Journal des débats 1983-mai-17 | Assemblée législative de l'Ontario

Mr. Speaker: On Friday last, the member for Etobicoke (Mr. Philip) raised a point of order in which he alleged that the introduction of Bill 32, An Act to amend the Landlord and Tenant Act, was not in order because the bill proposes to deal with a matter that is substantially the same as Bill 11 which was introduced earlier in this session.

It is well established by standing order 39 that no question or motion may be proposed upon which the judgement of the House has been expressed during the current session. However, in this case it cannot be said that the House has come to a decision on either of the bills, and I must rule that the member's point of order is not in order and cannot properly be submitted at this time.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

INDIAN BAND AGREEMENT

Hon. Mr. Henderson: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to report to the members of the Legislature on the progress of the negotiations between the Islington band and the government. Members will recall that the government agreed in 1978 to implement the recommendations in the interim report of the Royal Commission on the Northern Environment that Ontario provide special attention to the social and economic needs of the Islington and Grassy Narrows Indian bands.

The progress of these negotiations over the last five years has been the subject of a number of questions and discussions in the House. In December 1982, Ontario and the Islington band reached an agreement in principle on a wide range of economic development and social programs. These programs are designed to assist the band in its efforts to improve the social and economic conditions on the reserve.

Last January I visited Kenora with my colleague the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Bernier) and addressed a public meeting to explain to interested citizens of the area, the significance of the terms of the agreement in principle. After a wide-ranging discussion, I asked a number of interested local people to form a committee to focus the local concerns and provide me with their advice.

In February I again visited Kenora and met with the citizens' committee, receiving some valuable suggestions, a number of which have been incorporated in the final agreement. On the same day I visited the Islington band reserve and met Chief Isaac Mandamin to deliver to him for his review and response, an interim draft agreement as it had been developed to that time. Because of his desire to complete the agreement with Ontario, Chief Mandamin signed the interim draft agreement and had it delivered to the Premier (Mr. Davis) with a request that the province execute the draft agreement.

While the Ontario government is just as anxious as Chief Mandamin to execute the agreement, the draft signed by the chief contained wording that might have been misinterpreted in the future and I felt a little more time would be wisely spent in improving the style of the document. This has now been done and I have signed what I believe to be a suitable final document and sent it to Chief Mandamin. The differences between the two documents are mainly those I have made to improve the clarity of the agreement and to avoid difficulties that might otherwise arise in its implementation.

It is my sincere hope that the chief will sign this document and that the band will subsequently ratify the agreement so that the benefits the agreement provides can be implemented in the near future.

[Later]

Mr. Foulds: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order: I wonder whether it is not incumbent upon the Provincial Secretary for Resources Development to table both the documents he referred to in his statement and make a statement about whether he has talked to Chief Mandamin in the meantime.

INSPECTION OF NURSING HOMES

Mr. McClellan: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order: In yesterday's question period, the Minister of Health (Mr. Grossman) indicated he would be providing me with a report on the four nursing homes I questioned him about. His exact words were, "The honourable member will have that information by six o'clock this evening" -- that is, information arising from my questions of February 22. I still have not received that report. I think that should be on the record.

Mr. Speaker: I am sure the minister will take note.

I think really these are not points of order. They would be better dealt with during question period.

WOMEN'S ISSUES MINISTERIAL APPOINTMENT

Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform the House of an appointment that will be of particular interest not only to women in this province but to all our citizens.

Twenty years ago the government established the women's bureau in the Ministry of Labour to assist with the growing and continuous participation of women in the labour force. This year marks the 10th anniversary of the Ontario Status of Women Council, appointed by this government to advise on any and all matters of concern to women.

It was also 10 years ago that my colleague the Provincial Secretary for Social Development (Mrs. Birch) became Ontario's first woman cabinet minister. She continues to serve the government --

Mr. Breithaupt: Has it really been that long? It is as though it were yesterday.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Did the member for Kitchener say that? He said "It is as though it were yesterday" with affection and respect.

Mr. Breithaupt: Yes. I did not realize so much time had gone by.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I understand. If only some of his colleagues would demonstrate the same affection and respect.

Mr. Peterson: You always interiect when you are embarrassed, don't you?

2:10 p.m.

Hon. Mr. Davis: I am never embarrassed to speak about the Provincial Secretary for Social Development (Mrs. Birch) at any time, at any place and on any occasion. It would serve the member's own political interest if he would treat her with the same respect.

Mr. R. F. Johnston: Is that why you are appointing her minister?

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Davis: She continues to serve the government and the people of Ontario with great commitment and dedication and has brought to cabinet a special understanding and sensitivity on issues affecting women. She has been in the forefront of efforts to advance the cause of women in this province, based on her personal and ministerial experiences.

She has recommended to me and to her cabinet colleagues that it is now time that a new structure be put in place to further this cause and I have accepted her advice in this matter. She has also assured me of her continuing commitment and interest.

As members of this House are well aware, these past two decades have witnessed profound change as women have moved into every aspect of working life in this province. Women now represent some 42 per cent of our province's labour force --

An hon. member: Why not a woman prime minister?

Hon. Mr. Davis: A woman prime minister; I will tell the member this: She would be a far superior prime minister of this province than his leader, who happens to be in Washington today.

Mr. Foulds: Why are you relieving her of these responsibilities?

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Davis: They are embarrassed because the member for York South (Mr. Rae) was in Dallas yesterday and is in Washington today. Does he not know the politics of Ontario are here?

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Ashe: Why do you feel guilty over there?

Mr. R. F. Johnston: Give her the job.

Mr. Speaker: Order. The members can ask these questions at the appropriate time. Statements by the ministry; the Premier.

Hon. Mr. Davis: Women now represent some 42 per cent of our province's labour force and some 56 per cent of all women work outside their homes. This is a trend that it is obvious will continue.

These changes and increased opportunities for women have been reflected in legislation, in policy and in expenditures by this government. I need not remind members of this House, for example, that the Family Law Reform Act and the Human Rights Code in this province introduced landmark reforms in Canada. This government has been sensitive to the particular needs of women in many other areas as well.

My responsibilities as Premier, reinforced by my experience at home, have caused me to develop a personal interest and concern for the cause of equality of opportunity for women in our schools, in our offices and factories, and in our institutions.

As someone engaged in public life, I recognize the great contributions of women to our labour force, and the potential for even greater involvement as we work together to eliminate those factors that now deny full and equal participation. I am keenly aware that Ontario needs the creative powers and hard work of all its citizens.

In my view, achieving full equality for women is vital to the equity and fairness on which our society is based. I believe we, as a people. can all be proud of the progress we have made as we recommit ourselves to fostering this objective.

It is increasingly apparent, I believe, that many issues of particular interest and concern to women are widely based, affecting several ministries, often at more than one level of government. Therefore we will proceed immediately with the recommendation that a minister be named responsible for women's issues, to provide a needed focus and a co-ordinating role in the delivery and communication of programs and policies designed to assist and encourage women in all aspects of life.

One of the minister's first duties will be to represent Ontario at a national meeting of ministers responsible for women's issues in Ottawa later this month. The minister will, of course, be a voice in cabinet on all issues of interest and concern to women. In partnership with others, this minister will also have the challenging task of analysing all proposals for their effect on women and recommending how these can best be implemented.

In the speech from the throne, the government indicated its intention to appoint a senior minister to undertake this responsibility. I am pleased to inform the House, therefore, that my most senior colleague in cabinet, the member for Brock (Mr. Welch), has agreed to become the minister responsible for women's issues.

This assignment will be in addition to his current responsibilities as Deputy Premier and Minister of Energy. I need not remind this House of the long and committed service of the member for Brock. I am convinced the experience he has gained from the many portfolios he has headed will serve him well in his new responsibilities.

He has demonstrated a long-standing interest in those issues of particular concern to women. It was the member for Brock who, as Attorney General, began the process of family law reform in Ontario. It was he who, as Provincial Secretary for Social Development, introduced a green paper on equal opportunity for women in Ontario, which served to focus public attention and debate.

His great compassion, sensitivity and commitment to human rights are well known throughout Ontario and will continue to serve all the people of Ontario in his new capacity. As I said at the outset. I believe that by achieving the goals of greater equity and fairness to women, we can build a society that is more equitable and fair to all its citizens.

I know members of this House now join me in assuring the minister of our full and enthusiastic support, and our best wishes for much success in discharging this new and significant responsibility.

I want to quote a former chairman of the advisory committee who has said, "The Honourable Robert Welch has been a tower of strength to this council, first as our minister, then as Attorney General. His indefatigable and resolute going to the people in every nook and cranny of Ontario with a film on matrimonial property must he applauded. He promised to listen to the women of Ontario. He will; he is that kind of person. We commend him."

ORAL QUESTIONS

WOMEN'S ISSUES

Mr. Peterson: Mr. Speaker, let me say at the outset I am somewhat confused, because I was under the impression the policy secretaries were in fact the senior ministers of the crown in the government. However, under the circumstances, I would like to congratulate the new minister. It is a very significant and important step forward, and we fully expect he will show the same concern as his predecessor always had for these issues of urgent and pressing concern for this province.

We have had only a very vague statement about the responsibilities the minister will assume, and therefore I would like to ask him if it is now his intention to consolidate some of the various issues into one portfolio. Will he be responsible for the Ontario Status of Women Council, as well as day care, the affirmative action program, the employment standards branch and a variety of other programs pertaining specifically to women in the work force as well as in the public service? What will his priorities be as the new minister in charge of women's issues in this province?

Hon. Mr. Welch: Mr. Speaker, I think perhaps the Leader of the Opposition will appreciate that, having received this assignment, it will be wise for me to consult with leaders who have taken responsible positions on these issues both in and out of government. Therefore the first round of consultative meetings will start tomorrow.

The Leader of the Opposition has been quite correct in pointing out the various activities within various ministries. This explains, really, why the Premier (Mr. Davis) was very anxious to have a focus and a co-ordinating organization of some kind to bring together all the activities that have been going on in several ministries of this government over the years.

The ultimate structure that will be designed would perhaps best await these consultations and the results of an examination of the various functions that is at present being carried out. I attach a great deal of importance to starting out by consulting with those who have been involved in this work. Number one on my list will be my distinguished predecessor in this responsibility, the Provincial Secretary for Social Development (Mrs. Birch), who has given such great leadership and has brought her style to bear on this.

2:20 p.m.

I want to indicate that I want to be very co-operative with the government of Canada, which has a focus and a co-ordinating structure as well, together with a number of other organizations. Then I think I would perhaps be in a much better position to recommend to the Premier what should be put in place in order to translate the mandate in some very real and positive way.

In summary, the emphasis now is that we have a sharper focus on it. Indeed, the responsibility of the minister will be to put in place a structure that will co-ordinate all of the many activities at present going on in several ministries of the government.

Mr. Peterson: Mr. Speaker, I apologize. From press reports, I was under the impression that the minister had been briefed by Sally Barnes yesterday and therefore knew all the issues concerned. However, we will give him time to inform himself of the various issues in his new role.

But when he is analysing his own responsibilities, instead of just putting a new structure on some old programs, would the minister specifically promise this House that he will address those problems -- particularly, for example, in his own Ministry of Energy?

According to the latest Status of Women Crown Employees report for the year 1981-82, of 73 women employed by his ministry, 50 hold clerical positions or are in the office service category. Women in his ministry earn an average salary of some $18,189, which is 48.5 per cent of that earned by men in his ministry, which averages out to some $37,525.

With respect to the training and development money in his ministry, although women make up some 50 per cent of the work force in the Ministry of Energy, they receive only some 31.6 per cent of the training dollars. even lower than the 41 per cent spent a year previously.

Would the minister, as he is trying to establish his good faith in this movement and become the new principal spokesman for the government, address his mind to the problems in his other responsibility of Minister of Energy?

Hon. Mr. Welch: I am very pleased the Leader of the Opposition has raised this point, because it does help to illustrate what one of the high-priority issues will be as far as this work is concerned.

The member singles out the Ministry of Energy. That is fair; indeed, I have made it my business to go into these particular facts and figures. The Leader of the Opposition would be fair enough to appreciate that in a ministry such as Energy there is proportionally a very small middle-management group. There is a very large concentration of professional people in a ministry such as Energy, and when one understands that, it helps to underline in a very real way the tremendous importance that has to be placed on bringing into even sharper focus the need for more women to be pursuing careers in the other professions.

As we know, there are increasing numbers of women in medicine and law, but when one thinks of engineering and some of the other professions, I think all would agree that more progress has to be made in convincing women that they can see fulfilling career opportunities in these other professions. That is manifesting itself in my ministry, where there is such a high proportion of professional people.

So I would attach a very high priority to what the member says in so far as occupational emphasis is concerned and women themselves being encouraged to pursue careers in those other professions.

The Leader of the Opposition made some reference to issues, and perhaps in my haste to speak only in answer to his main question with respect to organizational matters I overlooked the fact that he did raise some questions about issues. There is no question there is a great deal of work to be done, building on what has already been done in the area of pensions and pension reform. This was referred to both in the speech from the throne and by the Treasurer (Mr. F. S. Miller) in his budget. The member opposite has been assured that there will be further statements on this.

There is the whole area of part-time work, the whole area of further reforms in family law and in skills training, the impact on women of the whole area of high technology and the commitment in the budget of the Treasurer for some million to be made available for skills training there. One could go on.

I want to assure the member that the emphasis, I hope with his encouragement and support, will be positive and progressive in the interests of those who are looking for leadership here for this type of encouragement.

Ms. Bryden: Mr. Speaker, I welcome the Premier's announcement today about the appointment of a senior cabinet minister, the member for Brock (Mr. Welch), as a spokesperson on women's issues, although I am surprised it took him about a month to fulfil this promise made in the throne speech, and many years to recognize it is essential to have a minister responsible for women's issues in the same way as our party has had a person responsible solely for women's issues for several years.

I am disappointed the Premier's announcement did not include notification that he had relieved the member of any of his other responsibilities as Deputy Premier and Minister of Energy. I would like to ask the minister if he can tell us just how much time he expects to be able to devote to his new responsibility. Will he have a staff to assist him, and can we expect some new legislation in the women's issues field this session?

Mr. Speaker: There were three questions there and I would ask the minister to address his attention to the last one please.

Hon. Mr. Welch: Mr. Speaker, in response to the honourable member's question, I do want to underline what I have already indicated to her in writing -- that I am anxious to meet with her as soon as convenient to have the benefit of her views on a number of issues, I do respect the fact that she has devoted a great deal of time to this whole area of women's issues, and I am sure I will benefit greatly from having the opportunity to review them.

Certainly the Premier has assured me I will have the resources that will be necessary in these early stages to bring together people who will be helpful in discharging the responsibilities he has assigned to me. I can assure the honourable member that with the help of those who will be brought together in this organization, we will then be in a better position some weeks from now to make some more specific recommendations with respect to structure.

The emphasis is to get on with the job, to build on what has already been done, to consult with those, such as the member for Beaches-Woodbine, who have a very keen interest in these issues, and I hope to make some real progress.

Mr. Wrye: Mr. Speaker, while the minister is newly appointed today to this job, he has been a long-time member of cabinet and undoubtedly has had some input into some of the major directions the cabinet has taken. I want to remind him that back in April of last year the Advisory Council on Equal Opportunity for Women, followed later by the Ontario Status of Women Council, suggested to his colleague the Minister of Labour (Mr. Ramsay) that --

Mr. Speaker: I will ask the honourable member to place his question please. The standing orders do not provide for any statements of fact or opinions.

Mr. Wrye: I am just trying to remind him of the background.

Mr. Speaker: I am sure he is aware. Please place your question.

Mr. Wrye: The Minister of Labour was advised that voluntary affirmative action had failed and both organizations suggested that mandatory affirmative action be implemented. The Minister of Labour said that while he clearly recognized the necessity, he did not believe --

Mr. Speaker: Order. Will the honourable member please place his question without any further delay.

Mr. Wrye: Can the minister share with us his preliminary observations on whether the time has not now come to move towards mandatory affirmative action?

Hon. Mr. Welch: Mr. Speaker, I think it would be premature on my part to really share any judgement on that particular issue until I have had an opportunity to get an update on this. In fairness, tribute should be paid to my colleague the Minister of Labour who has spent a great deal of time on many of these issues. A tremendous amount of progress has been realized through the voluntary approach.

I am sure the honourable member would be the first to know that a very meaningful way to accomplish goals and objectives is to work from an educative and persuasive point of view to convince people with respect to adopting this and working with it, but I must tell him that I come into this responsibility quite prepared to he persuaded on a number of issues.

The important emphasis in this, and I am sure the member for Hamilton Centre (Ms. Copps) will agree with me, is to give some real meaning and substance to the term "equal opportunity." That is what we are about, that is why we are here: because we agree on this whole concept of equal opportunity for women. Indeed, we want to make sure that we remove any impediment that would stand in the way of their accomplishing that.

2:30 p.m.

TOXIC WASTE DISPOSAL

Mr. Peterson: Mr. Speaker, the minister really is wonderful. That was a great speech and I want to congratulate him.

I have a question for the Minister of the Environment. He is aware, I am sure, of the press conference this morning held by Dr. Chant and the Ontario Waste Management Corp. I gather they are moving towards some resolution of the difficult problems they are wrestling with.

What was most disturbing coming out of that press conference is that Dr. Chant's time line now is about four years, and according to his figures, we are still dumping about 750,000 long tons of poisonous toxic waste in a variety of places in Ontario on an annual basis -- in sewer systems, lakes, landfill sites and who knows where. That means in the next four years another three million long tons will be dumped in this province in these same places; presumably, in many instances, in very unsafe and dangerous places.

What strategy does the minister have to deal with these problems until the completion of that facility?

Hon. Mr. Norton: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member would be well served and would also serve the public of Ontario well if he took the time to sit down and I would be quite prepared to assign the staff of my ministry to sit down with him if he likes -- to review what Dr. Chant and the Ontario Waste Management Corp. are referring to when they mention those kinds of figures. In most instances -- I think it is safe to say in all instances -- it is not the poisonous, toxic material the member is describing that is being dumped everywhere in the province.

There are a variety of classifications of waste in this particularly sensitive area. It is true there are some classifications of liquid industrial waste that are highly toxic. By and large, the most toxic ones are not being dumped. Some are being treated; in fact, a very considerable proportion at present is being treated in the province in places such as the Tricil facility in Lambton county.

There are some less harmful liquid wastes and the member must not assume that all liquids fall into the category that he has just described -- that are still going into some six or seven landfill sites which have been examined and are approved for that purpose.

I was not present at the press conference, but I understand there are a number of industrial sludges that have been included by the waste management corporation in its calculations. Those industrial sludges are regarded by many people as not suitable for categorization as hazardous materials.

There have been ongoing discussions between the staff of the waste management corporation and the staff of my ministry since one of the earlier reports of the waste management corporation in which there was a very large figure for unaccounted-for waste. All those figures are currently under review because it appears the consultants used an erroneous method to collect the data; we know they erred very substantially in some communities. We have done actual industry-by-industry surveys that demonstrate the consultants figures were quite erroneous.

Mr. Peterson: If there is no problem, why is the minister going ahead with the waste management facility?

Hon. Mr. Norton: I did not say there was no problem. For example, polychlorinated biphenyls are being stored in this province, as I think the member is aware, in places like Smithville. Ontario Hydro has a site or two where they are being stored. We must find appropriate ways to destroy those, but in the interim they are being stored. Certain other materials are being stored at present, and we will be diverting other materials, as the time is appropriate, into the waste stream that will be handled by the waste management corporation.

I have never said there is not a problem. All I am saying is that the kind of exaggerated and distorted statement emanating from the member, for example, in the question he raised this afternoon, serves no one well and does not communicate accurate information to the public. The problem is being addressed and will be addressed in plenty of time.

Mr. Charlton: Mr. Speaker, regardless of the extent of the problem, there is a problem out there. There are some toxic wastes that are not now being stored that perhaps should be. Is the ministry developing interim plans for dealing with some of the problem areas in the time frame between now and getting the waste management corporation operation in place?

Hon. Mr. Norton: Mr. Speaker, we are certainly looking at a variety of things; for example, effective methods of PCB destruction. We have almost completed the guidelines that will be subject to an environmental assessment, which I hope will lead to the utilization of available technology in the destruction of PCBs before the end of this year. In the interim we will continue to look at any available method to safely dispose of hazardous or potentially hazardous materials.

To suggest there is a rampant problem out there is not correct --

Mr. Swart: Time.

Mr. Speaker: Thank you. The minister has answered the question.

Mr. Elston: Mr. Speaker, the minister will be told shortly, if he has not yet been told, that Dr. Chant has indicated there has been some consultation between himself and his ministry with respect to the numbers. Dr. Chant indicated today that no information was presented to him that would dissuade him from his original contention that half of the 1.5 million long tons of generated waste for which his corporation was responsible would not be treated.

I challenge the Minister of the Environment to reduce the 750,000 tons, which my leader spoke about, by half between now and 1986-87. Can the ministry reduce those wastes by half in that time?

Hon. Mr. Norton: That is a very interesting question, Mr. Speaker. How long do I have?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: You have 39 minutes and 27 seconds.

Hon. Mr. Norton: It is a very complicated question. I am not sure whence that question emanated, where the magic figure of a 50 per cent reduction came from. Is the honourable member suggesting I eat it?

There is a problem in terms of volume of waste, no question about it. Major strides have been taken in terms of recycling some of that waste, particularly oily wastes. That has now given rise to two new industries in Ontario that are thriving on the recycling of oily wastes.

We will continue to work with industries to try to generate that kind of utilization of organic waste material. Whether we can achieve a 50 per cent reduction in that time frame, I do not know, unless the member is suggesting we start shutting down industry in the province.

2:40 p.m.

WOMEN APPRENTICES

Ms. Bryden: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the newly named spokesperson on women's issues. The reason I had hoped the minister chosen for this post would have been relieved of his other portfolio responsibilities is that women in Ontario occupy a second-class position in many fields.

Specifically, I want to ask the minister what is happening in the apprenticeship training field. Recent statistics from the Ontario government indicate that there are 856 fewer women apprentices now in Ontario than in 1981 and that whereas there has been an increase of nine per cent in total apprentices, there has been a 44 per cent decrease in women apprentices. We seem to be moving backwards in training women for skilled jobs.

What steps will the minister consider to ensure full access to mandatory skills training programs?

Hon. Mr. Welch: Mr. Speaker, as the honour- able member will recall in response to the main question of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Peterson), there was some emphasis placed on this whole question of skills training. Indeed, as the member will recall, the Treasurer (Mr. F. S. Miller) has made an allocation of some $4 million in this year's budget, with a special emphasis on this idea of skills training. That will be administered, as the member knows, by the Minister of Colleges and Universities (Miss Stephenson).

I have no reason to want to dispute the figures mentioned by the member. What we have before us is a golden opportunity to impress upon guidance counsellors and people involved in the education system to ensure there is a broadening of the horizons with respect to the career opportunites that women see for themselves. I think that is a very important point.

I hope the resources which the Minister of Colleges and Universities has and this whole concern that is being expressed with respect to the impact of the advances in high technology, particularly on women, will provide us with an opportunity to attach an even higher priority to getting busy in the area to which the member makes reference.

As we reflect upon where we are, I point out to her that I think it was my colleague the member for Lincoln (Mr. Andrewes), when he was making his very excellent contribution in the throne speech debate on May 3, who used that opportunity to draw attention to this whole area of women's issues and brought us up to date on some of the progress that was being made. I commend him for that speech and for having included this particular area as part of his interest.

But I go back to what the member has urged on us and would attach some very high priority to that particular concern.

Ms. Bryden: I fail to see how it is a very high priority to provide skills training for women when the Treasurer said in his budget that he was going to introduce a number of new skills training initiatives in certain fields, only one of which would be for women. He did not give any specifics as to what that field was or what any of the other fields were either. That kind of vague promise from the Treasurer does not leave us with much to go on as to any action in this field.

Can the new spokesperson tell us whether he believes he can overcome the wage gap between men and women without adopting the principle of equal pay for work of equal value and mandatory affirmative action?

Hon. Mr. Welch: With the greatest respect, although I would like to address the matter, the supplementary is not related to the main question; it is a brand-new question. We were asked about --

Mr. Laughren: That's not for you to judge.

Mr. R. F. Johnston: Do you want to be Speaker too, as well as women's minister, Minister of Energy and Deputy Premier?

Hon. Mr. Welch: In all fairness, and I would hope that fairness would prevail, the main question was about the apprenticeship program; now we are talking about equal pay for work of equal value. I am simply asking whether that is supplementary.

Mr. Speaker: Order. Will the minister please not enter into debate? He may answer the question if he wishes.

Hon. Mr. Welch: If we are now talking about equal pay, I would think I would be correct in drawing to the member's attention the speech from the throne and the commitment of the government to want to continue whatever steps are going to be necessary to close the gap in salaries or wages earned by men and women. That commitment is set out there.

There has been some interesting work done by the advisory council and by a number of others to take us from where we are now, as far as the equal pay provisions are concerned, although I must be very honest to share with members that I have not gone into all the intricacies and ramifications of the new composite test, which is seen as a progressive step towards a fuller realization and appreciation of some of the problems.

Ms. Bryden: It was promised a year ago.

Hon. Mr. Welch: Certainly as of this appointment today, I tell my friend, one of the matters on my agenda is to translate the commitment made in the speech from the throne to close that gap.

Ms. Copps: Mr. Speaker, when the minister made his comment earlier about the poor record, trying to justify the lousy record of his ministry in hiring women, in which he said most people working in capacities in his ministry are working as professionals, it reminded me a little of some years ago when the banks were looking for women for their boards of directors. They started by telling the women of this country that the reason they could not get women on their boards of directors was that they did not have women qualified for that.

In coming at this portfolio, the minister has to come at it with an open mind that there are women who are professionals who could be working in his ministry to clear up his record.

Mr. Speaker: Question, please.

Ms. Copps: If the minister is really serious in going by the voluntary method, expecting the people of this province will bring in equal pay for work of equal value, how can he justify the fact that in his own ministry his record is substantially lower than the provincial average? For every dollar paid to a man in his ministry, 48.5 cents is paid to a woman. This is substantially lower even than the provincial average, which is not adequate for women in this province. How can he justify that when his own record in his past ministries is not acceptable and is intolerable?

Hon. Mr. Welch: Mr. Speaker, in all fairness, I would think the honourable member would want to be accurate. As a follow-up to the question of the Leader of the Opposition when he made reference to my ministry, I was not using the question of professional recruitment as an excuse. I was pointing out that in the Ministry of Energy there is a predominance of engineers, and I invited the member to look at the record as to the number of women who are preparing themselves for that profession.

I welcome the comment, as I welcome this member's comment with respect to the need to be aggressive and on the job with respect to that, but by the same token we have to make sure young women are being encouraged to see career opportunities in those other professions, of which engineering is one. That is the point I was making.

Because of the large numbers of, say, engineers in the ministry, it is perhaps not fair to make those judgements about that ministry. We have very few in the so-called middle management group. I am not here to try to defend what the situation may be now. I am here, I hope with the member's support and encouragement, to make improvements and progress.

We have a choice. We can spend all our time here talking about yesterday or we can get on and build on what has happened and make an even brighter tomorrow as far as equality of opportunity is concerned.

Mr. Foulds: Mr. Speaker, can the minister give us a commitment today that he will take one concrete step before this House adjourns in June or July to improve the condition of women with respect to equal pay for work of equal value, affirmative action and skills training and to reverse the scandalously low number of women in executive positions in the public service of Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Welch: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member has the commitment of this government with respect to the appointment announced by the Premier today, the statements made in the speech from the throne and the progressive steps we have already taken in the budget. After all, with respect to the business of the Canada pension plan, the commitment in the budget on pension reform which will be announced by the minister, the whole tone is progress. I am quite prepared to be judged some months from now on that, which will be the fair time.

2:50 p.m.

INSPECTION OF NURSING HOMES

Mr. McClellan: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Health with respect to violations of unenforced regulations of the Nursing Homes Act and regulations.

It being after six of the clock on Monday. and the report not having been delivered as promised, let me ask the minister, since we dealt with Country Place Nursing Home yesterday and the violations there -- by the way, they are still delivering meals in a golf cart, I understand -- can he confirm or deny that his inspectors found violations of the regulations at the Lakewood Nursing Home in Huntsville, specifically violations of subsection 56(12) of the regulations which require adult-sized beds for adult-sized residents -- in other words, the beds were deficient in size -- and of clause 56(c), having to do with the requirement that a resident who is in a restraint should have his position changed every hour by a registered nurse or a registered nursing assistant?

Can the minister confirm that those or other violations were found at Lakewood?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I can confirm that there are some violations at Lake- wood. I also want to apologize to the honourable member. I mentioned yesterday that I thought the information he had requested and I had undertaken to provide for him on three nursing homes several months ago had already been put in his hands. Later, when I asked why he had not had it, I discovered the answer was that since in all those cases it had been determined that indeed there were violations, our legal staff, pursuant to our instructions to move immediately where there were any violations throughout the system, had commenced certain proceedings in each of those cases, and therefore the distribution of some of the details could perhaps harm the ultimate success of the prosecutions we had undertaken.

That covers Country Place, which has indeed been charged. With regard to Lakewood, Barton Place and Good Samaritan, final decisions have not yet been taken, but they will be taken in the next day or two.

Mr. McClellan: My concern is very simple. As in the case of the Ark Eden Nursing Home, one is free to draw the inference that the violations in each of these nursing homes took place under the nose of Ministry of Health inspectors and that the violations were not brought into enforcement until the matters were raised in the Legislature.

I want to ask the minister whether that is the case. In Barton Place, Country Place, Lakewood or the Good Samaritan Nursing Home were there violations of the regulations that were known to the minister's inspectors before February 21 or 22?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: As the member knows, we began to increase our inspection opportunities as long as a year ago, when a special team was brought into the ministry on contract to begin to review all the nursing homes in the province. That process took a number of months last year; so the simple answer to his question is that the crackdown had begun almost a year before the question was raised in this House. It took us most of last year to complete one inspection program of the province in some detail.

Finally, with regard to some of the other matters, those were done earlier this year. In the case of Country Place, which the member asked about, there have been six inspections done in the past month and a half.

Mr. McClellan: The minister is aware that as of April 14 the Ark Eden Nursing Home was still in violation of the act with respect to subsection 56(12), residents were still occupying cribs that were deficient in size, and the Ark Eden Nursing Home is still in violation even after the inquest.

Will the minister tell us whether it is true that there were adult-sized residents at the Lakewood Nursing Home living in infant-sized cribs, which, as the minister knows, produces curvature of the spine and respiratory difficulties? Can he tell us whether there are adult-sized residents at the Sunnydale Nursing Home at Sunderland who are living in infant-sized cribs?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: As I have indicated, if the member wants us to provide any details that our legal staff feel we can provide with regard to the new home he has raised this afternoon, we will try to provide them.

As I look briefly and quickly through the circumstances with regard to Lakewood, it appears that what we might call the crib or undersized bed problem is not one of those identified; but I would want to have another look at this in some more detail before I confirmed that.

ASSISTIVE DEVICES PROGRAM

Mr. T. P. Reid: Mr. Speaker, I also have a question for the Minister of Health in regard to his prosthetic devices program. The minister is aware that it has been close to a year and a half since his predecessor and the Provincial Secretary for Social Development (Mrs. Birch) announced a $13-million-a-year program to cover some 15,000 handicapped children in our province.

Is the minister aware that as of the end of March 1983, only 6,808 children, not even half the 15,000 in need of the program, had been covered at a cost of only $2,553,000 instead of the expected $13 million'? Obviously the minister's program is being implemented very slowly, if at all.

Further, is the minister aware that the upkeep of a wheelchair over the three-year period which is allowed for in the program before replacement sometimes equals the cost of the device, that the life expectancy of a wheelchair is only between six months to a year and that batteries for mechanical chairs cost between $75 and $100 and have a life expectancy of two to five months?

Is he also aware that all maintenance costs and the cost of batteries have to be borne by the users?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Mr. Speaker, let us put the figures in some perspective. The phase-in period was well known when it began. That is, it was known it would take one year to phase in the entire program. No one in this House or anywhere else suggested that on July 1, 1982, there would be 10,000 or 15,000 young people covered on day one. The members of the advisory committee and the members of this House knew that.

A committee was set up so there could be an orderly and proper phase-in of the program as arrangements were made for each of the different devices. As of March 31 -- I think the figure the honourable member gave was somewhat low, but not that low -- there were 6,445 covered; and without the introduction of some of the new programs that are coming on, just taking it on an annual level, that would indicate there would be 9,700 covered by the end of the first fiscal year. As well, with the visual aids program for which a subcommittee of the committee has been struck, if we introduce that as of September 1, 1983, that will add another 10,000 young people at one fell swoop.

All in all, wherever the member is getting his information, I think most members of the committee would report to him that there is an orderly and proper phase-in of the program, as was anticipated. It is not behind, either in numbers of people covered or in the moneys being spent.

Mr. T. P. Reid: It is nice that the minister, as usual, is so complacent about this, but there are a lot of people who need these devices. In view of the fact that the minister has got almost $10 million, regardless of what he is talking about as far as phasing in goes, it is obvious he is not going to find the 15,000 he was targeting. Once again I ask, will the minister consider expanding the program to cover those people who are over 18 years of age?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: When the program was introduced, my colleague indicated, and we have subsequently confirmed, that at the conclusion of one full year of operation there will be a total review of the program to see where, when and if the program should be expanded. I am also confident that at some stage, when we have got the necessary expertise and advice, there will be an expansion of this program.

I should also say the fact that as much moneys as anticipated may not be spent is due in part to the excellent work of the members of that advisory committee. It has turned out that some of the assistive devices have been obtained at more advantageous prices and under more advantageous arrangments than was the case in other provinces which leapt right into it without doing this kind of work in advance and ended up paying far more than was appropriate.

The extent to which the budget is not fully spent is something that is not a criticism, I take it, as long as the number of children who ought to be covered are being covered. We seem to be on target on that basis.

RIGHT TO REFUSE WORK

Mr. Wildman: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Labour regarding the risk to the foetus of cytomegalovirus, or CMV, in that it can cause in utero death or severe retardation.

Does the minister not agree that any risk is too great for the three female teachers employed at the developmental day care centre of the Algoma District Mental Retardation Service in Sault Ste. Marie, since two are pregnant and one is planning a family? If so, will the minister intervene personally to ensure that these teachers are given the same rights to transfer as the female social workers of child-bearing age at the centre, who are represented by the Canadian Union of Public Employees, or at least are given the right of leave of absence at full pay?

3 p.m.

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: Mr. Speaker, in response to that question, I would advise the honourable member that I have already intervened personally. A meeting was arranged with the director for the board of education in Sault Ste. Marie, and it is my understanding that the concerns of the parties involved personally with this problem -- and I share those concerns -- are being addressed. The matter, if not resolved, is well on its way to being resolved. I am surprised to hear that question. It was my understanding that everything was straightened away.

Mr. Wildman: For the information of the minister, I was informed by the superintendent of personnel that the board of education and the Ministry of Community and Social Services had failed to work out an agreement on physical separation. As a matter of fact, the board of education has referred the matter to the regional office of the Ministry of Education in Sudbury. The teachers are on a temporary leave of absence with pay until the matter is resolved, but at this point it is not resolved.

Does the minister not agree that this case is similar to that of the pregnant worker at the Midwestern Regional Centre? That worker had the right to refuse unsafe work to protect her unborn child, under section 23 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. Since teachers are excluded from the Occupational Health and Safety Act, they cannot protect themselves or their foetuses in the same way.

If the minister does agree, will he move quickly to amend the act to include teachers and all other workers who are not now covered, as recommended by the task force headed by my colleague the member for Sudbury East (Mr. Martel)?

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: The ministry, in consultation with the Ministry of Education, has been working towards exactly what the member is asking for; that is, coverage of teachers under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. We have that as an objective, and I am quite sure we are going to be able to reach that objective in the not-too-distant future.

Mr. Bradley: Mr. Speaker, is the minister prepared to allow me to ask a supplementary of the Minister of Education (Miss Stephenson). Is that all right with you, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Speaker: It is up to the minister to redirect if he so desires.

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: Mr. Speaker, I would just as soon the honourable member directed the question to me.

Mr. Bradley: I will direct it later to the Minister of Education.

HOSPITAL BEDS

Mr. Roy: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Health. His ministry has known for more than 10 years about the hospital bed shortage in Ottawa-Carleton. His own ministry's figures have brought out the fact that there is a shortage, at least this year and in 1982, of around 175 hospital beds. These are the figures published by his own ministry and by the Ottawa-Carleton Regional District Health Council. Yet the senior minister for Ottawa-Carleton does not buy these figures and is quoted as saying he does not believe there is a hospital bed shortage.

Given this situation, why would the minister refuse the new Ottawa General Hospital an additional 80 beds, for which apparently there is some $7 million available for construction? He would prefer, according to the reports, to see the money spent on what is called "community health care," when everybody in Ottawa-Carleton, including the district health council, says the highest priority should be to alleviate the hospital bed shortage.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Mr. Speaker, if the honourable member would read some of the comments made by his Health critic, he would learn that some of the community-based programs we have been talking about, which the New Democratic Party Health critic and I have been pushing for and trying to introduce, do alleviate the bed shortage. They enable people to stay in their homes, to be discharged from the hospital area and to make and be given better use of community resources.

The geriatric assessment program that is going into place at the Ottawa Civic Hospital, with the support of this government, will be one of the great milestones in this province in terms of making sure that a better assessment is made of those people currently in hospital who could be discharged and that they are sent to places, be it homes, community programs or other institutions, where they will have more appropriate treatment and thus alleviating some of the bed pressures that may be existing in Ottawa.

Most other areas of the province would like to get that sort of service. The Ottawa-Carleton Regional District Health Council in Ottawa has been pushing very strongly for it. In fact, that was the subject of its recent meeting in my office.

I also wish to take this opportunity to correct the record, Mr. Speaker. Not only has my colleague the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing (Mr. Bennett) been speaking to me about this matter for many months -- long before the member dropped in this afternoon, having read this in the Ottawa Citizen -- but also all my colleagues from the Ottawa area have been talking to us about this problem.

As a result, in addition to the geriatric assessment program, which will alleviate pressure on those beds, the Elisabeth Bruyère Health Centre has just opened 98 chronic care beds. Also, we are adding a palliative unit of 30 more beds; the geriatric assessment unit is 18 beds; 29 cardiac beds are being planned at the Civic and could open in September.

Later, the Civic will reopen 70 acute beds that were temporarily closed for renovations. Ambulatory care improvements will take place at Hal Montfort and the Salvation Army Grace General Hospital. The Royal Ottawa Hospital has expanded some of its outpatient services, which again will alleviate some pressures, and St. Vincent Hospital will receive $1.25 million.

Mr. Martel: Is this a statement?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: It is a complete answer to the shallow allegations being made that the answer to the pressures in Ottawa would be to move to a strict bed guideline.

Having listened to the debates in this House, I would have to say that, with the exception of the member for Ottawa East (Mr. Roy), everyone has agreed the way to go in this province is to community-based programs, outpatient programs and the kinds of things we are doing in Ottawa rather than putting in more beds.

Mr. Roy: I am glad to hear the minister say his Conservative colleagues have lobbied effectively to see that there are additional hospital beds in Ottawa, because in yesterday's Ottawa Citizen the editorial said, "The attitude of local Conservative MPPs towards the well-documented problem of hospital bed shortages in Ottawa-Carleton is puzzling, to say the least."

That was what the Ottawa Citizen said about the minister's Conservative colleague.

Why will the minister not accept the recommendations of the Ottawa-Carleton Regional District Health Council and of committees in Ottawa which say clearly we are short 175 beds? Will the minister answer my question instead of just talking to the member for Ottawa South? Why will he not pay attention to my questions?

Mr. Speaker: Order. I heard the question very clearly. I am sure the minister did as well.

Mr. Roy: He was talking to the puzzling member for Ottawa South. May I complete my question, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Speaker: I think you did. I heard it very clearly.

Mr. Roy: Not quite. My question is, will the minister allow the Ottawa General to build an additional 80 hospital health care beds?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: There are not very many areas of the province for which the minister can stand up and recite the number of new beds, which I think total 147, as I recited them a moment ago --

Mr. Roy: Is that why the minister was reading the answer?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: If the member wants to talk about reaching the provincial average, let me tell him --

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. That was not the question, with all respect.

Mr. Cassidy: Mr. Speaker, since the minister is making it quite clear that he is not prepared to bring Ottawa-Carleton up to the provincial average in terms of hospital beds provided, and since I presume he intends that Ottawa-Carleton is to be treated on a basis of equality with the rest of the province, is he now saying it is government policy that there are to be further cutbacks in active hospital treatment beds across the rest of the province?

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Mr. Speaker, I knew I would get the opportunity, and I thank the honourable member. In terms of the member making his final assessment with regard to overbedding or underbedding, there are two things he ought to keep in mind. First, there is the new hospital that is being built on the Quebec border. The member knows very well that will alleviate perhaps all the pressures and entirely change the ratio.

Mr. Roy: That's not what the health council says.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Mr. Grossman: Mr. Speaker, I hear a noise out of this ear.

Mr. Roy: Well, you should hear a noise.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order. Quite obviously, they do not want an answer.

Interjections.

3:10 p.m.

DONATIONS TO POLITICAL PARTIES

Mr. Philip: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. The minister is no doubt aware that municipal funds have been spent by Mr. Frank Biss, Peterborough director of development and a prominent Conservative, to attend $150 per plate Tory dinners for the Treasurer (Mr. F. S. Miller) and the Minister of Health (Mr. Grossman). Does the municipal affairs minister not agree that making donations to the Conservative Party or to any other party is inappropriate use of municipal funds, and will he initiate a public inquiry under the Public Inquiries Act into this abuse as has been suggested by a number of residents of the city of Peterborough?

Hon. Mr. Bennett: Mr. Speaker, I would suggest if there is some wrong use of municipal funds, that is entirely a municipal responsibility. I have not received any request.

Mr. Philip: I wonder if the minister realizes that under section 17 of the Election Finances Reform Act, corporations may make contributions to political parties. Does the minister feel that municipal corporations should have that privilege or does he feel an amendment is perhaps in order to exclude municipal corporations from giving funds to the Conservative Party?

Hon. Mr. Bennett: Let us go back for a moment. The very party now asking a question wants to have autonomy at the municipal level to make decisions by council. I trust this expenditure must go through the municipality at some point or other. Whether it has or not I do not know, but I am clearly saying it is the municipal council's responsibility, if it is levying funds to operate its industrial commission, to review those expenditures. I do not know whether the municipal council has approved it. I am suggesting to the member if he wants autonomy at the municipal level, then if the council has approved those expenditures, so be it. I have not had a request from any party at this point to examine any funds that have been expended --

Mr. R. F. Johnston: You just got one.

Hon. Mr. Bennett: Just one moment; I have not had any request from that community at this point to review any of the expenditures of that commission.

Mr. Peterson: Mr. Speaker, I am sure the minister is aware of the situation. It obviously raises a number of implications, presumably many of which we will review as we look at amendments to the act. Has he, and if he has not, will he request the Attorney General (Mr. McMurtry) or the law officers of the crown to see if there have been any violations of the Election Finances Reform Act. I am referring specifically to subsection 20(1) in this particular case. Will he request that review to see if there have been any violations of the law?

Hon. Mr. Bennett: Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to request a review of the situation if there seems to be an outstanding situation. Let me add only one other comment. Most of the industrial commissions that exist in this province, that is at the municipal level, do not exist entirely on municipal funds. There are contributions by the private sector to some of them to maintain the viability of their communities. The board of commissioners or directors of those corporations, generally speaking, are composed of members of council and the private sector. I am prepared to look at the situation.

Mr. O'Neil: Mr. Speaker, on a point of privilege: While we are on this point, the minister has just made a statement. I would like to accuse him of using funds from his ministry for political purposes, in that when he sends out or gives out cheques, or there are moneys being given to certain ridings, that he only allows his --

Mr. Speaker: Order, the member for Quinte; new question.

The minister, a point of privilege.

Hon. Mr. Bennett: Mr. Speaker, on a point of privilege: Since it has now been indicated by the member for Quinte that I have taken some privileges he believes I am not entitled to, as a minister of this government, I want to suggest to you, Mr. Speaker --

Mr. Speaker: I just ruled that it was not a point of privilege.

Hon. Mr. Bennett: But, Mr. Speaker, the accusation has gone into the record, unless the member wants to strike it out --

Mr. Speaker: Perhaps you would like to correct the record.

Hon. Mr. Bennett: Mr. Speaker, I would correct the record by saying that I never want to embarrass an opposition member in delivering any kind of a program on behalf of this government, which the members opposite so seldom want to support at any time.

Mr. O'Neil: On that same point of privilege. When the minister goes into our riding --

Mr. Speaker: Order. It is not a point of privilege.

Mr. O'Neil: I believe it is a point of privilege.

Mr. Speaker: No, it is not, with all respect. Order. The honourable member will resume his seat, please.

Mr. O'Neil: Mr. Speaker, I would like to correct the record.

Mr. Speaker: Order. You cannot correct the record on behalf of somebody else. This is getting into a debate, so we will have a new question.

FRENCH-LANGUAGE SERVICES

Mr. Boudria: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Deputy Premier in the absence of the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (Mr. Wells). I wonder if the Deputy Premier would be aware that last week the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs tabled the annual report of the office of the government co-ordinator of French-language services in this Legislature.

On page 15, the report states, "The government policy and budget commitment to the expansion of French-language services is a high priority." On page 28 of the same report it quotes the Solicitor General (Mr. G. W. Taylor) as saying, "The ministry is pursuing this program to recruit provincial police officers with French-language capability."

If such is the commitment of the government, can the Deputy Premier tell us why, after the wife battering report stated there is "a severe lack of French-language services in the Ontario Provincial Police," the Solicitor General stated in a letter to me on January 28 that "No further advertising to attract bilingual candidates would be contemplated" and he was satisfied that less than 10 per cent of the applications came from bilingual officers?

Is the Deputy Premier satisfied with that or what does he intend to do about it?

Hon. Mr. Welch: I would be very happy to discuss this matter further with the Solicitor General. I think the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, who has returned to his seat, would be the first to point out to the honourable member that the overall report shows significant progress in positioning services to accommodate the French-speaking population of the province.

REPORT

SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE OMBUDSMAN

Mr. Runciman: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present a special report from the select committee on the Ombudsman and move adoption of its recommendations.

This is not the sort of report from the Ombudsman's committee with which members are familiar. It is a special report on the ways in which the assembly may act to make its voice heard against political killings, imprisonment, terror and torture. This stems from a resolution brought forward by the member for Riverdale (Mr. Renwick).

I would urge all members to take 10 minutes or so to read this brief report. In it we explain why the committee, along with the government of Canada, believes that although foreign policy is properly the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada, there is an important and useful role for the Ontario Legislature in speaking out against violations of human rights throughout the world. We also indicate a number of possible methods the assembly may choose for fulfilling this role. The committee looks forward to hearing a debate on this report.

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

3:20 p.m.

INTRODUCTION OF BILL

INCORPORATION OF VAL RITA-HARTY ACT

Mr. Piché moved, seconded by Mr. Eves, first reading of Bill Pr25, An Act to continue the Corporation of the Township of Owens, Williamson and Idington under the name of the Corporation of the Township of Val Rita-Harty.

Motion agreed to.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

MISSIONARY CHURCH, CANADA EAST ACT

Mrs. Scrivener moved second reading of Bill Pr4, An Act respecting the Missionary Church, Canada East.

Motion agreed to.