centre and indeed those throughout Ontario what this government is doing to help women who are victims of domestic violence.
Hon Helen Johns (Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, minister responsible for seniors and women): Can I say that while other governments remain silent, this government has been acting to ensure that the government invests in programs and services that will help the women of Ontario and will get results. That's why this government has doubled funding in the Investing in Women's Future program; we've moved from $855,000 to $1.9 million. In fact, we've been getting some good reviews from that. The president of the Sudbury Women's Centre said, "We are pleased that we have been able to secure this funding. We are particularly excited because this year we can provide specialized services in the area of domestic violence specific to the women of northern Ontario"-specialized services that make a difference for women who are suffering from domestic assault and abuse. That's what this government's all about.
1450
Ms Mushinski: Minister, we know that many women are victims not only of violence but also of poverty. I'm wondering if you could please explain to this House what the government is doing to help eradicate women's poverty in particular.
Hon Mrs Johns: This government is strongly committed to assisting women and their families to participate in Ontario's growing economy and to helping women break the cycle of violence by fostering women's economic independence. This government will not tolerate domestic violence. To do that, we're making sure we have economic independence activities and programs we can use so we can create jobs and so the private sector can create jobs for women in the province.
The Ontario economy is booming, and the benefits are here for all the people. Since 1995, Ontario has gained 768,000 new jobs, and about half of those jobs were created were for women. Last year Ontario gained a record 198,000 jobs, most of them high-paying jobs, with 42% of them jobs going to women. Women in Ontario are actively participating in the new economy that's happening in Ontario-
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. I'm afraid the minister's time is up.
ANNUAL REPORT, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER OF ONTARIO
Mr Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): This question is for the Chair of Management Board. In this report by the Ontario Environmental Commissioner, he's very categorical. He says that in 1998 your ministry was warned that it was not obeying environmental legislation. Then he says again, "In this reporting period, the Ontario Realty Corp"-which you're in charge of-"has continued to market, rezone, subdivide and sell government land holdings affecting environmentally significant land, including lands in the parkway belt north of Toronto, the Oak Ridges moraine, the Markham-Pickering agricultural land preserve, and the Rouge park areas, all without environmental study or public consultations."
He is quite categorical that you are breaking the law. In fact, the commissioner said to me that you refused to hand over the list of all the properties you hold and the list of all the properties you've sold. I ask you to make that list public right here. Give a copy to the opposition and a copy to the commissioner without any further delay.
Hon Chris Hodgson (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): We welcome the Environmental Commissioner's report. He's got a lot of good things in it and a lot of good recommendations which we are following up on. When we first became aware of this, when he contacted my deputy minister in May, I wrote a letter to the board. I stated that to this House; it's in the Hansard. But in case the member wasn't listening, the Deputy Minister of Management Board, Michele Noble, wrote to the Environmental Commissioner on July 14. It's unfortunate that he did not include that response in his report, but, for example, the deputy minister informed the commissioner's office that the ORC did not market, rezone or subdivide environmentally sensitive government-held lands during the 1999-2000 reporting period. She also informed the office that the ORC offered for sale to adjacent owners several landlocked parcels in the Oak Ridges moraine that were surplus remnants of the Highway 404 construction.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. I'm afraid the minister's time is up.
Mr Colle: I talked to the Environmental Commissioner a half hour ago, and he said you are stonewalling; you are refusing to make public the list of lands that are owned by your realty corporation. You're hiding them; you're blocking them. And then, I'll give you two pieces of land you sold. In fact, on one piece you went to the OMB with a developer-that's on the Bloomington Sideroad in Aurora-then there was the Landcrest development. Both are on the moraine. You went to the OMB, pushed for the land to be sold and rezoned into housing.
Why won't you make the list public? The commissioner is asking for the list; we're asking for the list. And we're asking you for one thing: to have a moratorium on the sale of all lands on the Rouge, in the parkway belt and now on the Oak Ridges moraine. Will you agree to at least a moratorium if you won't release the list?
Hon Mr Hodgson: I know the opposition want to make a great big deal of this. This is administrative work, which I agree should be there. As I mentioned, the deputy minister wrote a letter responding to the Environmental Commissioner's concerns, which I will-
Interjection.
The Speaker: Will the member take his seat. The member for Eglinton-Lawrence, come to order. You asked the question. You can't continue to shout across.
Hon Mr Hodgson: I know the member of the opposition is excited on this issue. I will share with him the letter from the deputy minister on July 14, where she went on to point out that the ORC did transfer one environmentally significant parkway belt parcel, but it was transferred directly to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Surely you wouldn't agree with that. The environmental reports of the ORC activities are currently before the board of directors for review, and I expect to receive them shortly. When these reports are provided by the board, we'll be able to release them.
ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION
Mr John O'Toole (Durham): Today my question is to the Minister of the Environment. Minister, a Liberal news release yesterday suggested-
Interjection.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): This is the last warning to the member for Eglinton-Lawrence.
Mr O'Toole: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for helping me there. Yesterday a Liberal news release suggested, "There has not been a single fine levied in two years since the much-touted 1998 amendment the Harris government made to the environment legislation which allowed the government to levy fines against companies who fail to meet mandatory reporting and record-keeping requirements." That's quite a long-actually, it's not a properly structured sentence. Anyway, Minister, would you tell the House today and my constituents in Durham riding what your ministry is doing to ensure that fines are indeed levied.
Hon Dan Newman (Minister of the Environment): The Liberal news release is chock full of misinformation and it's rather light on the facts. One fact they didn't provide was the name of the legislation they make reference to, hence I'll assume they're referring to Bill 82. On February 1, 1999, Bill 82 became law, and it gave the power to give administrative monetary penalties in this province. At the time, it added new powers to the compliance framework, and these powers were exercised to levy fines. In some examples, fines are increasing. In fact, in 1999 a fine was issued to Shell Canada Products Ltd for $150,000, and the fines levied in 1999 totalled $1.5 million. In the year 2000, for the first six months of the year, we've already seen fines totalling more than $1.8 million. These fines go a long way toward getting tough on polluters, and we recognize there's still more to do.
Mr O'Toole: Clearly that quote was somewhat misleading, so I want the minister to-
The Speaker: I'll ask the member to withdraw the word "misleading," please, if you would.
Mr O'Toole: Perhaps it was just false.
The Speaker: Either withdraw it or you're going to be thrown out. Withdraw it when I ask you to withdraw it. We're not kidding around with things like this.
Mr O'Toole: I withdraw, Mr Speaker.
Minister, with the clarity and directness of your response, it was certainly satisfying to know that indeed enforcement and conviction are out there, as you've just stated for the record.
I've heard you talk before about your commitment to ensuring cleaner communities, and certainly this is very important to my riding in Durham, as it is to all members. Minister, could you tell the House today what further actions you're taking to protect the clean air, clean water and clean soil not just in Durham but all over the province of Ontario?
Hon Mr Newman: I thank the hard-working member from Durham for the supplementary question. Prior to the election in May 1999, this government released our Blueprint, which called for higher limits on penalties, including administrative monetary penalties. In keeping with our Blueprint commitment, in Bill 124 we've proposed to increase the limit for administrative monetary penalty from $5,000 to $10,000 per day. A draft regulation will be posted on the Environmental Bill of Rights registry that will clarify the scope of contraventions and to whom they will apply. In fact, in 1999, charges laid were up 51% over 1998. There has been a 200% increase in orders issued from 1996 to 1999. In 1998, there were 805 charges laid and 413 convictions. In 1999, there were 1,216 charges laid and 611 charges with convictions. That's a 25% increase in the numbers over a one-year period. No one in this House today-
The Speaker: Order. The minister's time is up.
1500
AIR AMBULANCE SERVICE
Ms Frances Lankin (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Minister of Health. Minister, why are you allowing new, private air ambulance operators to operate without flight paramedic staff? Last month you issued a request for proposals, an RFP, to privatize the critical-care component of Ontario's air ambulance service. In that RFP, there is a clause, 7(2). It's entitled "Reduced Flight Paramedic Staffing." It allows air operators to request, where necessary for operational reasons, to operate the aircraft with (a) only one flight paramedic or (b) zero flight paramedics.
Where operational necessity requires? That's where it's convenient. This means patients are going to be on their own if the private provider decides it's not profitable enough to send a paramedic along. It's do-it-yourself medicine, and it could be fatal. My question is simple: why are you putting patients' lives at risk?
Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): As the member knows, there is currently an RFP that has been issued requesting proposals. At this point in time, I have no further information on the status of that RFP.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Supplementary.
Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): Minister, the question was, why are you putting patients' lives at risk? This is your request for proposals. You are proposing do-it-yourself medicine, which is not acceptable and completely irresponsible. May I remind you that the air ambulance service we are talking about transports patients with life-threatening injuries. They are victims of motor accidents, of snowmobile and car accidents. They need advanced medical care, and they should be getting that advanced medical care from highly skilled advanced-care paramedics working in the public sector. Your RFP makes it clear that you're ready to leave patients in the back of an air ambulance with no medical attention whatsoever. Minister, will you cancel this ridiculous privatization scheme so that patients will get the critical care they need?
Hon Mrs Witmer: The member probably knows that already 75% of the paramedic staff for air ambulance services is currently provided by the private sector. The RFP will require bidders to submit two proposals: one for the provision of pilots, aircraft and maintenance only; another for pilots, aircraft and maintenance plus the ministry administrative and critical-care-transport paramedic staff. At this point, no decisions have been made.
LABOUR DISPUTE
Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): My question is to the Minister of Health. Minister, in Hamilton currently there are 200 community care case workers, managers, who are in the fourth week of a strike. Many of them are here today in the members' gallery, and they're here today because they're looking for answers from you to the crisis you have created in Hamilton-Wentworth.
Workers for CCACs earn 14% less than in neighbouring communities such as Niagara. Their benefits have remained at roughly the same level since 1990. They have heavier caseloads. Since March 1998, the difference between the increased funding and the increased caseload has been 25%-25% more cases than the funding you have given them. The crisis we face today-the backlogs in emergency departments, the backlogs in discharge and the fact that these women are on strike-is a result of your underfunding of home care in Hamilton and across this province. We're in a crisis situation. Things are getting serious. Patients are being hurt. Care is not being delivered. You are responsible for that. Can you commit in the House today to the proper funding necessary for these women to go back to work and do the work they're doing, looking after patients in Hamilton?
Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I would just preface my remarks by saying that as a result of our government's unprecedented investments into community care, Ontario today has the most generous home care program in all of Canada. In fact, we have increased our funding by 63% since 1995. I would just remind the member that home care spending in our province is at $128 per capita, and in Manitoba, which spends the next highest per capita, it is $97. I would also remind the member that six of 10 provinces charge co-payments for personal care and homemaking services; we don't charge a fee. But we have increased funding, as I say, by 63%-
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. I'm afraid the minister's time is up.
Mr Agostino: Clearly the stock answer that you found in your briefing notes has absolutely nothing to do with the question that I asked you about these women and the fact that they're out on strike-in order to help their patients-for better wages, for better benefits, for smaller caseloads so that they can look after patients.
Minister, right now the CCACs in Hamilton overall deal with 10,000 patients per day. In order to meet your wacky underfunding, to meet the funding targets you have given them, they would have to cut out 1,000 home visits per day. That is unreasonable; they're not doing it. These women are on the picket line because of what you have done with home care across this province. Right now the system is bending; it is ready to break. Patient discharging is not occurring at the same rate; backlogs are occurring in emergency departments; and the working conditions and the wages of these women do not even match the areas around Hamilton.
Clearly, it is your responsibility. You control the funding, you control the strings here. Again, I ask you, will you commit today to the proper funding so we can get a proper settlement, so these women can go back to work and look after their patients as they want to?
Interruption.
The Speaker: Clear the gallery. We will have a five-minute recess while the gallery is cleared. I'm afraid the members will have to leave. We're going to clear the gallery.
The House recessed from 1507 to 1508.
Interjections.
The Speaker: The member for Hamilton East, come to order.
Obviously we've had a bit of a disruption here, but hopefully all members will give the Minister of Health their attention.
Hon Mrs Witmer: The member opposite made reference to underfunding, and I am perplexed totally as to why, for five years, when the federal government continued to take money away from the provinces and the territories, this party sat there and didn't fight for any more money for the people of Ontario.
SCHOOL EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES
Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough): My question is to the Minister of Education. Last week I spoke with-
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The Member for Peterborough take his seat. Member for Kingston and the Islands, come to order, please. Member for Peterborough, sorry.
Mr Stewart: Minister, last week I spoke with some very unhappy and frustrated students in my riding. These students were members of the Adam Scott girls' field hockey team. These and other students from area high schools set up their own field hockey league with support from their parents. They set up a proper schedule and held their own tournament with qualified officials. In fact, the students I met with won the tournament. They did this without the help of teacher volunteers.
I was disappointed to hear that they may not be able to compete in the provincial high school championships, OFFSA, because there is no teacher supervision at their own tournament. Let me say these students are upset and disappointed. They have reason to be upset. They are young athletes who practise hard and deserve the chance to compete. Minister, what can I tell these students? What are you doing to ensure that these students, all students, can participate in sports or drama or clubs or any other activity?
Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education): Thank you to the member for Peterborough, who has been meeting regularly with the students in his riding.
The Adam Scott secondary school students are to be commended for the work that they and their parents and the other volunteers have done and they're certainly to be congratulated for the success they have had. As you know, there are many schools where extracurricular activities are continuing to be provided, but we know that in some communities, unfortunately, teachers have chosen to work to rule and this is denying those students opportunities. Those students are quite rightly frustrated and upset about that. I've been encouraging them to meet with their student trustees. I've been meeting with student representatives and will continue to do that to seek their advice on the alternatives we will be moving forward with.
Mr Stewart: Thank you, Minister, for your answer. It is most unfortunate that these types of obstacles and roadblocks are put up in front of students and parents in this province. I'm disgusted with the situation. I agree that it's important for students to discuss these issues with their student trustees. Obviously, students have very strong feelings when it comes to these activities. Minister, do you have a plan to resolve this situation?
Hon Mrs Ecker: Yes, we are considering the options available to us. I wrote last week to the heads of the trustee associations. I'll be meeting with all our education partners to seek further advice from them, as I have on every initiative we have done, and I will be receiving that advice as to how best to proceed and which of the options we have available to us will be best to make sure alternative solutions are there for those students so they can get the extracurricular activities they deserve.
EDUCATION FUNDING
Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): My question is to the Minister of Education. We're clearly in a state of crisis in education in our province on a number of vital fronts, but one area that has not received enough attention has been the shocking lack of capital funding support that you're providing, particularly to our northern and our remote boards.
Last January I wrote to you urging your government to act immediately to assist the Superior North Catholic District School Board deal with its critical capital needs. Specifically, I wrote you about St Edward school in Nipigon, which is over 50 years old and in desperate need of replacement, and St Martin/Franco-Terrace school in Terrace Bay.
While parents at St Edward have told me that the building is unsafe for their children, the board is helpless to do anything about it because of your inflexible and totally inadequate funding formula. The roof repairs alone at St Edward would eat up the paltry allocation your ministry has provided to the board this year, an allocation, I might add, that must cover the capital needs for all the schools in the board's jurisdiction.
Minister, I asked you in January; I'll ask you again: when will your government provide the needed resources to the Superior North board so that the children in Nipigon and Terrace Bay can get the healthy and safe school facilities they deserve?
Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education): Thank you to the honourable member for the question. As he well knows, we fund school boards in a process for capital that allows them to plan ahead, that allows them to set priorities for those schools that may require additional work. They can depend on that funding. It's much better than the way it was when they didn't know, when they had to apply year by year. Would they get it? Would they not get it? That funding is now available to them based on their long-range plans, based on their priorities. They have flexibility to allocate those resources.
We topped up to give them additional flexibility last year. We are looking at whether we need to take additional steps this year to assist boards in meeting those priorities for capital. We've asked them to submit their plans. Your board should be in the process of doing that. If they have any misunderstanding about what that process is, I'd be very pleased to make sure that staff could acquaint them with that because we want to continue every year to meet the priorities as boards are setting them.
Mr Gravelle: Minister, I think it's important to say that your answer will not please anybody, nor will it give anybody any sense of satisfaction that something will happen in the future. The fact is that this capital funding shortfall is an enormous problem for all northern boards, including the Superior-Greenstone board, as well as Thunder Bay's Catholic and public boards. Obviously your capital funding formula cannot simply be based on student population; you've got to factor in the actual infrastructure needs and you need to be able to relate to that.
The reality with St Edward's school in Nipigon is particularly grim. Parents have been told that at times the school does not meet the minimal safety standards or building code. There is water spurting through the basement concrete during the spring, bulging tiles on the ceilings and stale or musty air that the children must breathe. Clearly this is a major problem.
The frustrated parents who have written me are powerless to do anything about it, and the school board officials are working literally in a straitjacket. We need more than minor Band-Aids; we need new and realistic capital funding from the province or the infrastructure needs of our schools will never be met.
Will you at least acknowledge today that your capital funding formula isn't working for boards in northern Ontario, let alone the rest of the province, and will you commit to fix the problems so that our students can be taught in a safe and healthy environment? Surely that's the least we can expect.
Hon Mrs Ecker: As the honourable member would know, if his school board has told him the accurate facts, we indeed are doing work with school boards to improve how we support capital needs. We have actually had staff on site at many schools.
But the problems that the honourable member is describing about that school, from his description, sound like something that should have been fixed. If there are health and safety needs, they didn't happen overnight. I would like to ask what the officials in that school board were doing while these problems have been developing in that school over the last several years. They didn't happen overnight.
We are continuing to meet with school boards and working out additional funding arrangements for those boards that require it, depending on their long-range plan, but it's up to those boards to set those priorities, to do those plans, and to manage it in a way that allows them to make appropriate decisions to protect the safety of their children. That is their responsibility; they should indeed be doing that.
CHILD-FRIENDLY COURTS
Mr Doug Galt (Northumberland): My question is directed to the Attorney General. Our government has been doing its part for Ontario children. We have actually set a real track record of helping children get a healthy start in life, for example, the Healthy Babies, Healthy Children program, a province-wide screening program for newborn babies and follow-up support for children.
We've also had Canada's first provincial sex offender registry, protecting some of Ontario's most vulnerable youth. Also, we've increased funding for child care, and it's now up to some $700 million a year.
But when a child has been victimized or placed in a situation where they must act as a witness, testifying in court can be a very scary and intimidating experience. Minister, have you taken any action to improve our courts to help Ontario's children when they're required as a witness?
Hon Jim Flaherty (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): I thank the member for Northumberland for the question. It is regrettably so that from time to time children are necessarily involved in the court process, both as witnesses and as victims. The step we have taken is the expansion of child-friendly courts around Ontario. These courts are designed to deal with cases involving child and domestic abuse in which a child is a witness or a victim. They create a less intimidating atmosphere, a less intimidating environment, where children can feel safe when they testify.
Since 1997, we've been working to create 15 new child-friendly courts in Ontario, including courts in Toronto, Thunder Bay, North Bay, Ottawa, Newmarket, Simcoe, two in the new courthouse in Hamilton, Welland, two in the new courthouse in Brampton, London and in the new courthouse in Windsor.
Mr Galt: It's certainly a very impressive list of locations for child-friendly courts. However, you seem to have missed out having one in Northumberland.
I can imagine how terrifying and intimidating it must be for a child to participate in a courtroom session. I'm sure many agree that testifying in a courtroom can be a very intimidating experience at any age. Therefore, I applaud your efforts to increase the number of child-friendly courts across Ontario.
Would you please expand on how these courts actually work and what specific measures have been taken to actually make courtrooms child-friendly. Also, Minister, when can I expect to see a child-friendly court in Northumberland?
1520
Hon Mr Flaherty: I thank the member for Northumberland. Not only is there not a child-friendly court yet in Northumberland; I see there's not one yet in Durham region. So there are a couple of matters we need to look into in terms of expansion of child-friendly courts.
The courtrooms are smaller and less intimidating. Most of these facilities offer, very importantly, support staff to children to help prepare them and to provide some comfort both before and during the trial. A screen is available in front of the witness stand that can shield the child from the view of the accused.
My colleague the minister responsible for children and I had an opportunity to visit the child-friendly court in the old city hall in Toronto earlier this year. It is heartwarming to see the support of the staff for the children who are necessarily, regrettably, involved in some of these court cases. One other innovation is special closed-circuit television to let children testify in a room separate from the accused person.
ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION
Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): My question is for the Premier, who just walked out of the House. I'm wondering if he's coming back.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Stop the clock. The Premier is close at hand.
The member may proceed.
Mr Martin: Premier, why is your government so insistent on adding insult to injury where the disabled are concerned in this province? Your minister put out a press release just the other day saying that you have no business introducing an Ontarians with Disabilities Act. As a matter of fact, she went further, to suggest that maybe a Web site with practical information in it might be the way to go. Is it your intention, if you get enough in this province printing off material from your Web site, that you would have enough paper to then build ramps for the disabled so they can access facilities in this province? Is that your plan?
Hon Michael D. Harris (Premier): No.
Mr Martin: Then what is your plan? The press release was obviously a cynical ploy. You refuse to meet with the Ontarians with Disabilities Act Committee, who are a cross-section of the disabled in this province. However, when your minister meets with somebody from the business community who suggests that we go with voluntary compliance, she comes out with her press release saying that perhaps that's the way we should go. If voluntary compliance is the answer, why do thousands and thousands of disabled Ontarians face barriers to workplaces, to movie theatres, to public telephones and other public and private services in this province?
Hon Mr Harris: I'm sorry if you thought anybody was doing anything cynical-I think those were the words in your question, and it's a silly suggestion. Unfortunately, I see a number of your members smirking. I don't know why you don't take this matter a lot more seriously. Maybe it's because you had five years when you were in government and you did absolutely nothing to bring in an act for Ontarians with disabilities. You ignored them completely. I'm very proud of the fact that our minister is consulting in a major way to bring forward a meaningful Ontarians with Disabilities Act, something your government failed to do.
NURSING SALARIES
Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): My question is for the Minister of Health. Minister, you will be aware that full-time registered nurses in Ontario at the entry level are being paid $20.50 an hour. A senior nurse, after eight years of service, would be making a top rate of $30.24 an hour. Are you aware that hospitals in this province, because they are not able to offer nurses full-time positions because of the uncertainty of their funding, are in many situations hiring nurses from private agencies? They are hiring nurses from private agencies at rates as $47.80 per hour, which Humber River is paying to SRT. St Joe's in Toronto is hiring from SRT for $59 an hour. Providence is hiring from SRT and Care Corp for $35 an hour. North York General is hiring private agency nurses at $40 an hour. Minister, how is it possible that cash-strapped hospitals in the province of Ontario are being forced to hire nurses from private agencies at rates that are almost double what our most senior experienced nurses in this province are receiving?
Hon Elizabeth Witmer (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): As the member knows full well, our government has provided very generous funding to the hospitals in Ontario. We have encouraged the hospitals to use the resources in order to ensure that they hire permanent full-time and part-time staff.
WORKPLACE FATALITIES
Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of Labour): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I seek unanimous consent to make a short statement. I think I've got agreement from both parties.
The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? Agreed.
Hon Mr Stockwell: I'm sorry to inform the House that today two teenagers who went to work at the John Deere plant in Welland on Take Our Kids to Work Day were killed in the plant doing work around the plant. I think everyone should know that we offer the families our unconditional sorrow. It's a difficult situation, and we would ask for a moment of silence once this is done.
The Speaker: I think there was agreement to have some quick statements as well. The member for Hamilton East.
Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): On behalf of the Liberal caucus, I join the minister in offering condolences to the families. This is not a moment for political statements; this is a moment for sorrow, when any tragedy occurs in the workplace. However, when it occurs particularly to young people, the tragedy is even more profound for all of us. So today, on behalf of our caucus, I certainly want to add our condolences to the families and the friends who are affected by this loss, not only for the families but really for all of us, when two lives are so tragically taken away from us.
Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): Needless to say, I was shocked and in an incredible state of disbelief and despair since I learned of this earlier today. I appreciate the Minister of Labour sharing with me the information he only just recently obtained.
I tell you, Welland, the community, is in a state of disbelief and incredible shock and sorrow. I speak, I have no doubt, for every member of that community and throughout the Niagara region in not only expressing our incredible sympathy for the families of these two youngsters, but in attempting to, with our genuine sorrow and with our prayers, provide whatever modest support we can for the families of these youngsters.
I know the workers at that John Deere plant. I know them; I know their families. They are just incredibly decent, hard-working, committed people. They work in the Girl Guide and the Boy Scout movements, they coach the hockey teams and they work hard in their workplace. So you can only begin to imagine the incredible grief that has permeated that workplace, that is shouldered by all of the workers there and that is shared by people in the Welland community and beyond.
I join in this expression of sorrow and sympathy. I also plead with folks in my community to please let the facts be ascertained in a disciplined manner. Obviously crises, tragedies like this, initiate and prompt rumours which travel through small towns at an incredibly rapid pace, and sometimes those rumours result in a misstatement of the facts which can cause harm to people in a way that people shouldn't have to suffer.
I call upon my community of members to please attempt to quash rumour but to understand that right now there's a whole lot of people experiencing incredible pain and incredible sorrow that we can only try to share and help shoulder, that none of us can ever probably even come close to understanding in terms of the visceral blow to the belly that that constitutes for people who suffer this kind of loss.
The Speaker: I would ask all members to stand, and also if our friends in the gallery could stand and join us in a moment of silence.
The House observed a moment's silence.
The Speaker: It is now time for petitions.
Mr Mike Colle (Eglinton-Lawrence): On a point of order, Speaker: Under standing order 37, I'm giving notice that I am dissatisfied with the answer given to one of my questions by the minister responsible for the Management Board Secretariat.
The Speaker: If you could file the appropriate papers with the table.
1530
PETITIONS
NORTHERN HEALTH TRAVEL GRANT
Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This petition is to the Ontario Legislature and it concerns the northerners demanding that the Harris government eliminate health care apartheid.
"Whereas the northern health travel grant offers a reimbursement of partial travel costs at a rate of 30.4 cents per kilometre one way for northerners forced to travel for cancer care while travel policy for southerners who travel for cancer care features full reimbursement costs for travel, meals and accommodation;
"Whereas a cancer tumour knows no health travel policy or geographic location;
"Whereas a recently released Oracle research poll confirms that 92% of Ontarians support equal health travel funding;
"Whereas northern Ontario residents pay the same amount of taxes and are entitled to the same access to health care and all government services and inherent civil rights as residents living elsewhere in the province; and
"Whereas we support the efforts of OSECC (Ontarians Seeking Equal Cancer Care), founded by Gerry Lougheed Jr, former chair of Cancer Care Ontario, Northeast Region, to correct this injustice against northerners travelling for cancer treatment;
"Therefore, be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to fund full travel expenses for northern Ontario cancer patients and eliminate the health care apartheid which exists presently in the province of Ontario."
I affix my signature to this petition as I am in complete agreement with the 1,000 people who have signed this.
Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): My petition is similar to the previous one, to the Ontario Legislature from northerners demanding that the Harris government eliminate health care apartheid.
"Whereas the northern health travel grant offers a reimbursement of partial travel costs at a rate of 30.4 cents per kilometre one way for northerners forced to travel for cancer care while travel policy for southerners who travel for cancer care features full reimbursement costs for travel, meals and accommodation;
"Whereas a cancer tumour knows no health travel policy or geographic location;
"Whereas a recently released Oracle research poll confirms that 92% of Ontarians support equal health travel funding;
"Whereas northern Ontario residents pay the same amount of taxes and are entitled to the same access to health care and all government services and inherent civil rights as residents living elsewhere in the province; and
"Whereas we support the efforts of the newly formed OSECC (Ontarians Seeking Equal Cancer Care), founded by Gerry Lougheed Jr, former chair of Cancer Care Ontario, Northeast Region, to correct this injustice against northerners travelling for cancer treatment;
"Therefore, be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to fund full travel expenses for northern Ontario cancer patients and eliminate the health care apartheid which exists presently in the province of Ontario."
This is signed by about 300 people from northern Ontario. I will add my signature to it and send it down to the Clerk with Natasha.
REGISTRATION OF VINTAGE CARS
Mr John O'Toole (Durham): Just as a preamble, it's a pleasure to see the member from Peterborough in the chair. I think it suits him very well. In the future, I hope you're here to serve in that position.
"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
"Whereas there are many Ontarians who have a passion for perfection in the restoration of vintage vehicles; and
"Whereas unlike many other jurisdictions, Ontario vintage automobile enthusiasts are unable to register their vehicles using the original year of manufacture licence plates; and
"Whereas Durham MPP John R. O'Toole and former MPP John Parker have worked together" tirelessly "to recognize the desire of vintage car collectors to register their vehicles using vintage plates; and
"Whereas the Honourable David Turnbull as Minister of Transportation has the power to change the existing regulation;
"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows: to pass Bill 99 or to amend the Highway Traffic Act to be used on vintage automobiles."
I'm pleased to sign, endorse and hope this is passed.
EDUCATION REFORM
Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition addressed to the Parliament of Ontario, which reads as follows:
"We believe that the heart of education in our province is the relationship between student and teacher and that this human and relational dimension should be maintained and extended in any proposed reform. The Minister of Education and Training should know how strongly we oppose many of the secondary school reform recommendations being proposed by the ministry and by this government.
"We recognize and support the need to review secondary education in Ontario. The proposal for reform as put forward by the ministry, however, is substantially flawed in several key areas: (a) reduced instructional time, (b) reduction of instruction in English, (c) a reduction of qualified teaching personnel, (d) academic work experience credit not linked to educational curriculum, and (e) devaluation of formal education.
"We strongly urge your ministry to delay the implementation of secondary school reform so that all interested stakeholders-parents, students, school councils, trustees and teachers-are able to participate in a more meaningful consultation process which will help ensure that a high quality of publicly funded education is provided," and we oppose any school closing in the city of Toronto.
Since I agree with the sentiments of this petition, I'm signing my name to it.
NORTHERN HEALTH TRAVEL GRANT
Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): I have a petition.
"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
"Whereas the northern health travel grant was introduced in 1987 in recognition of the fact that northern Ontario residents are often forced to receive treatment outside their own communities because of the lack of available services; and
"Whereas the Ontario government acknowledged that the costs associated with that travel should not be fully borne by those residents and, therefore, that financial support should be provided by the Ontario government through the travel grant program; and
"Whereas travel, accommodation and other costs have escalated sharply since the program was first put in place, particularly in the area of air travel; and
"Whereas the Ontario government has provided funds so that southern Ontario patients needing care at the Northwestern Ontario Cancer Centre have all their expenses paid while receiving treatment in the north which creates a double standard for health care delivery in the province; and
"Whereas northern Ontario residents should not receive a different level of health care nor be discriminated against because of their geographical locations;
"Therefore we, the undersigned citizens of Ontario, petition the Ontario Legislature to acknowledge the unfairness and inadequacy of the northern health travel grant program and commit to a review of the program with a goal of providing 100% funding of the travel costs for residents needing care outside their communities until such time as that care is available in our communities."
This has been signed by many more residents who continue to be concerned about the inequity in the funding program. I affix my signature in full support.
REGISTRATION OF VINTAGE CARS
Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): I've got a petition.
"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
"Whereas there are many Ontarians who have a passion for perfection in the restoration of vintage vehicles; and
"Whereas unlike many other jurisdictions, Ontario vintage automobile enthusiasts are unable to register their vehicles using the original year of manufacture licence plates; and
"Whereas Durham MPP John R. O'Toole"-a very hard-working member; you might have heard that name before-"and former MPP John Parker have worked together to recognize the desire of vintage car collectors to register their vehicles using vintage plates; and
"Whereas the Honourable David Turnbull as Minister of Transportation has the power to change the existing regulation;
"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows: to pass Bill 99 or to amend the Highway Traffic Act to be used on vintage automobiles."
Surprisingly, Mr Speaker, it seems to have my name as the first signature, and many other members have signed it.
ONTARIANS WITH DISABILITIES LEGISLATION
Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): "To the Legislature of Ontario:
"Whereas Mike Harris promised an Ontarians with Disabilities Act during the 1995 election and renewed that commitment in 1997 but has yet to make good on that promise; and
"Whereas the Harris government has not committed to holding open consultations with the various stakeholders and individuals on the ODA; and
"Whereas the minister responsible for persons with disabilities will not commit to the 11 principles outlined by the ODA committee;
"Whereas the vast majority of Ontario citizens believe there should be an Ontarians with Disabilities Act to remove the barriers facing 1.5 million persons with disabilities;
"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of Ontario as follows:
"To pass a strong and effective Ontarians with Disabilities Act that would remove the barriers facing 1.5 million persons with disabilities in this province."
This is signed by over 100 residents of the city of St Thomas. I have affixed my signature in support.
1540
NORTHERN HEALTH TRAVEL GRANT
Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly.
"Northerners demand Harris government eliminate health care apartheid;
"Whereas the northern health travel grant offers a reimbursement of partial travel costs at a rate of 30.4 cents per kilometre one way for northerners forced to travel for cancer care while travel policy for southerners who travel for cancer care features full reimbursement costs for travel, meals and accommodation;
"Whereas a cancer tumour knows no health travel policy or geographic location;
"Whereas a recently released Oracle research poll confirms that 92% of Ontarians support equal health travel funding;
"Whereas northern Ontario residents pay the same amount of taxes and are entitled to the same access to health care and all government services and inherent civil rights as residents living elsewhere in the province;
"Whereas we support the efforts of the newly formed Ontarians Seeking Equal Cancer Care, founded by Gerry Lougheed Jr, former chair of Cancer Care Ontario, Northeast Region, to correct this injustice against northerners travelling for cancer treatment;
"Therefore, be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to fund full travel expenses for northern Ontario cancer patients and eliminate the health care apartheid that exists presently in the province of Ontario."
I will be happy to sign my name to this petition.
PHOTO RADAR
Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
"Whereas Mike Harris made the decision in 1995 to cancel the Ontario government's photo radar project before it could properly be completed; and
"Whereas two Ontario coroners' juries in the last year, including the jury investigating traffic fatalities on Highway 401 between Windsor and London in September 1999, have called for the reintroduction of photo radar on that stretch of `Carnage Alley'; and
"Whereas studies show that the use of photo radar in many jurisdictions, including British Columbia, Alberta, Australia and many European countries and several American states, does have a marked impact in preventing speeding and improving road and highway safety, from a 16% decrease in fatalities in British Columbia, to a 49% decrease in fatalities in Victoria, Australia; and
"Whereas photo radar is supported by the RCMP, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, several police departments, including many Ontario Provincial Police constables, the Canadian Automobile Association, the Ontario Trucking Association, and many road safety groups;
"Therefore we, the undersigned citizens of Ontario, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand that the Ministry of Transportation reinstate photo radar on dangerous stretches of provincial and municipal highways and streets as identified by police. The top priority should be `Carnage Alley,' the section of 401 between Windsor and London, and all revenues from photo radar be directed towards putting more police on our roads and highways to combat aggressive driving."
NORTHERN HEALTH TRAVEL GRANT
Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): I have a petition to the Ontario Legislature.
"Whereas the northern health travel grant offers the reimbursement of partial travel costs at a rate of 30.4 cents per kilometre one way for northerners forced to travel for cancer care while travel policy for southerners who travel for cancer care features full reimbursement costs for travel, meals and accommodation;
"Whereas a cancer tumour knows no health travel policy nor geographic location;
"Whereas a recently released Oracle research poll confirms that 92% of Ontarians support equal health travel funding;
"Whereas northern Ontario residents pay the same amount of taxes and are entitled to the same access to health care and all government services and inherent civil rights as residents living elsewhere in the province;
"Whereas we support the efforts of the newly formed OSECC, Ontarians Seeking Equal Cancer Care, founded by Gerry Lougheed Jr, former chair of Cancer Care Ontario, Northeast Region, to correct this injustice against northerners travelling for cancer treatment;
"Therefore, be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to fund full travel expenses for northern Ontario cancer patients and eliminate the health care apartheid which exists presently in the province of Ontario."
I sign my name to this in full agreement with the concerns expressed.
Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): I am pleased to read this petition in support of northerners demanding the Harris government eliminate health care apartheid.
"Whereas the northern health travel grant offers a reimbursement of partial travel costs at a rate of 30.4 cents per kilometre one way for northerners forced to travel for cancer care while travel policy for southerners who travel for cancer care features full reimbursement costs for travel, meals and accommodation;
"Whereas a cancer tumour knows no health travel policy or geographic location; and
"Whereas a recently released Oracle research poll confirms that 92% of Ontarians support equal health travel funding;
"Whereas northern Ontario residents pay the same amount of taxes and are entitled to the same access to health care and all government services and inherent civil rights as residents living elsewhere in the province;
"Whereas we support the efforts of the newly formed Ontarians Seeking Equal Cancer Care, founded by Gerry Lougheed Jr, former chair of Cancer Care Ontario, Northeast Region, to correct this injustice against northerners travelling for cancer treatment;
"Therefore, be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government move immediately to fund full travel expenses for northern Ontario cancer patients and eliminate the health care apartheid which exists presently in the province of Ontario."
I'm in full agreement and have affixed my signature hereto.
Orders of the Day reported in volume B.