ESTIMATES, MINISTRY OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS (CONCLUDED)

ESTIMATES, MINISTRY OF REVENUE

---

The House resumed at 8 p.m.

House in committee of supply.

ESTIMATES, MINISTRY OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS (CONCLUDED)

On vote 601, ministry administration program:

The Deputy Chairman: With one hour and 19 minutes remaining, the House remains in committee and we are in the process of reviewing the estimates of the Ministry of Intergovernmental Affairs. We are on vote 601, and the member for Prescott-Russell has the floor.

[Applause]

Mr. Boudria: I thank my colleague the member for Renfrew North (Mr. Conway) for all that enthusiasm.

Mr. Conway: You have to clap to get some heat in this joint.

Mr. Boudria: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Maybe this would be a good occasion to mention the fact that the temperature in this place has not been particularly warm. Some of us may have a thicker layer to keep our body heat, but then others do not have quite that privilege, if it can be called that.

Before the dinner hour we were just about to start the discussion on the services offered to Franco-Ontarians by this ministry or indirectly through it, since this ministry is responsible for Franco-Ontarian services.

There are a few issues I wish to discuss with the minister. One, of course, is translation services. We know that over the past year the translation service offered to members by the different ministries has been an issue. I believe that the Ministry of Government Services at one time was very far behind in its work, and that has since improved considerably. I think they must have obtained additional personnel. Whatever they did, it has improved considerably since then.

But there is one thing that happened about three or four months ago, and the minister perhaps was in the House when I raised it. Certain government agencies now are using the excuse of not being able to get a translation as a reason for a delay in corresponding with constituents.

The instance I brought to the attention of the House was the case of the Social Assistance Review Board, which had stated to one of my constituents that it took three and a half months to reply to him because of translation services. The Minister of Government Services (Mr. Wiseman) verified that a translation had been offered to the Social Assistance Review Board within five days; so obviously that was a case of this agency using that as an excuse for its delay.

I do hope it is not a trend in government to tell the francophones in this province, "Well, folks, if you want French services you can get them but they will be delayed by the translation service," because in this particular case it was totally erroneous.

I do not know whether I was misled deliberately or unintentionally, but I was given wrong information on that occasion by the Social Assistance Review Board and it was corrected in this House by the Minister of Government Services. I do hope that some directive is given to government agencies so they do not ever use that kind of an excuse again, especially when it is untrue.

The other issues involving francophone services and of concern to me are in the specific area of Ontario Provincial Police protection. I am glad that the Solicitor General (Mr. G. W. Taylor) is in the House at this point, because he represents an area that has a number of francophone residents and he is responsible for the OPP.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, I wrote an open letter to the Solicitor General asking him whether he would do something to improve services offered by the OPP to francophones in my region. The minister replied to me and indicated that so far as he was concerned, 37 out of 58 OPP officers in my constituency had some knowledge of the French language and that this was sufficient, so he did not intend to improve the service beyond that.

He also indicated in his letter to me that it was very difficult to hire francophones to serve as OPP officers. That I totally refuse to believe. If the city of Hawkesbury, small towns like Vanier and other areas can hire competent people to serve as police officers, then surely this government with all its resources and all its advertising can find a greater number of francophones to serve as OPP officers. To say we cannot find people who are willing to do that job, I do not think is particularly correct. As a matter of fact, I do not think it is particularly honest.

I am sure that if I were given a small budget to advertise, I could find a suitable quantity of them in not a very long time without even leaving the constituency of Prescott-Russell. I am sure that a good, well-sized ad in the newspaper Le Carillon would immediately bring a sufficient number of francophone replies from people who want to become OPP officers.

In the past there have been a number of government agencies that have progressed at a much slower pace than others in the area of delivery of services to francophones. I guess it would be fair to say that the Workmen's Compensation Board in particular has not been very fast in responding to the needs of the francophone community. On the other hand, there are other agencies that have been considerably faster. The Ministry of Tourism and Recreation, for instance, does a relatively good job in the area of responding to the francophone community.

There are regional offices in eastern Ontario -- and, I would assume, in northern Ontario, although I am not certain -- that have a large number of bilingual personnel. They can serve the needs of volunteer groups in my constituency and other areas in a very adequate way. They do a very good job. On the other hand, in the ministries such as the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, the work that has been done is not nearly as good. The signs on our highways still leave a lot to be desired.

8:10 p.m.

As I was saying, the workmen's compensation area certainly needs some improvement as far as delivery of services is concerned. Perhaps the minister can appreciate the kind of circumstance where a constituent receives a letter from the Workmen's Compensation Board or some other government agency telling him it has arrived at a decision in his case. The letter is sent to the constituent in English. He carefully puts it aside and, when he has a visitor who can read the letter, it will be read to him and he will be able to understand exactly what it says.

The letter contains information such as, "You have 21 days to appeal our decision." That is not very effective for those who learn that 28, 30 or 40 days later from a person who can translate. It is difficult to understand why such letters from the Workmen's Compensation Board are not printed on both sides. They are form letters anyway and in many cases do not contain information that has to be printed every time. It would be easy for certain government agencies to improve these services at little extra cost, and sometimes at no cost at all.

In the United States, I believe it is Senator Proxmire who has an award every year.

Mr. Wrye: The Golden Fleece.

Mr. Boudria: Is it the Golden Fleece? It is an award presented to the government department that does a particularly bad job. He gives his for wasting taxpayers' dollars. I wonder whether we should have a similar award in Ontario. I intend to discuss this with the Association canadienne-française de l'Ontario or other groups.

Perhaps we could have an appropriate trophy we could dispense every year and award to the government ministry that does a particularly bad job in so far as offering services to the francophone population is concerned as some form of recognition of a deficiency. It would be hoped that some ministries that lag a little behind the others would try to catch up to ensure they are not the recipients of this award.

I have thought of what this award could look like. As a francophone, I can certainly say that maybe it should be shaped like a great big frog about so long. We could award it once a year to the government ministry that does a bad job in offering services. Perhaps that would keep the few of them that are doing a bad job in line with the others.

In view of the report on wife battering which will be coming out later, I think this year the award should go to the Solicitor General for the lack of OPP protection in that area and his letter stating that he does not intend to fix the problem.

Another area I would like the minister to respond on is the governance of French-language schools. I recognize that is more properly the responsibility of the Minister of Education (Miss Stephenson), but nevertheless the minister must have had some input into that area.

The report that came out last year was presented to the Premier (Mr. Davis) on the second to last day or the last day of March. It was only brought into this Legislature in mid-May. For some reason it took six weeks to read a report that had only 30 or 40 pages.

Once it was tabled in the House, a letter was sent to all the school boards asking them to give their comments on it without even giving them a closing date by which the government wanted the comments returned. The letter was different in French and English. In English it said to reply as soon as possible and in French it did not say anything about that. It just said, "Would you please give us your comments on this report?"

At the beginning of September, we found ourselves in a situation where the Premier had to tell Mr. Jean François Aubé: "Sorry, guys. It's too late. We can't adopt this report in time for the fall election." Small wonder in view of the fact that nothing was done to accelerate it or push it along to ensure the government got the feedback quickly enough.

Perhaps the minister could respond to that as well as to the question that was raised about the enumeration of francophones. That has come under criticism, and I have spoken to you privately about this. I believe the phrasing of the question on the enumeration form made it a little difficult for people to answer. The question was something like, "Do you wish to have your name placed on the list of electors for French language schools?" Because there was no alternative, constituents found it difficult to respond.

If there had been two different blocks provided for the question "Do you wish your name placed on the list for English or French schools?" or something like that, people would have had to reply one way or the other, and the francophones, as a group, would not have been set apart, as they were by the way the question was asked on the enumeration form.

I recognize that enumeration is the responsibility of the minister's colleague the Minister of Revenue (Mr. Ashe), but I am sure this minister had some influence on it, since he is the minister responsible for francophone services.

I would welcome replies to those questions from the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

Mr. R. F. Johnston: M. le président, je veux poser quelques questions au ministre, M. Wells, mais en anglais si je peux, si possible. They concern French-language services. I would like to have some idea of interaction between this government, and this minister in particular, and the government of Quebec.

In the past few weeks we have heard, in eulogies, of the special liaison that existed between Quebec and this province under the leadership of Premier John Robarts. But we are all very much aware of the divisions that have occurred in the past number of years and of the lack of communication between Ontario and Quebec at a time when the unity of our country was under heavy pressure. That was undoubtedly a most difficult time for a Conservative government in Ontario to relate to a government of Quebec whose philosophy was very much at odds with the philosophy of this government, especially in the matter of Canadian unity but also in other philosophical matters.

It is a shame that we have apparently let this bond and this co-operation which existed erode. I know this would terrify people in western Canada, but the central Canada axis seems to have fallen apart.

This is probably the most propitious time in our history for a government in Ontario to try to restore some of those bonds, and for many reasons. One is that, very slowly and quietly, this government has made some not inconsiderable steps towards the recognition of the French language in Ontario -- very quietly, unfortunately, has been the way these improvements have been brought about.

We still see them coming about, whether it is a matter of the language to be used in the courts; whether it is a bill -- which we will be debating shortly -- allowing municipalities to use either of the two official languages of Canada in their operations; whether it concerns providing psychiatric care to people in northeastern Ontario in the language of their choice; or whether it is providing advisory committees to various ministers to sensitize them to the needs of proper communication with the French-speaking community in Ontario.

It has all been done very quietly. It has all been done with a great fear of the notion of official bilingualism and a great fear of the notion of any kind of tacit acceptance of section 133 of the British North America Act and the sections now incorporated for Quebec, Manitoba and New Brunswick in the new Constitution but not for Ontario, that there should be any official recognition in our operations of the fundamental rights of the other founding nation of this country in Ontario.

8:20 p.m.

Mr. Kerr: Are they living up to it in Quebec?

Mr. R. F. Johnston: I think they have lived up to it in the past much better than we have. But in many ways I suggest they are not. That is unfortunate. I am not sure how much of that could have been overcome if we had maintained the kinds of connections we had, and how much would have been lost anyhow in terms of philosophy.

For a number of reasons the Quebec government is under some very interesting pressures at the moment and may be more open to the kinds of conversation with this government that could develop more co-operation on a whole range of matters.

It is going to require some movement by this government. It is going to require more public kinds of statements about bilingualism and about the rights of Franco-Ontarians in this province than just the piecemeal, but very much accumulative, increase of the rights or privileges of Franco-Ontarians.

I would like the minister to address us in his wrapup comments, if he can, or at some other point if it seems appropriate -- because I believe this is of such fundamental importance to the whole notion of the workings of this Confederation -- on just what he is intending to do in terms of action with the government of Quebec in trying to develop a greater interaction with that government, both in terms of French-language services and cultural exchanges and intergovernmental action but, more important, in terms of the whole notion that we should be talking much more than we are.

I would like to know, for instance, when was the last time the minister spoke to his counterpart in Quebec? How often does he do that? What can we do to expand the numbers of levels upon which we maintain contact with Quebec?

I am reminded of the Constitution committee here in the Legislature and our travels across the country and our brief period in Quebec, and thinking, "My goodness, this is the first time in many years that a parliamentary committee of the Legislature of Ontario has actually travelled to Quebec -- people representing all the parties, people who are coming here essentially to discuss with their counterparts in Quebec our feelings about our Confederation, what their feelings are about the possibilities of association and the future of our country as they see it, and trying to develop some kind of interaction."

We had very limited success in terms of the ability to actually communicate effectively with those people, partly because of our philosophical differences but also in part because it had been so long since those kinds of communication had taken place. There was not a naturalness to the fact that we were there and wanting to communicate to our brother and sister legislators in Quebec.

I think we need to look outside ourselves as a province. It is obviously the role of this minister to guide us in these kinds of developments.

I ask the minister whether he has any thoughts at all about means of doing that in a way that is not just strictly government to government, governing party to governing party, but also as a means of members of this Legislature making contact with their counterparts in Quebec and trying to see what we can do to --

Mr. Stokes: Their divine right to govern.

Mr. R. F. Johnston: That is true. The member for Lake Nipigon reminds me that it is seen as your divine right to govern, but it is our established right as legislators and our duty to work, not only as provincial legislators in Ontario but also in terms of our roles as legislators within the Canadian fabric, within the Canadian Confederation.

I am not convinced, as I look at the opening statement of the minister and his varied comments about what we have accomplished at the moment, that we are actually doing enough in terms of our interaction, at the ministerial level and certainly not at a legislative level, between the two oldest partners in our Confederation.

I would hope that the minister might give us some of his ideas about what we can do to foster that kind of communication; and in particular what kinds of things he is planning to do in terms of the development of French-language services -- in a more open way, a more public way, perhaps even spending some of our advertising money on something like that for a change rather than on some of the other kinds of issues. We do not seem to spend that much in terms of publicizing our quite considerable efforts in that area. I would hope he might tell us just what he hopes to accomplish over the next number of months. I would appreciate very much hearing from him on that side of things.

Mr. Mancini: Mr. Chairman, I would --

Interjection.

Mr. Mancini: The member for Scarborough-Ellesmere (Mr. Robinson) is a real gentleman. He is just tops. Thank you.

I would like to say that I concur with some of the arguments I have heard this evening from some of the honourable members. They certainly have stressed how important it is for this government to have good relations with Quebec, and how important it is for the wellbeing not only of Ontario but of Canada as a whole.

I would have liked to have seen the same members stress the same points for all the other provinces in Canada. For some reason, I suppose historical, many of the provinces in Canada -- I should say all the provinces in Canada -- are envious of Ontario for the industrial base that we have, for the large population that we have and for the seeming wealth that we possess.

It is very important to me as a member of the Legislature to be able to communicate not only with the members of the Quebec National Assembly but also with the members of the legislatures across this country, because just solving the differences we have with Quebec is not necessarily going to solve all of the problems we face in Canada.

Many of us here in this assembly were not only surprised but shocked some 18 months ago when a separatist was elected in Alberta. That same separatist has now been defeated --

[Applause]

We should all applaud that, but we are not necessarily sure why the defeat took place; whether it was the opening of the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund to the taxpayers in Alberta, whether it was their rejection of separatism, or whether it was that the separatist who did get elected turned out to be a carpet-bagger willing to run in any riding to hold a seat in the assembly. I would have to conclude that he was turfed out of office because he was a carpetbagger, not because he was a separatist and not because the Conservative government opened up the heritage fund to the people of that province.

I see here in the government directory that our government is very concerned and active in overseas trading. We have an international relations department and under that department we have a senior policy adviser for the United States and the Pacific Rim. Economic and trade relations is the reason stated in the directory for that particular department.

8:30 p.m.

We have a European affairs, science and technology department; cultural and social policy relations; transborder relations. That is an interesting one, transborder relations. Maybe the minister will take a minute to explain transborder relations. Latin American affairs -- very interesting; and we have international offices in Brussels and Paris. The agent general for England is not listed. He is not under the minister's department?

Hon. Mr. Wells: No.

Mr. Mancini: No. I see. He is listed under a different ministry then. Anyway, I am quite interested in what these departments do.

Mr. McClellan: They have a lot of fun.

Mr. Mancini: Yes. My friend the member for Bellwoods says they have a lot of fun, and I am not against anybody having fun; as a matter of fact, I have fun myself on occasion.

Mr. Breaugh: It's 8:30. Curfew.

Mr. Mancini: Yes, it is getting late. You're right.

Anyway, was it Patrick Lavelle -- how does that gentleman pronounce his name? Patrick Lavelle, who is involved with the auto parts manufacturing groups here in Ontario and in Canada, gave a scathing report on bureaucrats who are posted overseas. He pointed his remarks in particular and, I think possibly entirely, to the bureaucrats who serve the federal government.

Mr. Kerr: Hear, hear.

Mr. Mancini: I would not applaud too soon.

He mentioned how they are able to protect themselves from inflation, from the problems of layoffs, from the problems that ordinary men and women face, and he said basically that there are secluded bureaucrats living high off the hog and having the taxpayers foot the whole bill.

It had crossed my mind why Mr. Lavelle aimed his criticism only at the federal bureaucrats. There could be two reasons for that. The most simple reason, of course, is that he is a Conservative and he certainly would not want to do anything to embarrass his good friend Tom Wells. Actually, Tom --

Interjections.

Mr. Mancini: I am just giving two reasons why he may have said these things. I am not saying --

Interjections.

The Deputy Chairman: Order. Call the honourable member by his constituency. This matter is becoming too personal.

Mr. Mancini: Sorry?

The Deputy Chairman: Refer to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs; avoid the first-name bit.

Mr. Mancini: Oh, I'm sorry, Tom: the honourable Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. He could be personal friends with the minister and that could be the reason he pointed his finger at the federal bureaucrats -- whom none of those guys would lay off -- and said, "You guys are taking the taxpayer for a ride."

I believe he must have done this for political reasons. Why, for example, did he not mention the international relations offices of this ministry? Why did he not mention the Brussels office or the Paris office? Either he is a Conservative or he did not need any of these people. That is the only conclusion I can come to, and the minister is going to have to help us out. He is going to have to clear this situation up for us. He is going to have to tell us exactly what it costs to keep these gentlemen and ladies in Brussels. What rent do they pay?

Mr. Breaugh: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman: I just want to point out, since the member seems to be questioning the expenses, that there is this little blue book that the critic has, and in the little blue book are all those numbers. He might be interested in taking a look at the briefing material that has been provided by the ministry, which in fact has the exact numbers to the exact questions he just asked.

The Deputy Chairman: That was an excellent point of order. I now come back to the member for Essex South, who has the floor. There are 46 minutes left.

Mr. Mancini: Could the minister arrange some type of committee to go to England so that the member for Oshawa could go for his third time?

I want to know from the minister -- and we are really going to need his help -- why Mr. Lavelle pointed his finger in only one direction. The only way we can figure this out is for the minister to inform us of the following: What rent do they pay for accommodation in Brussels? What rent do they pay for accommodation in Paris? How many personnel do they have in each office? What are the salary levels of these personnel? What perks are they offered? What tangible benefits have we received from having these offices in Brussels and Paris? Finally, I want to know why the office in Rome was closed down.

Hon. Mr. Wells: We never had one in Rome.

Mr. Mancini: Okay, it was in Milan.

Why, when there are 650,000 Italian-Canadians living in this province, did you close the office in Milan down? Are you saying there are no Italian businessmen in this province who can work with the office that was established in Milan to bring new moneys and new industries into this province? Why would you maintain an office in Brussels and an office in Paris and close the Milan office down? It is not that I wanted the job myself.

Basically, those are my questions. We will understand Mr. Lavelle's criticism much more clearly when we get the answers to these questions that I pose to the minister. I am already assuming that Mr. Lavelle's statements could have and probably should have included not only the federal bureaucrats who are in trade offices around the world but also the bureaucrats who have been appointed by this government.

Mr. Stokes: Why are you a Liberal?

Mr. Mancini: My father was a Liberal.

Mr. Stokes: You spend all of your time criticizing the feds.

The Deputy Chairman: The member for Essex South has the floor and is continuing his presentation.

Mr. Mancini: Mr. Chairman, I thank you for keeping order and stopping these people from interrupting. I really appreciate the strong hand you have shown.

I am assuming that what Mr. Lavelle said about the federal bureaucrats should have included all the bureaucrats who have been appointed overseas. In these times of economic uncertainty and with the closing of the Milan office for reasons which are still yet unclear, I would recommend that the minister review the offices in Brussels and in Paris and review the international relations department to see exactly what tangible benefits this province is receiving.

Do your people in the international relations department liaise with the ambassadors appointed by the government of Canada or do they work in these circumstances almost as if they were ambassadors for Ontario? What exactly do they do? How do they fit into the system?

8:40 p.m.

Mr. Foulds: There isn't any system; they have a patronage system.

Mr. Mancini: That is what I am trying to get from him. That is exactly what I am trying to get the minister to say, that there is no system. Anyway, Mr. Chairman, I think I have had my share of the time. I know other members wish to speak on these important matters under this very important ministry and we will await the minister's answer.

The Deputy Chairman: The minister would like to respond to some of the questions that have been raised.

Mr. Conway: Mr. Chairman, may I add a brief one?

The Deputy Chairman: The member for Renfrew North.

Mr. Foulds: Be brief.

Mr. Conway: I will be very brief. It will surprise the member for Port Arthur. I do not wish in any way to be provocative.

Mr. McClellan: But extravagant.

Mr. Conway: I will be neither florid nor extravagant, having gone to that marvellous party in room 228 and having drunk at the table of my socialist friends.

As I was listening to my colleagues the member for Prescott-Russell (Mr. Boudria) and the member for Essex South (Mr. Mancini), I was reminded about the international relations office. I do not want to go into a little debate on my friend and the minister's colleague Omer Déslauriers, but I do read the Financial Post regularly. This is a rather small point, but I will make it none the less.

In the Financial Post, among other papers, there is a little, almost weekly ad run by the Westin Hotels chain.

Hon. Mr. Wells: We've had it before.

Mr. Conway: Have we dealt with that?

Mr. Stokes: The member for Oshawa (Mr. Breaugh) dealt with that.

Mr. Conway: I always wondered whether there was a policy governing --

Mr. Stokes: What have you got against Adrienne?

Mr. Conway: I have nothing against Adrienne, but I just wondered whether the minister, in the sweet reasonableness of his usual way, intended to answer the question, if it was put by the member for Oshawa. That is my very minor concern. I just wondered what, if any, policy there was governing this sort of moonlighting, as we call it at home, because one begins to fantasize about where it is that Omer Déslauriers might wish to show his face in some commercial way.

Hon. Mr. Wells: Mr. Chairman, I have a very excellent brochure on the Brussels office with Omer's picture and all the staff in it if the honourable member would like it. I think he would find it very interesting.

Mr. Conway: Is it true that you offered Morley Rosenberg my --

The Deputy Chairman: Order. I ask the honourable member to desist.

Hon. Mr. Wells: Here is an ad headed "The Westin woman in Canada," and it does not show Adrienne Clarkson.

Mr. Boudria: The one I picked up this morning on the Air Canada flight had her picture.

Hon. Mr. Wells: This is from a recent issue of Maclean's magazine, I would guess.

The answer to the question is quite simple. I was in the advertising business at one time, and members who know how these things work will understand that print ads such as these are prepared quite a long way ahead and then are shipped out to the various publications for use. Very often they are repeated for a year or two years; they all go by numbers and some have Adrienne's picture and some do not.

She agreed in November 1981 to let Westin Hotels use her photograph on their advertising campaign -- a photograph which, incidentally, is used without her name ever being mentioned. No one's name is mentioned on those.

I remind the member that at the particular time this agreement was entered into she was an employee of the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. She joined this ministry on April 15, 1982, and ever since then a variety of people have put the same question to her. There is no question that a civil servant or an employee of the government would not have his or her picture used in commercial advertising such as that. She has asked the Westin Hotels and the agency concerned to drop the ad as quickly as it is possible. I have assurances from those people that it should be stopped by mid-December.

Mr. Foulds: Are those assurances as good as Bob Elgie's on Cadillac Fairview?

Hon. Mr. Wells: They are excellent assurances. I am guaranteed that unless somebody has an old copy of the ad around and happens to break or drop the new one and some newspaper sticks it in again next January, which could happen, it will not be officially run after mid-December.

Next I would like to inform my friend that I recall Patrick Lavelle's comments about foreign service employees. I guess they were the trade employees working in the various embassies of the government of Canada. Patrick Lavelle is a friend of mine. As far as I know, he is certainly not a Conservative. I suspect his political affiliation is basically Liberal. He was an executive assistant to the Honourable Allan MacEachen at one time.

Mr. Boudria: So was the member for Scarborough-Ellesmere.

Hon. Mr. Wells: Not for Allan MacEachen.

Mr. Conway: We won't embarrass him further.

Hon. Mr. Wells: Be that as it may, Patrick Lavelle is a fine person who was the head of our operation in Paris before Adrienne Clarkson. He has a good appreciation of the things that have to go on in these foreign offices. The upgrading of our Paris office and the ultimate employment of Adrienne Clarkson as our agent general --

Mr. Mancini: You call it upgrading; that's what you call it.

Hon. Mr. Wells: Upgrading in the sense suggested by Patrick Lavelle when I met with him over there, which was that the status of our Paris office had to be lifted from a trade office to an Ontario House operation to give Ontario a certain degree of prestige and appearance in Paris to help the total long-range concerns of this province within the context of Canada as a country.

I want to emphasize clearly to my friend that all three of our offices abroad which are classified as Ontario Houses and have agents general; Brussels, Paris and London. All operate closely with the Department of External Affairs, with the Canadian embassies there, and are not there as embassies on their own. They are there to present the Ontario story in conjunction with the total Canadian picture. They do this very well.

I can read some of the letters I have concerning Adrienne's duties in Paris, written by businessmen who have said how appreciative they are of the new status that has accrued to that office and the doors that have been opened for Ontario businessmen by Adrienne's presence in Paris. This has been very helpful.

Mr. Mancini: Did you get any complaints about the Milan office?

Hon. Mr. Wells: There are 12 people in the office in Paris. Four positions are from our ministry, including Adrienne, who is the agent general. There are six people from the Ministry of Industry and Trade who are trade people. Then there are a couple of tourism people from the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation who will also be operating out of that office.

In Brussels, there are eight people: two officers and two secretaries from our ministry; and one officer, one secretary, one locally hired person, and one person who works half-time for us and half-time for Industry and Trade. So it is a joint operation in Brussels with eight people.

Let me add this little aside. The Brussels operation was reinstituted at the direct request of the Canadian ambassador in Brussels to the Premier during one of his visits there. He asked that Ontario re-establish its office.

I feel bad about not having an operation in Italy. For a variety of reasons, the trade office in Milan was closed. It may be we will expand that. I am happy to have on record a request from my friend on the other side that he would like to see us open an office in Italy. We will certainly put that into the hopper when that comes up for consideration.

Mr. Mancini: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: I find it just a little inconsistent. We have over 600,000 people of one particular extraction and we do not even have a trade office, and we have trade offices everywhere else.

8:50 p.m.

Hon. Mr. Wells: The need for the office does not necessarily depend upon the number of people from that area who are resident in this country. For various cultural reasons it would be very useful.

I think Adrienne and the Paris office cover the Rome territory at this time. Certainly that is something which could be considered for the future.

Mr. Conway: You could send Ed Havrot to Warsaw.

Hon. Mr. Wells: The point to remember is that it is very easy to criticize things that are beyond our borders.

Mr. Conway: It is not hard to criticize Omer Déslauriers, with all due respect.

Hon. Mr. Wells: With all due respect to my friend the member for Renfrew North --

Mr. Conway: Your case for the office in Brussels is somewhat lessened by that appointment, with all due respect.

Hon. Mr. Wells: -- it is easy to sit there and talk like that but Omer is doing a very good job in Brussels. Those who have visited there have found this to be the case. I find it just a little inconsistent when the member and his colleague the member for Prescott-Russell and others stand up in this House and ask us constantly to do more for Franco-Ontarians and to do all kinds of things in that area, then so severely criticize a former president of l'Association canadienne-française de l'Ontario, a former prominent Franco-Ontarian who is now representing our province abroad. They really want to try to have it both ways.

Mr. R. F. Johnston: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman: I want to be clear. Does this mean that the solution for Franco-Ontarian representation would be to send them all overseas?

Hon. Mr. Wells: No, it does not mean that; but the point seems to be completely missed by some members. Because Omer Déslauriers happens to have run as a Conservative candidate at one time he is now suddenly castigated out to one side. Omer Déslauriers has done a number of credible things for the Franco-Ontarian community. He has worked hard on its behalf. He is working hard now in an area where it is very credible for us to have a Franco-Ontarian.

I understand that the Walloon region of Belgium is now setting up a separate office in Quebec. For us to have a person like Omer in that kind of environment I think is not only a credit to Ontario but it is a credit to Franco-Ontarians. The member is attacking the fact we have not only got a credible representative there but a person who has good rapport with the Walloon section of Belgium.

We have had no criticism of the job Omer Déslauriers is doing in Belgium. I find the members' remarks disturbing and petty. Criticize the offices but do not be critical of a person who I think represents us well. No one is perfect, but in my years in education I found him to be a very helpful person in his contact with Franco-Ontarians and in fighting for their rights in some of the things members opposite are standing up to talk about every day in this House.

It is very difficult to justify overseas operations. I am sure it is difficult for the government of Canada to justify the External Affairs operation. It is perhaps difficult for us to justify what we do in overseas offices. Notwithstanding that they can he criticized, the fact remains their presence in these areas of the world ultimately will help create jobs, raise the standard of living and make things better for the people of this province and of Canada.

That is what it is all about. We do not live on an island. We live in a world and we want to trade with that world. Others want to sell their products here. We want to exchange culture and have all kinds of interflow going on. That is why we have operations such as our offices and the offices of the government of Canada. That is why we have trade offices and that is why people travel.

Mr. Mancini: Don't you find it interesting that your appointee criticizes the federal bureaucrats overseas and has nothing at all to say about your offices? What are the differences between your offices and theirs?

Hon. Mr. Wells: Listen, I do not know; you would have to ask Patrick Lavelle about that.

Mr. Mancini: He was appointed to work for you.

Hon. Mr. Wells: He does not work for me. Patrick Lavelle works for the auto parts manufacturers now. He never did work for the Ministry of Intergovernmental Affairs. I guess Mr. Lavelle always felt that the job the province did on very limited resources was a perfectly creditable job.

Mr. Mancini: Prove it; tell us the figures. Give us the figures for what's being spent and what we get for it.

Hon. Mr. Wells: Well, Industry and Tourism can bring out and trot out for you the whole list of contacts and opportunities that have been brought from other countries and the fact that we are able to do business there. One of the things that is happening now in Paris is that Ontario wine is getting some presence in the French market because of the job our people are doing over there.

Mr. Mancini: How do we know the federal government was not responsible for that?

Hon. Mr. Wells: The federal government is helping out on that too; certainly it is.

Mr. Boudria: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: I would like some clarification. This publication from your ministry from the bureau du co-ordonnateur provincial des services en français has it that you are advertising that Beaujolais nouveaux from France will be available in Ontario on November 15. It invites people to try out this new French wine on November 15. There is nothing about the reverse. Would you like to indicate why that was done in your ministry's publication which I have right here?

The Acting Chairman (Mr. Robinson): That is not a point of order. However, I am sure the minister will respond to the question none the less.

Hon. Mr. Wells: That is all part of the reciprocal kind of arrangement. We are selling French wine in this province. We want to sell Ontario wine in France; and believe me we are going to do it.

Mr. Boudria: Why not sell Ontario wine to Franco-Ontarians?

Hon. Mr. Wells: They sell Ontario wine here. They know it is here. Believe me, for the same reason you said that -- and I am not sure what happened -- the Chateau des Charmes people wanted to open up their nouveaux Beaujolais, to uncap a few bottles of it in front of the Eiffel Tower a day before this occurred here. I do not know if that came off, but there is very imaginative marketing of Ontario wines in France. That is what we are helping them with over there. It was successful and it will be successful.

Because time is limited, I want to talk quickly about a couple of other things in the area of French-language services. The members asked what was happening in certain ministries. On the recommendation of the co-ordinator of our ministry and our reports, last year we recommended that the Ministry of Transportation and Communications have a full-time co-ordinator. That person has been appointed, Roland Bourque, and he has set up committees in all the key areas there. I think there will be advances in the use of French in the operations of the Ministry of Transportation and Communications.

We also recommended there be a co-ordinator for the Workmen's Compensation Board and Labour. This person was appointed earlier this year, Mr. Stéphane Grenon. He is a full-time co-ordinator and I think you will find a new impetus there.

My colleague the Solicitor General is here. We will be recommending and will continue to recommend he have a full-time co-ordinator. I am sure he will be giving consideration to that. I hate to mention it -- well, I do not hate to and I do not apologize for it -- but Omer Déslauriers did a study on the use of French in policing and has passed on some recommendations to the Ministry of the Solicitor General concerning the police forces. Some of his recommendations would be helpful to a co-ordinator appointed in that particular ministry.

9 p.m.

As far as education is concerned, the Premier has written Mr. Aubé and has given him a commitment. I think we are all sorry that action could not be taken before these elections on the matter of the governance of school boards. I know that people worked very hard on that report and it was disturbing not to be able to come to some conclusions in time for this year's election.

But the Premier has given four indications, one of them being that after the consultation was completed with the school boards we would then bring forward suggestions for the kind of legislation that we could support in this area. That is for early spring, as I understand it.

We have already indicated that we would look at areas where the Languages of Instruction Commission of Ontario could be strengthened; with regard to the possibility of trial areas without legislation it has not been possible to work anything out; and the consultations with the school boards will end by December 31.

So I think that in the school board area four guarantees have been given, and we intend to abide by those guarantees. The backup work proceeding towards what was suggested there is going ahead; meetings will be held when appropriate to discuss the various changes with the people concerned.

In the general area of French-language services I think we have to continue to push forward. I have never made any secret of this; I made a fairly lengthy speech on this coupled with the matter of our relations with Quebec back in April. I give members my assurance that I will be recommending continually that we push forward, as has been recommended, to provide better services for the Franco-Ontarian population of this province. We will be doing this in the appointment of co-ordinators, in the movement in ministries, in the movement in the courts and education and in all the other services.

I will also tell members something personal. I hope that before I relinquish this particular responsibility I will be able to recommend to this House some changes in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that will include Ontario in some of the sections of that charter. I believe we can do this; I cannot guarantee it, but I hope it will be possible. Certainly on the basis of the record of this province we could easily recommend, and the Franco-Ontarians could be guaranteed in that charter, at least some of the rights that are now actually available in this province. I think this would be a significant guidepost and a sign, perhaps, to the people of Quebec who are doubtful about the kinds of things that are happening in this province.

As far as our relations with Quebec are concerned, my friend the member for Scarborough West (Mr. R. F. Johnston) asked when I last met the Intergovernmental Affairs minister from Quebec. I last discussed some matters with him in August at the Premiers' conference. In April and early May we had a very detailed discussion about the relationship between our provinces. At that time we decided that we should establish working groups, either at the staff level, or in some cases at the ministerial level, between our ministries in Ontario and Quebec on a variety of problems and challenges which have existed between our two provinces.

Subsequently, some of those meetings were held. We decided we would carry on those matters of economic and trade interests in a traditional manner, but that we would not have discussions on constitutional matters because we had agreed to differ on those. Philosophically, we differ with their view of Canada's future and their place in it.

Putting that aside, we agreed that we should, and in fact needed to get together and talk about a number of things. A meeting was held in early September between the deputy ministers of the Intergovernmental Affairs ministries of both governments and a plan of action was worked out in a number of areas. These included established programs financing, acid-rain issues, securities regulations, racing commissions, energy matters, industrial development procedures, natural resources, French-language services, exchanges, the area of transportation, and so forth. There was a variety of issues and concerns to be discussed in meetings between our staffs, our deputy ministers, and in some cases the ministers.

Some of those meetings have already happened, some are now taking place and others will be taking place in an effort to restore some of the traditional accord which formerly existed between Ontario and Quebec.

Mr. R. F. Johnston: Is that available?

Hon. Mr. Wells: Is what available?

Mr. R. F. Johnston: Are the plans that you are working on available?

Hon. Mr. Wells: This is just from a memo telling me what they were. I could write you a letter to tell you what is happening. I will write to advise you of the discussion areas and what meetings are going on.

Mr. R. F. Johnston: I would appreciate that.

Hon. Mr. Wells: I think that kind of relationship can exist. I was visiting the Quebec office in New York last week and when I walked in somebody pulled out an Eric Dowd story which purported to show a plan of action by Ontario to improve relations with Quebec. It mentioned that one of the things we were going to do -- and this was from some policy paper that had leaked out somewhere -- was to establish relations with those groups in Quebec who are opposed to separatism, particularly with the Liberal Party of Quebec.

Mr. Foulds: Why not? You have done it here and you have done it with the feds.

Mr. Breaugh: That is the same kind of relationship that you have here with the Liberals.

Hon. Mr. Wells: I have no animosity towards the Liberal Party, but I can understand that a government in power, no matter of what persuasion, would view with a little concern a suggestion by a government in another province that it will start building up relations with the opposition. We would probably look askance if we read in the Montreal Gazette that the Parti Québécois had decided to start liaising with Jim Foulds and Bob Rae and to talk to them about how they could build better relations in this province.

Mr. Wrye: Are they really going to do that?

Mr. Foulds: We would probably look at it askance ourselves.

Hon. Mr. Wells: It was obvious to me that they had read that story because they had photocopies of it with yellow markings all over it. Obviously it had been circulated to everybody in the government of Quebec and obviously they had been bothered by our attitude; that instead of dealing with the government we were going to deal with these other people.

I suppose this grows out of the fact of the close relationships that all of us had with the Liberal Party, the official opposition, at the time of the referendum. They were on the same side and we were fighting the government at the time.

That is a hurdle over which we have to jump in our efforts to build and continue relations with the Quebec government, and I think we can jump that hurdle. What we have been trying to do, and what I as the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs have been doing with my Quebec counterpart on economic and trade matters, is to some degree beginning to regularize some of our relationships.

9:10 p.m.

Mr. Conway: I Just want to say something quickly to the minister, Mr. Chairman. I want to reiterate what I have said in this House before, that on matters of French-English relations I think he has been exemplary and has led the government very well in many tough and delicate battles.

I take some personal exception to the inference he tried to draw from my remarks with respect to the appointment of the current agent general in Brussels. I really do take some exception to that. It is almost like saying my comments about Morley Rosenberg had some sort of anti-Semitic animus.

I have no quarrel at all with the elevation and promotion of Franco-Ontarians to offices within the ambit of the provincial government. I think that is all to the good. But I think the minister would want to share with me and agree with me, and if he does not a lot of people would, that when one sees a situation where a prominent member of a given organization or community leaves the neutrality of that past and enters the political arena, and then within weeks of that political orientation gets a major appointment, there is without any doubt a prima facie case, a very clear case for the public at large, that the principal attraction of the candidate was not his or her affiliation with a great cause, as we saw not so much in the appointment but in the letter written by the supplicant from the city of Kitchener in June 1982.

I have no reason to doubt what you have said about Mr. Déslauriers in ACFO or whatever. I accept all of that but I tell you that on the face of it the case was much more political than it was meritorious, though the latter may also have been the case.

I think that is the oldest roll of the pork-barrel that political parties of any persuasion could be found in association with. I would not want to leave it unanswered and would not want it left on the record that somehow my attack on that, and somehow my comments with respect to Mr. Rosenberg, or in this case Mr. Déslauriers, sprung out of some deep, personal wellspring of francophobia.

I want for the minister's benefit and the benefit of the member for Cochrane North (Mr. Piché) to have that point of clarification.

Hon. Mr. Wells: I am glad my friend said that because I did not want to cast any of that light over what he had said. I certainly was not attributing any of those motives or that background to the remarks.

My friend is not the one who usually criticises Omer Déslauriers' appointment. It is usually his colleague the member for Ottawa East (Mr. Roy) who constantly reminds me about it. I would say the same things to him.

As the minister responsible, I made the final and ultimate decision that Mr. Déslauriers would be the person to go to Brussels and I felt it was a proper thing. I just want to tell the member it is sometimes difficult in these positions when faced with people who have --

Mr. Mancini: Don't try to explain.

Hon. Mr. Wells: What I want to say and I think this is a very important point --

Mr. Mancini: It's pork-barrelling.

Hon. Mr. Wells: It is not pork-barrelling. If you were faced with these particular decisions, would you really say that because somebody decided to make some attempt at political activity he should be ruled out of consideration for a position?

I am not talking about any other position now but that of Omer Déslauriers, but the fact he happened to run at some time for some party does not suggest to me he should not be appointed. In the same light, I point out to my friend this same question was raised when Pat Lavelle was appointed. Someone said, "He used to be Allan MacEachen's executive assistant." To some people that would suggest he should not be considered for a job either. We rejected that in that particular case, and in Mr. Déslauriers' case we rejected the fact there would be criticism because he had run as a candidate in an election at one time.

Mr. R. F. Johnston: Mr. Chairman, it may surprise you that I have absolutely no interest in Omer Déslauriers' appointment at all, but I do want --

Mr. Wrye: You guys weren't even close in Ottawa East.

Mr. R. F. Johnston: It is not even for that reason. Omer and I have never been in agreement on policies, but the fact that he has actually worked hard for Franco-Ontarian rights from his own perspective is something I respect. I do not question the government's right to appoint him.

I do want to come back to the question of our relations with Quebec. I am heartened to see that there has been a systematic attempt to try to develop relationships on a broad range of matters. One of the aspects of which I was speaking was the role of this House and the members of this House, that is outside of the notion of government to government but rather as legislature to legislature. What kind of roles might we be playing and how could the minister's portfolio facilitate the kind of communication that we might be having as legislators to legislators?

Hon. Mr. Wells: Very quickly, Mr. Chairman, I have thought about this since the time we had the committee on the Constitution and so forth, and I think that the best way for this House, all legislators of whatever party, to liaise with other legislators is through the Canadian branch of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.

I would like to suggest at some point that this House consider setting up a committee or group where those from all parties who are keenly interested in this kind of liaison can get together with the Speaker, who is the nominal, titular or actual head of this branch in Ontario, and working from that set up exchanges with the other provinces. That is the best way to do it.

Some of us have felt that we have not become involved enough in the process here in Ontario to be able to expand it to the other provinces. Our ministry tends to be dealing with the other Intergovernmental Affairs ministries, and if it is legislators to legislators that is a better vehicle to work through. It is an unused one as far as this Legislature is concerned.

A trip was arranged to visit the Alberta Legislature, and there were some exchanges with the Quebec National Assembly at one time. But those and many more could be arranged, and it would give us a good way of doing it without getting into any of the government or policy matters.

Mr. Kolyn: Mr. Chairman, I would like to mention one matter that has been brought up, and that is the appointment of Adrienne Clarkson to the Paris office. I do not know the lady or what her qualifications are or how good she is at her job. I have never evaluated her, but I had the opportunity of reading Allan Fotheringham's new book last night. In one of the paragraphs he states that Adrienne Clarkson is a card-carrying Liberal. I think the official opposition should know that. If Miss Clarkson is well qualified for her job, whatever she should be should not be the basis for her appointment.

Mr. Boudria: Mr. Chairman, I have just two very quick questions to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. On April 17 a delegation from the government went to Ottawa as part of the Constitution day ceremonies. The delegation was composed of the Premier and Mrs. Davis, Mr. Leal, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, the Attorney General, Mr. Dick, E. Greathed, G. Posen, J. Cavarzan, L. Hilborn and a D.W. Stevenson.

I find it unusual that in the context of that celebration it was not seen fit to invite the leader of Her Majesty's loyal opposition to an event which, after all, was not only a government event but which should have been one to which all parts of the population were invited. Certainly members on both sides of the House represent the people.

I recognize the very excellent work done by the minister's deputy, for instance, in this case, but I find it unusual that it was slated that way; and perhaps the minister would like to tell us why it is, for instance, that he did not choose to invite either the Leader of the Opposition, the leader of the third party or representatives from all three parties to keep the Constitution day celebrations a truly nonpartisan event, like the deliberations we had in this House. I question the wisdom of having done that in that way. Perhaps the minister could clarify that for us.

I have one final question for the minister --

The Acting Chairman (Mr. Robinson): On the same matter?

Mr. Boudria: Yes; just one final question of a different tone and perhaps he can answer them both. I will be very brief.

9:20 p.m.

Hon. Mr. Wells: I will answer that one, Mr. Chairman. As I recall now, there were only 10 invitations to the official celebrations, and they went to the people who had participated over many years. We would have liked to have invited a number of people, and indeed the leaders of the opposition, but the federal government would not give us any more seats. We were very limited in the number of places we had there, and that was the reason those decisions were made.

Mr. Boudria: Okay. If I can ask --

The Acting Chairman: No, I am sorry. The time for the estimates has expired. We have been watching the clock rather carefully. We are now beyond that time.

The time for the estimates of the Ministry of Intergovernmental Affairs having expired, pursuant to standing order 46(d) I am required to put all questions necessary to carry every vote and item of the estimates.

Vote 601 agreed to.

Votes 602 and 603 agreed to.

The Acting Chairman: This completes consideration of the estimates of the Ministry of Intergovernmental Affairs.

ESTIMATES, MINISTRY OF REVENUE

Hon. Mr. Ashe: Mr. Chairman, I have a brief opening statement. I am very pleased to have this opportunity to present the estimates of the Ministry of Revenue for 1982-83 to this House.

Before commencing a detailed examination of these estimates, I would like to review with the honourable members some of the significant program developments that have occurred relevant to this fiscal year and to outline several upcoming initiatives that will shape the ministry's fiscal and administrative direction in the future.

I believe the members will see in the points raised in my discussion a prudent and intelligent use of resources, exploitation of modern technology and a progressive management philosophy working to increase the ministry's productivity and sensitivity to our clients' needs.

First, looking at the 1982-83 resources to furnish an overview: As members are aware, since 1975 the government of Ontario has pursued an aggressive constraint policy through a selective reduction in the size of the public service and a close scrutiny of ministry spending. This policy is in keeping with the recognized need to minimize the impact of inflation on government spending and to improve the balance between the private and public sectors in the province's economy.

Of course, this government takes a back seat to none, including the federal government, which did not recognize restraint and constraint until very recent history.

This resource management policy of doing more with less has had considerable success, and I am pleased with the significant role that the Ministry of Revenue has played in this process over recent years. Again in 1982-83, the ministry continues to contribute to the realization of these important government aims. At the same time, however, my ministry has taken on important additional program responsibilities, several of which I will be describing shortly in my opening remarks.

I would like now to draw attention to the human resource summary and the expenditure summary tables in the briefing material that has been provided to the critics. They will observe that the human resource table describes the planned employment for 1982-83 by major program and is included with a comparison of the same figures presented to members for last year's estimates submission.

The table indicates that the ministry has made plans to increase its level of staffing by 119 man-years in 1982-83. I emphasize the word "planned" because, as members know, the ministry for a number of years has presented its manpower estimates in terms of maximum staffing potential. This method presents most accurately our manpower needs for the consideration of members, who will understand that the actual level of staff employed is invariably somewhat lower because of vacancies and staff redeployment.

This maximum potential staffing concept is particularly important to the 49 man-year increase planned for the ministry's administration program. This increase largely concerns staffing strategies designed to accomplish an uninterrupted transfer of head office operations to Oshawa in early 1983. Most important, members will appreciate that this transfer must be achieved without disruptions of essential revenue flows and of services to taxpayers and municipalities. However, much of this provision may not be required as current employees move to their new location and staff are hired and trained to quickly and smoothly fill the positions of nonrelocating employees. I will have more to say on the impact of the Oshawa move later in my remarks.

The other major manpower increase, 108 man-years, occurs within our tax revenue program. This allocation is required to handle the expanded work load related to the implementation of ad valorem gasoline taxation and the coloured fuels taxation program as well as improved client services for Ontario's program of tax grants for seniors.

Members will note that increases in ministry staff levels attributable to the Oshawa move, tax revenue program initiatives and an expanded and improved tax grants program are partially offset by 38 man-years made possible by improved management systems and productivity gains in other areas of the ministry. Thus the ministry has held its staff levels to an overall increase of only 119 man-years for 1982-83 while dealing with steady increases in the volume and complexity of existing operations and while implementing a number of important new programs.

The second table in the briefing material to which I want to draw the members' attention is the expenditures summary. Members will see that this summary describes the 1982-83 estimates spending and compares it to last year's actual by major classification.

The table shows that for 1982-83 the ministry's total operating expenditure, excluding transfer payments, is up by $18.4 million over last year. Salaries and benefits are up by $6.4 million, a figure reflective of the higher level of potential staffing which I mentioned earlier, overtime pay for assessors working on regional reassessments and annualization of salary awards. Travel, services and supplies are increased by $10.6 million, of which $9 million is related to relocation expenditures, such as Oshawa moving and commuting expenses for employees as well as furniture and equipment required for the new building.

Mr. T. P. Reid: What happened to the old furniture?

Hon. Mr. Ashe: You do not move into a Cadillac with the furnishings of a Volkswagen. You have to take advantage of what is there to utilize the increased capacity and capabilities of a 20th-century --

Mr. Breaugh: That's an unfortunate turn of phrase.

Hon. Mr. Ashe: Yes, that is true. The Cadillac was fine, though.

The balance of the increase is attributable to new program initiatives in 1982-83. Thus the impact of inflation and work load increase on other ministry operations has largely been absorbed.

The result is that the demands for new programs and the relocation to Oshawa have increased the staffing and operating expenditure levels of the ministry; however, I point out that in a time of inflation and constraint, ongoing program staffing and expenditures have been clearly contained to enable the ministry to minimize the impact of the responsibilities and services I have described. In addition, the transfer payments to Ontario pensioners have increased by $49.6 million in the form of grants for property and sales tax and home heating.

In view of these results, and keeping in mind the Ministry of Revenue's new responsibilities in 1982-83, I believe I am fully justified in stating that my ministry continues to prudently manage its resources and to maintain the level-line trend established in recent years.

9:30 p.m.

Resource management techniques for productive results: The success achieved by the Ministry of Revenue in its expenditure control is due in no small measure to the planning and control methods in use at all levels in the organization. In particular, I refer to the zero-base budgeting and management-by-results review processes in place in the ministry which have allowed managers to use our resources effectively to meet program objectives in the face of budgetary constraints and increasing work loads.

These resource management processes reflect the principles and practices of good management that have been adopted generally as policy in the Ontario public service. Over the past 12 months, several major initiatives have been undertaken at the corporate level to help managers successfully meet the challenges and demands of the 1980s.

Two of these initiatives, the management standards project and the management-by-results improvement project introduced by Management Board of Cabinet, have defined guidelines against which effective management action may be measured. I am pleased to report that managers in the Ministry of Revenue have made significant contributions to the development of these government-wide management standards and that they have continued to refine and improve our internal processes.

Mr. T. P. Reid: Do you have performance appraisal in your ministry?

Hon. Mr. Ashe: Always; we are always appraising each other, each and every day.

For example, each year the ministry produces an operational planning manual to guide managers during estimates preparation. The manual has been further improved to give greater attention to such important elements as strategic and priorities planning, resource allocation and results reporting. Each of these components has been designed to meet the particular needs of the Ministry of Revenue as well as reflecting and supporting the government-wide management standards.

As a result of these improvements in the ministry's planning and budgeting processes, management has been able to exercise strict control over the use of scarce resources in achieving stated priorities.

Further, the ministry would be happy to provide copies of its resource planning manual to interested members.

In addition, I want to make a few remarks about the Ministry of Revenue's management-by-results approach. I have already mentioned the government's commitment to the MBR improvement project and, again I stress, my ministry's emphatic support of this important endeavour.

Each year the ministry documents the operational efficiencies, program outputs and program effects that are targeted for the budget year. In this, considerable emphasis is also placed on all in-year ministry communications with Management Board. Within the ministry, reporting systems are in place which enable the communication and recording of results achieved by managers working in a decentralized management environment. These systems permit the flexible deployment of resources to make necessary tactical adjustments to meet in-year changes in our program priorities, such as implementing the Treasurer's budget policies.

It is my belief that this results-oriented management philosophy is crucial to the successful operation of a business organization like the Ministry of Revenue in a constraint environment. I am pleased with the tangible increases in productivity achieved to date, and I fully support our emphasis on continued development of stronger management systems in the ministry.

Mr. T. P. Reid: Can you table some facts and figures to back up the productivity you claim?

Hon. Mr. Ashe: The member has got a big, thick book and he will find them in there.

Technology applications to improve productivity: First, the ministry's overview.

Over the past 15 years, the computer has emerged as possibly the most important management tool in modern business organizations. The Ministry of Revenue has been quick to recognize the potential of automated production and information systems and, as a result, is now recognized as a leader in government in the utilization of advanced technology. This status has been achieved through a consistent commitment by senior management to investment in modern computer systems and other technical support facilities.

The result of these efforts has been a dramatic increase in both the effectiveness and the efficiency with which the Ministry of Revenue performs its functions. Within the past five years, as I have discussed, the ministry has absorbed a considerable increase in work load in terms of both volume and complexity while reducing staff levels and minimizing cost increases well within inflation rates.

Unquestionably this record of achievement would not have been possible were it not for the Ministry of Revenue's long-term investment in automated systems and similar technology. All major programs in the ministry now are supported by computerized systems, which form the core of our operation.

As in any leading private sector corporation, total expenditures for the maintenance, updating and introduction of new electronic data processing systems now represent some 15 per cent of the ministry's direct operating budget, and in my view it is money well spent.

Of course, computer-based technology is evolving very quickly and constantly, presenting new opportunities for increased productivity. The performance of computers is increasing rapidly while the price is gradually falling. With the experience we have gained in recent years in improving performance through investment in technology, my ministry is well positioned and prepared to exploit these developments.

The opportunities that are emerging for these types of systems will provide the following benefits.

First, more rapid access to information. Customer service has been enhanced considerably in recent years as a result of direct access by video display terminals to the ministry's compute data bases. The ability of the ministry to serve its various client groups will continue to improve as this technology evolves, particularly in our Oshawa building.

Second, increased efficiency. Ministry investment in automated systems will continue to realize productivity gains and allow work load growth to be absorbed. Existing systems will be enhanced or redeveloped to increase their effectiveness.

Third, greater flexibility. Recent developments in technology promise to increase the flexibility and turnaround time with which the ministry can respond to legislative changes. This increased flexibility will allow the ministry to more readily implement changes in fiscal policy -- changes that are critical in allowing the government to respond quickly to changing economic conditions and requirements.

To take advantage of the rapid evolution of information technology, the ministry early recognized that existing management processes and structures would have to be strengthened. Consequently the ministry has established organizational units that are responsible for planning technological changes within the major programs.

These various planning sections, supported by computer programming and systems design staff, have enabled EDP investment opportunities to be more quickly identified and have ensured that automation is tailored to the specific requirements of each operating branch.

This structure has also led to important decisions to achieve greater decentralization and flexibility within the ministry and particularly in its network of regional property assessment and retail sales tax offices.

As computer-based technology becomes more central to the needs of the ministry and as technological alternatives become more diverse and complex, a more integrated technology planning process will clearly be required.

In recognition of this emerging requirement, the ministry has formulated a technology strategy process to ensure that appropriate decisions are made regarding investments in technology and that a strong link exists between the government's corporate strategy and the ministry's own technology direction.

Mr. Conway: Can't they type more than three words on a line?

Hon. Mr. Ashe: Do not worry about it. That is for me.

An important further step is the establishment of a technology strategy committee, which includes the ministry's senior executives and management as well as directors of the ministry's technology delivery branches. In the current fiscal year the technology strategy committee is focusing on the development of a comprehensive information technology plan that will be implemented after the move to Oshawa and will direct the major investments in automated systems anticipated over the next five years.

The Ministry of Revenue recognizes that government traditionally has been labour-intensive, with operational planning focused on staffing and short-term budgeting considerations. As processes become more automated, however, government is being more capital-intensive and must adopt appropriate planning and budgeting methodologies. As the Ministry of Revenue's first step in this corporate process, Management Board has recently approved two important projects to develop a range of new management information systems.

9:40 p.m.

The first of these will develop more rigorous capital budgeting and long-range investment planning methods especially tailored to the government sector and comparable to those in use in the private sector. In undertaking this initiative it is the intention of the ministry to create a model for new management processes which will be required by government to meet the technological challenges of the 1980s. The experience which the Ministry of Revenue gains in developing these new processes will be shared by all ministries in the Ontario government.

Over the past decade, most of the ministry's automated systems were focused on our basic operational processes and can be broadly described as production data processing systems. More recently, opportunities have emerged to support management processes and enhance general office productivity through automated information systems, commonly known as management information and integrated office systems.

The relocation of our head office to Oshawa will place considerable demand on existing communications processes and create significant opportunities for enhanced automated support. With the requirement for the ministry executive to spend much of their time in Toronto, it will be necessary to create a more effective and flexible communications system between the Toronto and Oshawa locations. At the same time, developments in office technology offer considerable opportunity to improve management communication on a more general level.

The office systems market, by some estimates, is expected to grow to $30 billion by the middle of the decade. The government has recognized that Ontario companies must develop competitive advantages in this industry, particularly in the areas of word processing and telecommunications.

Development of this industry could allow Ontario to become a major exporter of automated office products. Sensitive to the fact that government support is critical to the development of Ontario's office systems industry, my ministry will implement its office communications network with the assistance of Canadian technology.

Assessment program: Last year I advised honourable members of steps taken by my ministry to expand the application of computer technology in the property assessment program, a project specifically known as the Ontario assessment system, or Oasys. Oasys will not only allow the property assessment program to further improve productivity, but will ultimately also allow municipalities to have direct access to our assessment data base, thereby improving their own efficiency.

I am pleased to inform members that this project has now also been approved by Management Board and has progressed to the prototype development stage in two of our regional offices. Since this complex system will be required to maintain assessment and enumeration data for every property in the province, our plans call for a careful staging-in process over a three-year period.

Between 1974 and 1981, the staff complement of my ministry's property assessment program was reduced by 20 per cent. Over this same period, the number of assessable units increased at an average annual rate of five per cent. While we have, to date, successfully reassessed 349 municipalities under our section 63 program, we are now entering a period of accelerated reassessment activity as more municipalities and regions take advantage of this option and seek to create equity within property classes. As you will know, this important program will result in a fair sharing of the municipal tax burden by removing inequities.

This emerging concern to increase productivity within a constraint environment points up the need for the immediate and innovative use of computer technology within the assessment program. We are meeting this challenge with such initiatives as computer-assisted mass assessment techniques for assessing a large percentage of single-family residential properties, the introduction of interactive processing and the use of a prototype approach for Oasys systems development.

The reassessment process will ultimately cover all properties in Ontario on a cyclical basis. This introduces an enormous calculation task that can be performed effectively only by computer systems. We will therefore introduce computer-assisted mass assessment for the majority of single-family residential properties in the province. Consequently, assessment staff will be able to devote more attention to the professional effort required to maintain high-quality assessments and to perform inspection and related tasks. Only in this way will my ministry's objective to deliver a high-quality assessment product to municipalities without staff increases possibly be realized.

Interactive processing introduces a direct connection between the user of the computer system and the system itself. The user does not serve the system; rather it is the system that serves the user. Terminals will be located in each of our 31 regional offices and will be used by staff to conduct what amount to conversations with the computer system. The computer will prompt, note errors, provide warnings, make reference material available and, on request, provide explanations. Use of this user-friendly system will allow assessors to use their time and professional skills much more effectively.

One of the important benefits of this project will be a simplification of error-correction procedures. In a system that maintains data on every property in the province, even a small percentage of errors has a serious impact. Data accuracy will become even more important if we are going to rely on the system to calculate revised assessment values automatically, and this will be essential to meet our policy objectives within cost-containment limitations.

This interactive approach will also enable us to increase our level of service in that inquiries will be answered promptly because records will be available on the terminal screens. In the future we will be able to give local governments the facility to use our data base so that they can also make direct inquiries into certain restricted segments of the data we store on properties within their jurisdiction.

Mr. T. P. Reid: Isn't that a contradiction in terms?

Hon. Mr. Ashe: Never.

Mr. T. P. Reid: In certain restricted segments, but they can know about it.

Hon. Mr. Ashe: Within their jurisdiction; they cannot get into other jurisdictions.

A flexible interactive system will provide us with operational and management information quickly and efficiently. We will be able to obtain information selectively as we need it to analyse the quality of assessment, to determine work loads and to make policy decisions.

Clearly, though, our system must by definition be large and complex, and this introduces possible problems, such as failing to meet user needs, educating people in equipment use and the difficulty of determining the sequence in which information should be displayed.

Consequently, our approach is to develop a prototype system in an experimental environment, and systems staff are now doing just that in two regional offices. Both these offices are equipped with terminals so that different ways of displaying information and dealing with operational requirements can be tested. Systems specialists, assessors and assessment clerks are working as a team to develop a system that will best meet needs and make optimum use of computer technology. As well, our plans for actual implementation involve a comprehensive training effort and orientation programs.

The ministry's anticipated cost for developing this system over the three-year period will be $4.8 million, an expenditure already carefully justified in our Management Board submissions. Indeed, our studies indicate that either the ministry must increase staff or it must exploit available modern technology if assessment quality is to be maintained and a continuing reassessment cycle successfully introduced. Clearly, the latter course is substantially more economical and efficient.

I believe the honourable members should note that although contemporary arguments exist about the dehumanizing impact of modern technology, this assessment project will mean improved working conditions for staff and an enhanced professional environment.

Third, our tax revenue program: I have on previous occasions spoken to the honourable members about the widespread application of computer and systems technology to the process of tax administration. In particular, our retail sales tax Basys project and our corporations tax FACTS project are now maturing and returning substantial productivity gains in these two areas. As well, such technology has been instrumental in the administration of my ministry's benefit programs, such as Ontario tax grants for seniors, and I will be talking more about this shortly.

9:50 p.m.

However, as I have discussed previously, modern technology is also being adapted successfully within my ministry as a management and decision-support mechanism. This is amply demonstrated in our tax revenue program, where a recently created integrated planning and control system tool, known as IPACS, consolidates and makes available to senior management all the information pertinent to resource and fiscal control. In this way, IPACS allows managers to make decisions on such matters as priority budgeting, cash flow calendarization, consolidated financial status, personnel management and management by results.

The viability of the IPACS concept speaks for itself. From its beginnings as a prototype tool for the tax revenue program, it is now available to all Ontario government ministries, and in fact three ministries are using it with encouraging results.

The Ontario tax grants for seniors program: Since its inception in 1980, the Ontario tax grants for seniors program has had an increasingly significant impact on ministry operations. The fact alone that Ontario's senior citizens as a population group are growing in larger numbers than other age groups implies increased program complexity and grant volume.

Given this pattern of increasing growth and scope of the Ontario tax grants program, I would like now to discuss the status of 1982 application processing and the mailing of property tax grant cheques. As I stated in the House on October 29, 478,369 property tax grant cheques had been mailed that day. As of November 12, this figure stood at over 494,000, which represents an increase of over 40 per cent in the number of property tax grant cheques mailed at the same time in 1981. It is my intention to complete the processing of all applications received by the end of this month.

There have been a number of very significant improvements in the Ontario tax grant system in 1982, some of which I mentioned in my October 29 statement. I would like at this time to review these improvements in more detail.

First, a number of changes have been made in the property tax grant application form to facilitate its completion by seniors. In 1980, almost 40 per cent of returned applications submitted to the ministry were not fully or accurately completed. This resulted in changes to the application form in 1981 that further reduced the error rate to approximately 22 per cent. In 1982, as a direct result of further redesign and some market testing of the 1982 application form and instruction sheet, the error rate has fallen to approximately 11 per cent. Our efforts in this area have produced appreciable benefits for our senior citizens, as applications are now processed more quickly and grant cheques issued in a reduced turnaround time.

A second major factor in the success of this year's program has been the maturation in the development and implementation of our computer and electronic data processing systems. Two features merit particular attention.

First, there has been an improved system of processing returned applications. Previously, applications submitted to the ministry that were found to be less than fully or accurately completed were subject to manual and data entry recycling until all errors or omissions were corrected. This resulted in delays in application processing and subsequent mailing of the property tax grant cheque.

Enhancements in the 1982 program involving an on-line data entry facility have greatly reduced this problem. Once an application has been entered into the computer system, all corrections, changes or additions are now performed electronically. This new processing system ensures complete control of and access to application data, and facilitates a more expeditious conclusion to processing and to the mailing of grant cheques.

A second derivative of improved computer and EDP facilities has been the introduction of our request for information letters. Before the 1982 campaign, returned applications submitted to the ministry that were deficient in information required manually produced letters to be sent to the applicant. Because of the large volume of such applications, the demand for manual letters resulted in delays in generating a timely interaction between the ministry and its senior citizen clients. Enhancements in the use of automated features of our new processing system have now facilitated almost instantaneous dialogue with these seniors.

As applications are reviewed by ministry staff, those found to have simple errors such as no signature, no occupancy cost or no principal residence address are assigned a unique code identifying the type of error found. When this code is entered into the computer system, a letter to the applicant is generated automatically. The letter explains what information is required to complete the processing of the application and is accompanied by an instruction sheet which provides further assistance.

In addition, the letter also contains the key information recorded by the senior on the returned application and asks that the information be reviewed and corrected, if necessary. This allows the senior not only the opportunity to provide the necessary information, but also to confirm the validity of information previously reported, thereby further ensuring the accuracy of all data processed.

For applications with more complex errors, ministry staff may choose up to three of 25 paragraph inserts stored within the computer system for use on a letter sent to the applicant. The paragraph inserts for such letters are requested on-line via a computer terminal and have the same features as mentioned previously. Letters are then produced automatically by the computer system and mailed to the applicant in either French or English, as specified by the applicant.

I am pleased to report that of the more than 14,000 requests for information letters sent to date, over 85 per cent have been returned by the applicant. Of these, over 95 per cent have been correctly completed, as requested.

These improvements in our computer and EDP facilities are very much in line with the ministry's strategic priority to optimize the use of emerging technological advancements. As a result, significant savings in additional salary costs will accrue in future years and our continued emphasis on strengthening customer service will be further improved.

In an effort to fully harness the resources devoted to programs administered by the ministry, our guaranteed annual income, or Gains as it is known, and Ontario pensioners' property tax program, or OPPTA, were split into two distinct management streams. This allows the energies of staff to be totally dedicated to the delivery of a specific program and has thereby increased the effectiveness and efficiency of program delivery.

Last year, at November 3, the ministry had completed the processing of 421,000 out of 513,000 applications received to that date. This year, of approximately 534,000 applications returned, processing has been completed for 495,000, an increase in absolute terms of 74,000 and a percentage increase of over 17 per cent. Expressed another way, there were still some 92,000 property tax grant applications requiring further processing on November 3, 1981. However, on November 3 this year, there were fewer than 39,000 applications needing further action, an improvement of almost 58 per cent.

Mr. T. P. Reid: Could we have a little order, Mr. Chairman?

The Deputy Chairman: Yes. I would ask the honourable members to respect the order of the House and allow the Minister of Revenue to continue without these interruptions in the background.

Mr. Breaugh: Maybe the deputy whip should do his job and round up a quorum.

Mr. Piché: That's what I'm doing right now.

Mr. T. P. Reid: Otherwise the 39,000 applications that are not being processed will all be in your riding.

The Deputy Chairman: Order.

Hon. Mr. Ashe: It is worth noting that due to file growth between 1981 and 1982, 20,000 more applications were mailed to pensioners this year than last.

Fuel colouration: I indicated earlier that a portion of the man-year growth in our tax revenue program is attributable to the implementation of our coloured fuel legislation. A few words now about this program and its impact on the Ontario petroleum and trucking industry.

First, I wish to advise that implementation of this program proceeded as planned on September 1 without any major problems. Honourable members will recall this program is being introduced as an equitable, cost-beneficial method of reducing motor vehicle fuel tax evasion. Additionally, the measure has had a significant deregulatory impact in that over 100,000 registrants previously required to be fully or partially registered under the Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax Act have been removed from the tax rolls.

The majority of these former registrants are farmers and small business; in other words, those least able to cope with requirements for the filing of returns, reporting, record keeping, etc.

Positive though this program may be in strictly deregulatory terms, clearly its intent is to eliminate the interchangeability of middle distillate fuels between taxable and exempt uses. In this way, the fuel colouration program is expected to reap significant financial dividends to the province.

10 p.m.

Mr. T. P. Reid: And costs the taxpayers and the fuel distributors millions and millions of dollars, to say nothing of their pain and suffering.

Hon. Mr. Ashe: There is a difference between an expense and an investment. Even you should realize that.

Mr. Chairman, in introducing fuel colouration it is recognized that it may in some instances have a cost impact on specific businesses that cannot easily absorb that. Therefore, to alleviate the possible financial impact on these areas, the following comprehensive compensation package has been developed.

First, for those 75 businesses colouring fuel, 30 cents per kilolitre is provided for each kilolitre of fuel coloured by them;

Second, for independent bulk plant operators requiring realty tanks and ancillary equipment as a result of the program, reimbursement of those tankage and ancillary equipment costs to a maximum of $65,000 per tank;

Third, for independent tank truck operators requiring separate compartments for coloured and noncoloured fuels, reimbursement of modification costs to a maximum of $65,000 per tank truck.

Finally, my ministry will soon be expanding our compensation program to reimburse independent bulk plant operators requiring realty tank modifications, again to a maximum of $65,000 per tank.

In addition, in recognition of the impact of this program on the farm community, the ministry has made available the above compensation programs to farmer co-operatives. Further, a program has been instituted to reimburse farmers for additional tankage where need is demonstrated and where the farmer was registered under the Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax Act as drawing both taxable and exempt fuel from common farm storage.

My ministry will continue to modify and fine-tune the fuel colouration program to further minimize the impact on the province's petroleum industry and to ensure that the bottom line objective of reduced tax evasion is achieved.

I would now like to turn to a brief review of my ministry's administrative response to implement the corporations tax holiday announced by my colleague the Treasurer (Mr. F. S. Miller) in his May 13 budget. As members will recall, this initiative is designed to assist small businesses during these difficult economic times.

Corporations with active business income which qualifies for the small business deduction under the federal Income Tax Act pay no Ontario income tax on that income for two taxation years ending between May 13, 1982, and May 14, 1984.

At the same time, the Treasurer announced that Ontario would follow the federal proposal to increase both the annual limit for such income to $200,000 and the total limit to $1 million, thus further increasing the potential value of the exemption.

To get cash back into the hands of small business entrepreneurs as soon as possible, provision was made for corporations to claim a refund of any instalments that may have been already paid in the first of the exempt years. This provision meant that my ministry had to be quickly prepared to accept claims for refunds. A method was needed not only to validate and record refund claims, but also to mesh with the main corporations tax system so that the latter could recognize these special transactions and be able to calculate the correct instalment base in future years.

I am pleased to report that this challenge has been met swiftly and with top-level results. Using recent developments in computer programming technology, a system of recording, editing and tracking such requests was quickly established, and a small group created to handle the unavoidable paperwork. The system became operational on June 7 and the first refunds were paid on June 24. By the end of August, this unit had managed to put itself out of work, at which time it was disbanded after paying out $16.3 million in immediate refunds. Any remaining claims for refunds are now handled by regular staff.

In closing my remarks about the corporation tax, I would be remiss were I not to mention our recently reissued and redesigned corporations tax guide; a very attractive-looking piece of information. This publication presents in unequivocal language the answers to those corporate income tax and capital tax questions commonly asked by persons setting up new corporations in Ontario. In this way, our new corporations' tax guide continues to be an important customer service tool, contributing in a major way to the stability and certainty of the corporate tax system.

Next, I would like to discuss the property assessment program and a look at several recent, high-impact initiatives and their cost implications.

First, let me draw your attention to the printed estimates for the property assessment program which indicate a total 1982-83 estimate of $74 million, as opposed to the 1981-82 figure of $62.3 million. This difference can be expressed as an apparent 19.5 per cent increase.

However, I would point out that the $74 million includes one-time funding for a number of items and projects which will not require further funding commitments in subsequent years. These items are as follows:

First, $1.4 million for the OASYS project that I discussed earlier. This money has been obtained under the incentive program and must be repaid;

Second, $1.86 million for implementation of the proposed farms and managed forests property tax reduction program, which was subsequently deferred and the funding withdrawn from our budget;

Third, $1.7 million for the initial cost to produce a tax impact study for Metropolitan Toronto council.

Therefore, taking these issues into account and noting that a further $6 million of the program funding increase is caused by annualized salary and benefit increases, our real assessment budget is actually up by less than two per cent.

I need not point out that inflation during this time period has exceeded 10 per cent, subsequently diminishing program purchasing power. Further, inflation factors on direct operating expenses have meant that manpower levels within the program have had to be decreased by approximately 23 man-years.

It is important that the honourable members keep this in mind as I detail some of the significant assessment program achievements of the past year and outline the key initiatives being undertaken.

The basic mandate of the property assessment program, to provide assessment rolls to municipalities for the purpose of generating operating revenue, is well known to the honourable members. These rolls also form the basis for the distribution of provincial grants in support of education and local government. In this constraint environment, municipalities are becoming increasingly dependent upon the assessment base to raise sufficient tax revenue to meet taxpayer needs.

In this regard, the property assessment program has played, and will continue to play, a significant role in strengthening and enhancing the municipal assessment base.

Two important program priorities in this regard are supplementary assessments and appeals defence. Some 150,000 supplementary assessments were issued during 1982, generating millions of additional tax dollars. These supplementary assessments have provided a welcomed additional flow of revenue to municipalities throughout the province.

With regard to assessment appeals, the property assessment program defends an average of 150,000 appeals annually, involving some $200 million tax dollars. While we have, by and large, done well in defending these assessments, it is evident that successful commercial and industrial appeals are increasing in those municipalities where frozen and antiquated rolls are still in place. This success rate is not surprising, in that commercial property owners retain appraisal experts to substantiate their appeals. Of course, the end result is that a significant portion of the tax burden is inevitably shifted on to residential ratepayers.

10:10 p.m.

Clearly, then, one central objective of the assessment program must be to improve the integrity of the assessment base, thereby reducing municipal tax base erosion. We can do this in three main ways.

First, section 70 of the Assessment Act allows for reassessment at full market value. Over the past eight years, 138 municipalities in Ontario have been proclaimed at full market value. Most recently, the assessment rolls for the district municipality of Muskoka and the district of Parry Sound were updated to 1978 market value and reassessed in 1980 for 1981 taxation purposes.

Second, subsection 63(3) of the Assessment Act provides for the equalization of assessments within property classes in a municipality. Since that particular program, popularly referred to as a section 86 reassessment, was introduced in 1979, it has been successfully implemented in 349 municipalities. This year, approximately 70 municipalities are considering its implementation for 1983 taxation.

Third, my ministry has worked closely with the fiscal policy committee of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario in evaluating the feasibility of county-wide and region-wide section 63 reassessments. I am pleased to inform you that very shortly I will propose introduction of the necessary amendments to the Assessment Act to provide for this type of reassessment.

The benefits that would accrue to regional, county and municipal governments with this system are twofold. On the more obvious plane, a current reassessment at market value will afford a fair and defensible basis on which taxes can be levied; and second, the problems associated with the apportionment of shared costs among constituent municipalities would be addressed by the introduction of uniform mill rates for region, county and school purposes. This would mean, for example, that similar properties of comparable value will pay the same amount of taxes for school and regional purposes, no matter where they are located in a region.

As I previously stated, the Ministry of Revenue has received partial funding for preparing a Metro-wide property tax impact study. This study was undertaken in direct response to a request from Metropolitan Toronto council. Metro council's objectives in requesting this impact study were to remove inequities in Metro Toronto assessment rolls, and to ensure that similar properties of comparable market value pay similar Metro and school taxes.

This study represents the first time that my ministry has addressed a reassessment on a regional basis. The regional municipalities of Waterloo and Haldimand-Norfolk and the county of Perth have also requested similar region-wide studies which I have promised for next year. I also am aware of many other jurisdictions that are considering such a region-wide or county-wide reassessment.

The Metro Toronto study is based on 1980 market values developed for all 487,000 properties, which translate into 947,000 separately assessable units that represent the extremes of complexity found in the province. Indeed, this study represents the largest single valuation project ever undertaken by the ministry's property assessment program. The impact study will allow Metro politicians to evaluate the pros and cons of introducing a long-overdue reassessment.

These three approaches which I have just discussed, namely, market value reassessment, section 63 reassessment and county-wide and region-wide reassessment, collectively work to produce equitable assessments and a defensible base upon which taxes can be levied by municipalities.

In fact, by the end of this year, well over half of the province's 838 municipalities will have been reassessed using market value as the basis, both under our section 63 reassessment program and by proclamation. I think the members will agree that over the last four years, considerable progress on the property assessment front has been achieved.

Another mandate of the property assessment program is to undertake an enumeration during municipal election years. A full enumeration of the province began on Tuesday, September 7, and the field work was completed on September 25, 1982. This enumeration produced a preliminary list of electors for the municipal and school board elections held on Monday, November 8.

Because of the very short time period available to municipal clerks for printing and posting the lists, the ministry made a commitment to the Association of Municipal Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario to deliver the lists as early as possible. Consequently the first of these were delivered on September 29 and all were in the hands of municipal clerks by October 6.

In all, the 1982 enumeration process saw 10,683 enumerators call on approximately 3.2 million homes, collecting or verifying information on over 8.5 million people. This resulted in approximately 3.7 million changes to the data in the assessment program computer files. The total cost of this year's enumeration is expected to be in the region of $4.5 million. Given the high-quality data obtained during only a three-week period, I think the honourable members would concur in my evaluation of the 1982 enumeration process as an unqualified success.

Another important priority of the property assessment program is to improve services and information to ratepayers, municipalities and school boards. Over the past year, ratepayer services have been significantly enhanced. For example, a new feature on the assessment notice this year is a message alerting ratepayers to changes in their assessments.

With regard to supplementary assessment notices, we now include a new information pamphlet that explains in clear terms the purpose and basis on which the assessment was made as well as the ratepayer's means of appeal. This is particularly important since the supplementary assessment triggers an additional tax bill within a few weeks. I believe it is worth while noting that municipal tax collectors have been most appreciative of our efforts in helping ratepayers understand this special municipal taxing provision.

On a similar front, the assessment program will be introducing a new pamphlet later this year that explains in easily understood terms each part of the computer-generated notices of assessment. This pamphlet will accompany the 1982 assessment notice sent to every owner and tenant of real property in Ontario.

On the subject of assessment notices, I am considering limiting their distribution next year. In response to ongoing financial constraints and the need to refine the targeting of notices, I am considering mailing annual notices of assessment to owners and tenants of real property only when a change has occurred in any of the recorded information on the previous year's assessment roll.

Another ratepayer service measure introduced earlier this year provides increased accessibility for taxpayers to assessment staff. This initiative, which is to have an assessor available in the municipal office one day each month to discuss assessment-related matters with ratepayers, is particularly relevant to rural and northern Ontario. I should acknowledge, too, that this suggestion emanated from the advisory committee on assessment data services, comprising 10 representatives from five important municipal and school board organizations.

Further, on the advice of this same advisory committee, the assessment program has made available free of charge to municipalities and school boards up to five microfiche copies of the assessment roll. Additional copies will be made available on request at cost.

Last year I announced the development of the assessment program policy manual, which outlines the operative procedures used in the valuation of various property types as well as the process followed for such activities as enumeration and a section 63 reassessment. I am pleased to report to the members that this manual is now for sale to the public. Certainly I believe this publication will be of particular interest to tax agents, appraisers and others similarly involved in the assessment process.

As well, the assessment program will be issuing a new publication in 1983, entitled A Guide to the Assessment Act. This guide will provide clarifications on each portion of the act and will summarize court decisions relevant to each section. This guide will be of instrumental assistance to our property assessors throughout the province and will also be for sale to the general public.

In concluding my rather brief remarks about the property assessment program I would point out to the members that each of these latter customer service measures will provide a significant contribution to my ministry's freedom of information program and increased accessibility for ratepayers.

Head office relocation to Oshawa: I am sure that the honourable member, my critic from the third party will be most interested in this segment.

10:20 p.m.

I would like to turn now to perhaps the most significant event on my ministry's agenda during the current fiscal year. I am referring, of course, to the relocation of our head office to Oshawa.

I am pleased to report to the honourable members that after much careful planning, late this winter the 1,550 head office staff now located at 77 Bloor Street West in Toronto will move their base of operations to our new head office building which has been constructed in downtown Oshawa.

I believe this precedent-setting head office relocation outside the boundaries of Metropolitan Toronto heralds a future bright with promise and achievement for my ministry. I am convinced that its implications will resound for many years as the potential of our new building and location is realized and the Ministry of Revenue embarks on a new and exciting era of technological achievement in the administration of our statutes and an enhanced level of customer service to the residents of Ontario.

Since the relocation of our head office was announced by the then Treasurer, Darcy McKeough, on April 5, 1977, I have had a deep and abiding interest in this project, first as the member for Durham West, and latterly as the responsible cabinet minister.

The decision to relocate evolved in response to this government's policy with the brief but forcefully descriptive title of "Go East." This "Go East" policy was developed in the early 1970s as the cornerstone of a broader government belief that regions throughout Ontario, and not only Metropolitan Toronto, should have available to them the employment and economic stimulus associated with the presence of major government functions within their boundaries.

The Ministry of Revenue will become the third largest employer in Durham region after General Motors and the Durham Board of Education. In addition to economic stimulus through job creation and the infusion of government spending expected as a result of the relocation, the decision to build in downtown Oshawa is regarded as an added bonus. The central business district location is contributing significantly to the revitalization of the commercial heart of Oshawa.

About 10,000 square feet of prime retail space on the ground floor of our building will provide modern shopping convenience for prospective customers and will act as a stimulus for future commercial development in the city core.

When the move is completed by the end of March, it will mean that each and every working day of the year there will be a work force of some 1,550 in our new building at 33 King Street West in Oshawa. The impact both on Revenue staff and on the local community will, of course, be significant.

Next, there is purchasing, and this breaks down into three distinct areas.

First, there is the ministry itself. Like any other large organization, we consume a vast number of goods and services, and we know many of these can be provided locally. Consequently, we are making a deliberate and concerted effort to identify Durham suppliers and to ensure that our purchasing policies and procedures are known to local companies.

The next purchasing category is that of goods purchased by our own staff moving into the Durham region. Unquestionably, they will need the usual variety of goods and services such as houses, cars, groceries, entertainment and clothes, and I am sure this injection of consumer spending will be welcomed by local merchants.

Finally, there is the local purchasing conducted by our daily commuters. This is a different kind of market, one with perhaps more immediate short-term expectations. Certainly, though, I think it will be an interesting challenge to downtown Oshawa businessmen to develop marketing strategies which will positively and successfully correspond to the needs of this group.

A few words now about the building itself:

Our head office relocation project presented a one-time opportunity to have designed and constructed a building that would be expressly geared to the functions which my ministry performs.

The relocation also allowed the ministry to examine all aspects of automated office technology and to determine the kinds of computer and telecommunications equipment which might be incorporated into the new building.

As well, considerable attention has been paid to achieving a high level of energy efficiency and conservation which are maximized in the Oshawa building through a sophisticated heat reclamation and recirculation system.

This system is complemented by extensive use of conventional insulation materials and technology, resulting in one of the most energy-efficient office buildings in existence anywhere.

As well, an atrium extending through the middle of the building serves as a passive solar collector, while the lighting standard of 100 foot-candles has been reduced to 75 foot-candles.

Collectively, these and other sound energy conservation principles will work to provide a building expected to consume no more than nine kilowatt-hours per square foot per year. As a matter of comparison, a conventional "spec" office building of the 1970s consumes an average of 60 kilowatt-hours per square foot per year.

I should add in closing that the energy-consciousness aspects of our new Revenue building have not gone unnoticed internationally, and the building's architect is actively marketing these construction principles in several countries.

This concludes my introductory remarks, brief as they were, on the 1982-83 estimates for the Ministry of Revenue. I believe the comments I have made are crucial to a fair understanding of the resource and dollar figures presented here today.

Earlier, I referred to the initiatives and issues raised in this introduction as being both fiscally and administratively appropriate responses to the challenges of the contemporary economic scene. Now, I shall be pleased to provide members with further information in responding to any such questions they may have.

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

The House adjourned at 10:30 p.m.