Assemblée législative de l'Ontario

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

The Speaker: I would like to ask all members to join me in welcoming the first group of pages to serve in the first session of the 35th Parliament:

Luciana Cacciacarro, Etobicoke-Lakeshore; Laura Cricket, Carleton; Ryan Fortner, Welland-Thorold; Brian Fulsom, Nepean; Andrew Imrie, Peterborough; Megan Kerford, Durham-York; Elizabeth Kohli, Halton Centre; Renuga Kugadass, Lawrence; Sophie Lafrance, Nickel Belt; Jussi Leinala, Sudbury East; Anthony MacDonald, London North; Kristen MacKay, Halton North; Katie May, Middlesex; Rikin Morzaria, Markham; Meaghan Obee, Victoria-Haliburton; Kola Owolabi, Scarborough East; Aden Seaton, Lanark-Renfrew; Sarika Shah, Cornwall; Paul Sharp, Ottawa Centre; Carolyn Sparrey, York East; Jerry Stack, Huron; Matthew Stone, Simcoe East; Cary Wildman, Algoma; Michael Wood, Elgin.

Hon Miss Martel: I would like to ask the unanimous consent of all members of the House to move a motion with respect to permitting personal assistants on the floor of the House to assist members who have disabilities, in order that they might participate in these proceedings. Is that agreed?

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous consent?

Agreed to.

MOTION

ASSISTANTS FOR DISABLED MEMBERS

Miss Martel moved that, notwithstanding any standing order or custom of Parliament, personal assistants be permitted on the floor of the House and in committees to assist members with disabilities to participate in the proceedings of the House.

Hon Miss Martel: This is in order to accommodate the member for York East (Mr Malkowski) and any other members who in future may be elected to this Legislature who would need those assistants.

Mr Elston: I wish to make a comment if I might on that motion. My comments will come as no surprise to either the government House leader or yourself, because I have spoken to both of you about the position that we have with respect to this particular motion. We will not hold it up from being passed -- I think that would not be rational at all -- but I did want to comment that my feeling and the feeling of the caucus here is that this sort of motion need not even be addressed to the floor since we feel that the type of assistance that is required here should come automatically without such a motion happening in any event.

The idea of this motion being presented is that the people who are here as assistants are strangers to the floor. It is our understanding, on the principles required, that these people are not strangers but are in fact natural and needed extensions of the member elected.

We will not stand in the way of the motion passing, but we just wanted to make the point that philosophically we believe these people should be here as of right and not by exemption.

Hon Miss Martel: I agree entirely with the statement that was raised by the House leader for the official opposition. I raised those concerns with the Clerk and the table officers before the House leaders even met with respect to this position. Unfortunately, I could not get any of them on side and we decided the best thing to do to cover all cases in future was to move a motion that was as broad as possible, which would allow not only the accommodation of the member for York East but any other member who might come to this House and require other assistance, not only with respect to interpreters but perhaps if we have a member who is blind who might need some assistance. So we have tried to make the best of the situation by putting forward a motion which will cover all possible circumstances in future.

Motion agreed to.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF OTTAWA-CARLETON

Mr Chiarelli: First, Mr Speaker, let me congratulate you on your re-election to the House and your election as Speaker. We wish you great success.

Later today, I will be introducing a bill requiring the election at large of Ottawa-Carleton's regional chairman. The overwhelming majority of Ottawa-Carleton residents see the election at large of the chairman as the single best way to make regional government more accountable.

Earlier this year, our government responded to the accountability issue by introducing comprehensive reforms based on the recommendations of the Bartlett commission. The new government will need to review the Bartlett recommendations and develop its own policies on regional government reform. However, by passing this bill now, a strong measure of accountability will be in place while other more substantive reforms are worked out.

The bill also caps campaign donations and expenses for the election of the regional chairman. I am therefore urging the Minister of Municipal Affairs and the member for Ottawa Centre to support and pass this bill before Christmas in order that it be in place for the 1991 municipal elections.

1340

RECYCLING WEEK

Mr Cousens: This week has been notable in many ways. We in Ontario were the first provincial jurisdiction in Canada to elect a Speaker to our Legislature. We received the first speech from the throne from the New Democratic government and, remarkably, we have witnessed one of the greatest transformations of a political party. It would now seem that our social democratic friends across the floor are not Liberals in a hurry after all.

I would like to remind all members of this House, and indeed the government of the day, that this week is also recycling week in the province of Ontario. Yesterday's speech from the throne was an excellent opportunity for this government to unveil its plans for reducing, reusing and recycling our solid waste. Our party feels that addressing Ontario's waste crisis is an urgent priority. Some interesting statistics from the Recycling Advisory Committee include: 19 trees can be saved by recycling one tonne of newspapers; every tonne of steel cans recycled saves 1.5 tonnes of iron ore and 3.6 barrels of oil; recycling one tonne of waste can save three cubic yards of landfill space.

While every effort must be made by all of us to reduce and reuse as much as possible, recycling continues to play an important role in resolving the crisis before us. I say to the minister: Action must be taken immediately. We have not a moment to waste. The future is ours. Reduce, reuse and recycle.

DAVID REVILLE

Ms Churley: I would like to say a few words about my predecessor in this House, the member for Riverdale, David Reville.

David was first drawn into politics through his close involvement with the community. As a member of Toronto city council, he was a driving force behind establishing neighbourhood legal services.

David was also instrumental in helping to mobilize community opposition to a proposed garbage incinerator in south Riverdale and convincing city council to fund the intervenors. Thus was born Citizens for a Safe Environment.

When he was elected to the Ontario Legislature in 1985, David honoured both his predecessor, the late Jim Renwick, and the environmentally concerned citizens of Riverdale by demanding, in the first question he asked in this Legislature, that the Minister of the Environment begin a lead cleanup in Riverdale. The minister, to his credit, took David's advice.

In 1987, David was successful in convincing members of this Legislature to adopt a number of amendments to the Mental Health Act. The passage of Bill 190 made the Ontario Mental Health Act the most progressive in Canada.

In closing, I would like to repeat the words of one media observer who said: "David Reville is one of the most decent politicians I've ever met. He has courage."

As some members may know, he also has a sense of humour. I know that I am speaking for all of my colleagues in the Legislature in wishing him well in life outside this chamber. As the member for Riverdale, I will work hard to meet the high standards established by David Reville.

HIGHWAY 17A IN KENORA

Mr Miclash: Before I go into my statement, as well, Mr Speaker, I would like to congratulate you on your election to the Chair. I look forward to working with you.

A historic moment occurred in Kenora this past Friday morning. After 13 long years, much debate and a good number of alterations, Highway 17A, an alternative around Kenora, was opened.

For anyone who has driven through the town, he will know what a bottleneck in the Trans-Canada Highway Kenora's main street was. During the opening, I was able to refer to a number of very tragic mishaps that occurred on the congested streets in Kenora. I am happy to report to the House today that with the opening of 17A, these will be eliminated.

However, the project is not yet complete. The former government, at the wishes of the residents and businesses of the Kenora area, agreed to a number of changes in the design of the entrances and exits of the new route. I cannot stress the importance of these alterations enough. They are desperately needed to ensure safe passage on to and off 17A.

A commitment to ensure this safe passage was made by the former government in the way of the beginning of the construction of the same immediately upon the opening of 17A.

At this time, I would like to stress the importance of these and suggest that both the ministers of Transportation and Northern Development do everything in their power to ensure the completion of these projects in a timely manner.

HEALTH CARE

Mr J. Wilson: Yesterday's speech from the throne was conspicuous in its avoidance of health care issues. In light of this vagueness, my statement is directed to the Minister of Health, and it concerns two hospitals in my riding of Simcoe West.

Not only is Collingwood's economy suffering, but the town's hospital is awaiting the government's commitment to fund a desperately needed redevelopment of its facility. The hospital is looking for two-thirds support for the estimated $15-million redevelopment project. Currently, the hospital foundation has collected donations worth $2 million and has pledges for an additional $2 million.

There is an extreme need for this redevelopment. On a busy ski weekend, the Collingwood General and Marine Hospital receives about 150 visits to its emergency ward. During the course of the year, the overcrowded emergency department will handle some 37,000 visits. The minister should be aware that this figure falls just below the number of visits to the emergency ward at Toronto General.

In addition, a sizeable portion of the hospital was built in 1895 and upgrading is urgently needed.

Stevenson Memorial Hospital in Alliston is carrying a deficit for the first time in its history. The hospital's deficit is the direct result of the previous government's imposition of pay equity, the employer health tax levy and lost revenue from OHIP.

What does the government expect hospitals such as the one in Alliston to do to offset these costs? The throne speech provided no answers, which leads to the obvious conclusion that the ministry expects community hospitals to continue to cut services and jobs in order to balance budgets.

COMMUNITY LIVING ALTERNATIVES, SCARBOROUGH

Mr Owens: I rise today to make a statement regarding Community Living Alternatives, Scarborough. This group consists of 48 members who are parents of developmentally handicapped adults and adolescents. Community Living Alternatives, Scarborough is a compassionate and dynamic organization that is seeking to provide its adult children with an opportunity to live and participate as important and active members in their community.

This organization is also seeking to reduce the waiting list for group homes for individuals with developmental handicaps. Their first group home opened in September 1989 on Courtlands Drive in Scarborough, and on 14 November of this year, the Honourable Zanana Akande, Minister of Community and Social Services, announced that $185,090 would be provided annually for operating expenses for a second home in Scarborough.

I was quite pleased to assist this worthy organization in its efforts to gain funding, and I tip my hat to Bill Meldazy and Community Living Alternatives, Scarborough.

SERVICES EN FRANÇAIS / FRENCH-LANGUAGE SERVICES

M. Beer: Nous venons de franchir, le 19 novembre, le premier anniversaire de l'entrée en vigueur de la Loi sur les services en français.

J'ai eu l'honneur de présider à la déclaration de cette entrée en vigueur de la Loi, à minuit le 18 novembre dernier. Je n'oublierai jamais la fierté et l'euphorie qui animaient les francophones réunis ce soir-là à Toronto pour célébrer cet événement tant attendu.

Comme le disait si bien la chanson lancée ce soir-là, Notre place, tout ce que les francophones demandent c'est la possibilité de prendre leur place légitime dans la vie de cette province.

Over the last 25 years, successive Ontario governments have expanded the provision of French-language services in the fields of education and justice as well as those offered to the public by government ministries and agencies. The French Language Services Act remains one of the most important achievements of any Ontario government to serve the province's francophone population. It guarantees the individual's right to receive provincial government services in French in designated areas.

Lors d'une réunion en fin de semaine dernière, les francophones ont annoncé une vaste consultation provinciale sur l'avenir des francophones en Ontario dans le contexte des discussions sur l'avenir de notre pays.

Je voudraiss profiter de cette occasion pour leur souhaiter beaucoup de succès dans cet exercice et pour rappeler à tous les députés de cette nouvelle Assemblée législative que nous partageons la responsabilité d'assurer aux francophones l'infrastructure et les conditions équitables, pour qu'ils puissent continuer à enrichir l'Ontario de leur présence et de leur culture.

1350

NUCLEAR POWER

Mr Jordan: I suggest there is nothing new in the throne speech announced on nuclear energy. First and foremost, this government has reneged on a promise to stop Darlington. In the select committee's report on Darling ton, the NDP dissenting opinion said, "We believe the construction of Darlington should be stopped and that the plant should, at the very least, be mothballed."

This was their position despite the fact the plant had already cost the Ontario taxpayers $11 billion. Now the costs have reached $12.9 billion and the new Premier has changed his mind.

The Premier did not instruct Ontario Hydro to rewrite the 25-year demand/supply plan and take out the proposals for new nuclear facilities. He has also refused to rule out eventually lifting the moratorium and building more nuclear plants if conservation efforts do not succeed. If the Premier was serious about his commitment to eliminate nuclear power in Ontario, he would have done both of these things.

The throne speech also said that the government would instruct Ontario Hydro, which has already earmarked over $3 billion towards conservation measures over the next decade, to spend another $240 million, which is less than 1% in that budget. Will it be enough to keep Ontario out of the dark? I ask, what has changed?

NORTHERN ONTARIO

Mr Wood: I rise today to praise the government for its commitment to the north in the throne speech. The throne speech is a document of fairness. It is a blueprint for the people of Ontario that will fulfil our election promises based on these tough economic times.

On our native land claims, the aboriginal population in northern Ontario is six times the provincial average and it has been ignored for a long time by the previous regime, which is why I welcome the new government's pledge to make major strides in aboriginal self-government.

Also, over 22% of the population of northern Ontario speak French. Over 60% of the people in my riding of Cochrane North speak the language as well. That is why I am excited to see from the government a commitment of working to assure the rights of Franco-Ontarians.

Also, Cochrane North is a vast and expansive area spanning some 100,000 square miles where the car is often the only mode of transportation because communities are too far apart from each other. A fair and equitable car insurance system which the government will bring in will ease the cost of owning a car and help consumers.

As well, northern Ontario is the victim of the federal government's destructive and regressive economic and fiscal policies. This lack of action to provide the people of the north with protection during this period of restructuring is, to say the least, intolerable. We will introduce measures to protect the workers and their families from this injustice.

We will also provide a $700-million fund to spread --

The Speaker: Time.

BOARD OF INTERNAL ECONOMY

The Speaker: I beg to inform the House that I have laid upon the table a copy of order-in-council 2215/90 appointing the Speaker as chairperson; the Honourable Shelley Martel; the Honourable Shirley Coppen; the Honourable Gilles Pouliot; Dennis Drainville, MPP; Murray Elston, MPP, and Ernie Eves, MPP, as commissioners to the Board of Internal Economy.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

COURT SYSTEM

Hon Mr Hampton: On 18 October, the Supreme Court of Canada used section 11(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to rule that backlogs and delays in the criminal justice system were intolerable, and that the rights of accused, victims and the public to a speedy trial were being denied.

Court backlogs and lengthy systematic delays in many courtrooms in this province, particularly those in the greater Metropolitan area, are not new. Successive provincial governments have allowed the problem to deteriorate over the last several years. Now more than ever government and the key players of the justice system must accept responsibility for the credibility of the criminal court system, and work co-operatively to develop achievable solutions.

To deal with the many challenges created by what has become known as the Askov decision, I acted immediately to put in place several short-term measures. These measures were designed to ensure public safety.

Provincial crown attorneys are making every effort to bring forward serious charges in jeopardy of being dismissed due to unacceptable delays. Certain minor charges which are at risk due to delay and where it is determined they do not compromise public safety are being considered for withdrawal. This is done in an attempt to bring serious cases forward, which might otherwise be lost as a result of delays.

Today I am announcing a government commitment of over $39 million to reduce delays and backlogs in the criminal court system. The funds, totalling $10.9 million for the current fiscal year and an additional $28.3 million for the next fiscal year, will allow for the appointment of 27 new Ontario Court (Provincial Division) judges, and additional assistant crown attorneys and court staff. I have also made a request to my federal counterpart for the appointment of 12 new judges to the Ontario Court (General Division). Detailed announcements regarding the appointment of new judges will be made in the following weeks.

Just as important, the additional funds will help to facilitate the implementation of a number of reforms over the next year and a half. Combined, these measures will reduce time-to-trial delays and allow for the scheduling of all criminal court cases within acceptable time limits. But I want to stress that the new resources alone will not solve the problem. We must also change the way we do business in our courts.

Within the next few months the Ministry of the Attorney General will work with members of the justice system to implement the following initiatives: first, the extension of screening pilot projects to districts receiving staffing through additional resources; second, the reallocation of resources, including assistant crown attorneys, to jurisdictions experiencing the longest delays; third, a province-wide examination of the use of courtrooms to establish innovative ways for utilizing existing court facilities and maximizing court space; fourth, the appointment of four additional members to the Judicial Advisory Appointments Committee to expedite all new judicial appointments.

In addition, the Attorney General has asked Chief Judge Sidney Linden to consider the quick implementation of the following initiatives: first, establishing specialized courts in backlogged areas to expedite the handling of specific classes of charges, such as impaired driving; second, establishing afternoon and evening sittings in jurisdictions where the court backlog situation is most acute.

I am also pleased to announce the establishment of a minister's task force to make recommendations to me regarding specific medium- and long-term measures consistent with the charter to reduce delays and improve efficiency in the criminal court system.

The task force will be composed of a chair and two representatives from the community, with counsel provided by one member of the defence bar and a representative of the provincial crown attorneys. The task force will be responsible for examining and making recommendations related to the improved utilization of resources, future case flow management initiatives, a review of the criminal process and measures to improve co-ordination and planning between federal and provincial justice ministries. It will be established in January and it is to report recommendations within six months.

I recognize the enormous impact the Supreme Court of Canada decision has had for a number of victims of crime. Letters are being sent to individuals affected by the decision. In addition, letters have been mailed to a number of organizations concerned with victims of crime advising them that senior ministry officials will be available to discuss any concerns they may have.

I am pleased to add today that the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board will undertake a consultative process with representatives of the community and government. They will review current legislation regarding compensation and examine other jurisdictional models to identify alternative ways in which the justice system responds to victims of crime. The process will be determined by the chair of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board and will commence shortly.

My ministry has been consulting with the ministries of Community and Social Services, Correctional Services, the Solicitor General and Municipal Affairs to determine the specific impact reforms will have on the resources of these ministries.

I want to stress again that the success of these efforts lies in the hands of a number of groups. A high quality of justice in our courts and improved service to the public cannot be achieved by the efforts of my ministry alone. It requires the co-operation and commitment of all the players in the justice system. Collectively, we have a significant role to play in the administration of justice.

1400

WASTE MANAGEMENT

Hon Mrs Grier: I do not think I have to tell any member of this Legislature that we have a crisis in waste management in the province. Frankly, I am startled by how little has been achieved to date in terms of real progress in diverting waste from disposal sites.

Today I want to outline the framework of a three-part environmental plan that will be responsible, sensitive and cost-effective and will be developed in consultation with municipalities and environmental groups. I reject the idea of continuing with a waste management system that squanders material resources. My objective is to change Ontario's 1980s consumer way of life into a 1990s conserver society.

The first thing we must do is to get our 3R priorities straight: reduce, then reuse and, finally, recycle. I will be asking people from all parts of the community to help make the 3Rs work effectively.

Right now we have a runaway waste generation. We see it in our homes and schools, in food stores, shopping malls, office towers, restaurants, hotels and hospitals -- all the industries, businesses, offices and institutions.

I will be moving quickly to implement a number of waste reduction measures, including: mandatory work plans to reduce waste from major users of packaging to achieve our 25% diversion objective by 1992; prohibitions of valuable resource materials, such as wood and cardboard, at landfills across the province and efforts to develop markets for them; separation at source of materials for recycling at industrial, commercial and institutional sites which generate waste.

To help create a conserver society there will be seed money for new ideas and initiatives in industrial, commercial and institutional 3Rs programs; increased education so that people can make better use of their blue boxes and other reduction systems such as composting; more funding to improve and expand municipal programs in waste reduction, reuse and recycling, and a review of all provincial policies so that we discourage waste and provide incentives for reducing garbage.

As a second major action plan, my government will introduce changes to the environmental assessment process. While we fully support the values and principles that underlie the act, it has not always worked in the best interests of all concerned. The current act is frustrating, time-consuming and costly. To get the changes to the process under way, I will be releasing a discussion document on the Environmental Assessment Act which was prepared by the previous government. I will of course be consulting broadly to ensure the final development of an environmentally sensitive, timely and cost-effective process.

Reducing waste and improving the environmental assessment process will, in the long term, benefit the entire province. However, we have an immediate problem to deal with -- the greater Toronto area's waste crisis. I appreciate the effort of the regional chairs and other members of the Solid Waste Interim Steering Committee to date and I look forward to working with them in the future.

Unfortunately, the process designed by the previous government to solve this problem is not working fast enough. Neither is it environmentally sound. As a third part of my plan, and to help us tackle this particular problem effectively, I intend to establish a new public sector authority. This authority will work as a co-operative venture between the province and the regional municipalities in the greater Toronto area. I will assign responsibility to the authority to search for and select a waste disposal site. This site will be subject to approval under the revised Environmental Assessment Act. This search will begin immediately and be sensitive to the reality of the time constraints involved.

Given the problems of the past process and my commitment to a new solution, I am today suspending the Environmental Assessment Act exemptions for the Whitevale and Brampton sites.

With dramatic improvements in the 3R programs and positive changes to the environmental assessment process, I am persuaded that contingency sites will not be necessary.

It would, of course, be irresponsible of me to take risks with public health and safety. I will continue to monitor progress on waste reduction and on the search for a new site to determine if additional capacity is needed prior to the new site coming on stream.

To be prepared for any emergency, I will now ask Metropolitan Toronto and the region of Peel to delay final closing of the three existing sites so that if they are needed in an emergency they can be reopened easily.

It is clear that there are no quick and easy solutions. Full co-operation and an all-out effort to achieve a conserver society is needed from everyone: provincial and municipal governments, industries, businesses, institutions, labour, community and environmental groups, and individuals, and, of course, I know I can rely on the support of all members of this House.

ANTI-DRUG STRATEGIES

Hon Mr Farnan: It gives me great pleasure to draw the honourable members' attention to the fact that this is Drug Awareness Week in Ontario. As my colleagues will know, Drug Awareness Week is an annual event sponsored by this government and the federal government to promote public awareness of alcohol and drug issues and to draw attention to the activities of literally thousands of local community organizations which work in the addictions field in prevention, treatment and enforcement.

The kind of public attention Drug Awareness Week is intended to foster is not the kind generated by alarmist headlines, nor a vague knowledge that some people somewhere are involved with drugs or are addicted. It is a deeper kind of understanding we all seek -- an awareness of how drug experimentation and addiction can affect community life, an awareness of how drugs can sap the energy and skew the judgement of users, and an awareness of how drug activity can interfere with the enjoyment of our streets, homes and parks.

Drug Awareness Week is a catalyst for this kind of understanding and recognition of the roles of individuals working together in fighting substance abuse.

Our government, through the Provincial Anti-Drug Secretariat, has been able to assist local Drug Awareness Week activities. We have done this through support for the provincial co-ordinating committee and 21 local Drug Awareness Week projects throughout the province.

Our government's support has enabled local groups to undertake a wide variety of exciting projects, including the promotion of drug-free lifestyles through mini conferences, supper meetings, community forums, workplace wellness programs, mall displays and public service announcements. Young people are being encouraged to address drug and substance abuse issues and build leadership skills around student-oriented prevention projects. They are introducing videos and plays to inform students of the dangers of drug dependency. There are many programs to help communities become drug-resistant -- programs aimed at the young, single mothers, members of high-risk groups and children.

I am sure this will provide my honourable colleagues with a sense of the range of activities under way in their local communities throughout the province during this week.

All of our efforts, both during Drug Awareness Week and the other 51 weeks of the year, are designed to empower individuals and groups to take action. We are committed to building a drug-free Ontario through supporting both individual and collective action -- action on an individual, group, community and province-wide basis.

Our second focus is on consultation. The anti-drug secretariat is currently involved in a series of consultative youth forums aimed directly at young people in high schools, asking them for their views and solutions to drug and alcohol abuse. This form of direct consultation will be a hallmark of our activities over the months and years ahead.

This government is committed to moving from awareness to action. We are building an anti-drug movement in the province of Ontario through individual and community consultation and empowerment.

I am proud to be part of this week as its honorary chairman and I am proud of all those who have been working so long to support this goal. I am proud of those who are joining us to build this drug-free movement.

I encourage all members of the House to support the anti-drug efforts being made in their communities.

1410

RESPONSES

COURT SYSTEM

Mr Sorbara: Mr Speaker, I want to begin by congratulating you on your own election to the Chair and all the members, particularly the new members, who have been elected, the members of all three of the parties and our one independent member in the Legislature.

I wish I could congratulate the Attorney General on the first statement that he has made in this 35th Parliament. It is interesting that on the day that he makes the statement, the same day that the new Minister of the Environment makes the statement about recycling and reuse, in our request to have one copy of his statement sent over we received not only three copies, but two of them in these very glossy folders, which really are not necessary for statements any more. We just need a copy of the statement typed out as the minister reads it.

What is more unfortunate is what was contained in the statement itself. The Attorney General, in a sort of classic model, having encountered a problem in court delays, has simply thrown money at the problem. He knows clearly, and it has been reported in a number of reports, that the problem is management. He suggests that now an additional $10 million is to be available to hire new judges, when Mr Justice Zuber reported that the in-court time that judges are spending in courtrooms right now is only between two and a half and three and a half hours per day. It is a management problem and the minister knows it but he needs something more dramatic, so he has announced the expenditure of more money when this province does not have the luxury of spending that kind of money.

I implore the Attorney General to do one thing and one thing only during the life of this Parliament, and that is, every time that his government introduces a piece of legislation that has penal provisions in it where our courtrooms are going to be expanded in terms of their case load, I wish he would make sure that within each announcement of new legislation he has provisions to expand our courts so that this problem will never arise again.

WASTE MANAGEMENT

Mrs Sullivan: As I start my response, I would like to extend my congratulations to the member for Etobicoke-Lakeshore on assuming the position of Minister of the Environment. We have worked in the past on the select committee on energy and we are certainly looking forward to some interesting activity from her as minister.

I must say that I was surprised and in fact disappointed that the minister began her statement today by indicating that she was startled by how little had been achieved in terms of real progress. In fact, I was startled by how little was put forward in this statement to deal with what she has described already as a crisis in waste management.

We have, as members know, welcomed the 3Rs emphasis, and indeed many of the positions that have been put forward in this statement follow simply on the initiatives that were introduced by the former Minister of the Environment, the member for St Catharines.

Looking in particular at the 25% diversion from landfill by 1992 and the 50% diversion by 2000, these are, as has been pointed out, ambitious targets. Referring to the greater Toronto area, what those targets mean is that by 1992 we will be looking to divert substantially more than a million tonnes of municipal solid waste from landfill, and we have to be honest when we are looking at that diversion about the 50% of waste material which will not be diverted. It must be landfilled or used in an integrated strategy that includes energy recovery from landfill or other environmentally acceptable methods.

We have seen in this statement some direction relating to mandatory work plans to reduce waste. We do not know how this fits into the national packaging protocol. We do not see how this is going to meet their targets of 80% reduction in 1988 levels. We do not see who pays for them, who does them and what the plans are. On the bans at landfill, we do not see any market development support for those materials.

Relating to the greater Toronto area initiative, replacement of the Solid Waste Interim Steering Committee, SWISC, this is an absolute copout. At no time was there an integrated waste management strategy dealing with those issues. We see a new approach relating to landfill only; we see no integrated waste management; we see no recycling plans there; we see no place for the garbage to go when landfill runs out in Peel in one year. This is simply inadequate.

COURT SYSTEM

Mr Harnick: May I congratulate the Attorney General for doing what was totally obvious and for doing as well what his predecessor would not do -- and I mean his immediate predecessor -- despite advice from courts, from bar associations, from advocate societies and from the Criminal Lawyers Association.

My concern when we spend $39 million is that we spend it so we get a quality system of justice. I would ask the Attorney General to please ensure that provincial court judges are paid on the same basis as federal court judges, that crown attorneys are paid properly so that every three years they do not leave the system and leave it in disarray.

I would also ask the Attorney General to please acknowledge victims' rights with a bill of victims' rights, which he was in favour of when he sat on this side of the House and which I would ask him to please consider again.

As well, I would ask the minister to consider the reforms of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, reforms that have been studied and studied and do not need to be studied again. The benefits that that board pays are benefits that are, in a word, cheap.

WASTE MANAGEMENT

Mr Cousens: Last week the Minister of the Environment did not realize there was a crisis, or at least would not admit it to the Metropolitan Toronto councillors and chairman, but at last -- and I congratulate her -- she has at least begun to put in writing, in this House and on the record, that there is a crisis and now she is going to begin to deal with it.

If she is going to consult, as she indicates in her statement today, let's hope it is not the kind of consulting that the Liberals did for the last few years, because they use the same words, but when you talked about consulting, they went and did it after the fact. You never knew ahead of time what they were going to do. They would do something and say, "Hey, we consulted." That was not consulting. We want to see real consulting going on. That means --

Interjections.

Mr Cousens: It is not over for you guys. The fact is, we are talking --

Interjection.

The Speaker: Would the honourable member take his seat, please. This was after yesterday, when you all promised to come back and behave just like you did yesterday, from all sides. If you will do the member the courtesy of listening to him, then I will add the additional 30 seconds and the member may pick up where he left

Mr Cousens: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I think you are going to have a tough time with these Liberals.

We also acknowledge the fact that the minister wants to deal with this runaway waste generation and her reference to involving industry and business in the solution. When you think that some 60% of the waste generation comes from that part of our society, then we really have to involve them in helping solve it. It has been neglected until now. Let's begin to involve all parties in seeking out the solution.

When the minister refers to the changes in the environmental assessment process, I want to thank her for listening to our leader, the member for Nipissing. That was the first thing he said in the election campaign, that changes had to be made there. The fact that the minister is beginning to start that process is very much in line with what our leader, the leader of the Progressive Conservatives, talked about in the early parts of the campaign. When the minister talks about dollars for the municipalities, let's hope she puts in enough dollars to make it happen. We are dealing with time; we are dealing with constraints of money as well.

1420

ANTI-DRUG STRATEGIES

Mr Carr: I am glad to see that this Solicitor General has finally recognized the importance of the epidemic that is out there. The Addiction Research Foundation estimates that the toll of drug abuse is at about $9 billion. I would like, as the people of the province would like, to ask where this was yesterday and how we can take this commitment seriously in light of the fact that there was not one mention of it yesterday in the throne speech.

The NDP speech on drug awareness is noticeably lacking in hard action. When in opposition the Solicitor General strongly urged more support for the police, and now that they are in government we see that there is nothing more than a lot of hot air.

When you look at the statistics and see the $9 billion, when you see that 80% of crimes are drug related, you see the urgency. I am glad that, even if it is one day late, we are starting to address that problem. I urge the Solicitor General to present his plan to combat this drug problem as soon as possible.

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT STRATEGIES

Mr Nixon: My question is directed to the Premier and it has to do with the announcement yesterday in the throne speech on the relocation of government offices.

We are aware of the reluctance expressed by the Premier and his colleagues up until the announcement yesterday. I am really asking for clarification as to whether the former government's policy of the relocation of 6,000 permanent, recession-proof jobs out of Toronto is really an indication of what the government has in mind.

Hon Mr Rae: Mr Speaker, I hope this is permissible under the rules. I would like to answer the first question. If there are supplementaries which go into detail, I am going to refer them to the Minister of Government Services because she is familiar with that.

I would like to simply answer the former Treasurer by saying that the commitment of this government, the decision of this government is to proceed with the over 5,000 jobs, as I recall the number, which were announced by his government prior to 1990.

Interjections.

Hon Mr Rae: I have difficulty with those words -- which were announced by the Liberal government prior to 6 September. That is the intention of our government.

Mr Nixon: If the Premier has directed it to the Minister of Government Services, that is quite appropriate as far as I am concerned.

Although the statement in the throne speech yesterday was of a rather general nature, indicating the policy would go forward only after consultation and approval from the Ontario Public Service Employees Union, with which I understand the minister has previous connections, would it be possible for her to say why, even before the speech was read, she or her officials were contacting a variety of municipal leaders by fax and by telephone, giving them the good news that they were going to be the recipients of an established Liberal policy?

Hon Ms Lankin: As the Premier has indicated, the decision was made to go ahead with the relocations as had been announced by the previous government. The instructions I gave to my staff were to send faxes to the mayors of those cities to inform them of that decision as the throne speech was being read yesterday. We felt it was very important to try to end the uncertainty that existed in those communities.

I am sure many of the members who represent those communities on all sides of the House here have spoken with their municipal council representatives and their mayors and have had a sense of the uncertainty and anxiety that existed. We wanted to inform them at the same time as the throne speech was being read.

Mr Nixon: I have a report on the relocation announcements for summer 1990, which is a policy and priorities board of cabinet document which I understand was in the press in Windsor and Hamilton yesterday. The indications were that the recommendations to the ministry and to the policy and priorities board were that this phase-in be over 10 years as a possibility and that certain communities not be involved.

It is not clear, since the honourable minister did not make the announcement in the House but only directly to the municipalities concerned, which ones were fortunate enough to be a part of the New Democratic Party government policy.

Certainly the Premier indicated that 5,000 jobs would be involved, but I am not sure that the communities of Brantford, St Catharines, Cornwall, Elliot Lake and other communities desperately in need of these permanent recession-proof jobs have been informed.

Will the minister explain to the House and to the communities concerned how she and her colleagues picked the communities to be informed and what the timetable is going to be in using this, not as a new government policy which itself is important but to allay in some degree the depredations of the recession in these communities where it is of such importance?

Hon Ms Lankin: The announcements which the previous government made prior to the election are what we are carrying through with. Those jobs will be moved to all of the communities that in fact had been listed in the announcements. The letters that were sent to the mayors yesterday, the letters that I signed, were to all of those communities that the member listed: Haileybury, Windsor, St Catharines. The number of jobs and the ministries to be moved in fact are the same as what had been announced previously.

I do want to say that with respect to the community of St Catharines, in the letter that I sent to the mayor of St Catharines and copied to the regional chairman, we did indicate that the Ministry of Government Services would undertake a consultation with them in their community with respect to the location of the building of the Ministry of Transportation headquarters that we locate there, keeping in mind environmental concerns, agricultural food lands, preservation of the tender fruit lands and the goals and stated direction of the official regional plan. We will undertake that communication. The intention is to move the headquarters and all of the jobs to that area. The actual location of the building will be as a result of the consultation that will take place.

With respect to the time frame, let me just say that we did look at whether or not it would make sense to extend the time frame over 10 years. We decided to proceed with the seven-year time frame that the previous government announced.

NUCLEAR POWER

Mr Nixon: I have a question to the Premier. Is it possible that he can dispel any uncertainty regarding yesterday's announced nuclear moratorium by confirming now in the House his signed election response on 14 August 1990 to five environmental groups that committed him and his government that no new nuclear reactors will be built in Ontario and that our nuclear capability will be phased out?

Hon Mr Rae: Let me answer the Treasurer -- the Leader of the Opposition. These habits die hard. Let me answer the Leader of the Opposition as directly as I can. The statement yesterday made it very clear. First of all, we are completing the Darlington project for the simple reason that so much money has been committed to that project some five years after 1985 that we think that is the responsible thing to do.

We have also stated very clearly and directed to Ontario Hydro that the work that was started under the Liberal government plan with respect to an expansion of nuclear power in which Hydro was authorized to spend hundreds of millions of dollars with respect to pre-engineering and site planning for new nuclear plants be stopped. We have directed that those funds, as an alternative, should be directed towards energy efficiency and conservation.

That is what we have done. That is the nature of the moratorium. At the same time, I say to the Leader of the Opposition, the Environmental Assessment Board is going to be considering a range of plans from Hydro as well as the submissions of dozens of intervenors over the next few years with respect to what the future is going to look like. We think we can change the picture with respect to load growth and with respect to demand if we put the effort that was being put into the construction of new nuclear plants into energy efficiency and conservation. That is our belief and that is the nature of the moratorium we have established.

1430

Mr Nixon: Directly arising from the Premier's answer, it is my understanding from his comments that the moratorium is therefore directed only to Hydro and any reviews or planning it is presently undertaking, and under his orders that will be stopped. Am I also to understand, however, that the environmental assessment on the load growth proposal from Hydro continues unchanged, with the understanding that a major part of the proposals calls for substantial nuclear development in the next 25 years?

Hon Mr Rae: Let me be clear that as I understand the process, and I think I have understood it correctly, the Environmental Assessment Board is seized essentially of two questions. The first is, what is the demand going to be over the next 25 years? What is that load growth going to be over the next 25 years? If I may say so, that is a subject of considerable debate, because obviously it depends on how successful we are with respect to energy efficiency and conservation. That is why we as a government attach such importance to the directions we have given to Ontario Hydro, and that is to say: "Look, don't skew the Environmental Assessment Board hearings towards nuclear by simply proceeding with your own nuclear pre-engineering work. Give energy efficiency and conservation a chance -- a chance to be made to work and a chance to show how we can deal with load growth."

It is fair to say that Ontario Hydro is going to be presenting a range of options, including a non-nuclear option, to the Environmental Assessment Board, and it is also clear that intervenors from across the board are also going to be making those suggestions.

I also want to say to the Leader of the Opposition that our government has another obligation of which we are very much aware, and that obligation is to ensure a steady supply of affordable energy to the people of this province. That is an obligation we take very seriously. We think it is completely compatible with efficiency, and that is what we intend to carry out.

Mr Nixon: Would it be correct to say then that it is entirely in the hands of the electricity consumers? The Premier has indicated that it is his policy to maintain an adequate supply of electricity. If the consumers in fact want to use more than he would hope, then it is their decision, not his, and if it has to be provided from a nuclear source, then so be it. Is that the nature of the moratorium?

Is it possible that after the independent environmental assessment experts, with the full range of expertise available to them, indicate to the Premier, or to his successor three years from now or eight years from now when the environmental assessment may have been completed, that without a nuclear capability something in the reduction of the availability of power must occur, then it would be his view to give further consideration to the development of nuclear generation?

Hon Mr Rae: Again, I appreciate the question and I also appreciate the spirit with which it has been offered.

Let me say to the Leader of the Opposition that, first of all, some consumers of electricity can also be generators of electricity. Nuclear generation is not the only way for energy and electricity to be produced in this province. That is a fact. If the former Treasurer is saying that the only way the Liberal Party can think of generating electricity or of saving demand is by going nuclear, I say he is out of step with the facts of life with respect to this situation.

It is the position of the government that we have to make the best and most imaginative and creative effort we can to save energy and to make our system more efficient. We know that there are countries around the world that are doing things more efficiently than we are. We think it is time we started doing things more efficiently here. We believe that this is the option we want to see given a fair chance during the life of this government.

GOVERNMENT POLICIES

Mr Harris: I have listened to the opening question and the opening response. I do not know what has changed here since 6 September. I have a question for the Premier.

It has been over two and a half months since the election. During this time the Premier has had an opportunity to receive briefings from the civil service. He has had a chance to review the circumstances of the province. He has been forced or has seen fit to reverse some of his previous commitments, whether it is nuclear generation or Varity or others.

It is in this context that the Premier and I know, and talked about during the campaign, that people today are looking for more openness, more honesty from their politicians. I would like to know if the Premier would share with us today what other election commitments he may have to drop as a result of the briefings and the new understanding of the situation as he understands it today.

Hon Mr Rae: I appreciate the question. I can say directly to the leader of the Conservative Party that if he has specific questions he would like to ask about specific things, either with respect to the Agenda for People or with respect to the speech from the throne, I would be more than pleased to answer them. I look forward to doing so. That is the way in which I prefer to proceed.

Mr Harris: Well, the Premier may not have had enough time; I do not know. I want to say, in the context of this question and in a very serious way, that I think we are dealing with a serious situation across this province with the respect that politicians are held or not held in. I also want the Premier to realize that I am not criticizing him for changing his mind on a number of issues. I think we all know what they are.

Specifically, today I am trying to probe what commitment the Premier now has to some of the specific policies. He wants me to be specific. There is the minimum corporation tax, the 60% funding for school boards, the speculation tax, extending GO Transit to Peterborough and Brantford, increased support to the Toronto Transit Commission, 100% funding for child care facilities in Metropolitan Toronto, four-laning of northern highways.

So there are some, if the Premier wishes some specifics, but he is the one who knows. He has assessed the situation. Nobody will criticize him for the mess he has inherited. Nobody will criticize him for being honest. But I will be critical, and the public should be critical, if he does not level with us. Will he be dropping his commitment to some of those I have mentioned? Are there others? If so, which ones does he now realize are totally unrealistic and cannot be met? I think this is important.

Hon Mr Rae: I agree it is important. If the leader of the third party would like me to level with him, I would like him to level with me and ask a question that is not entirely rhetorical in nature. He mentioned several. He mentioned a great many. I would be happy to answer them as best I can in the time available. We have made very clear that decisions with respect to individual tax items, as the leader of the third party well knows, are made at the time of the budget. The budget will be coming down in the spring, as we have made very clear.

We have also made very clear that there are commitments we have made that are things we can do right away. There are other things that are going to take more time, over the life of the government. Some of the things he has mentioned, I can say to the leader of the third party, are going to be made very clear in announcements by ministers very, very soon. Others, frankly, are going to take a little bit more time.

I am quite happy to level with the leader as best I can in the circumstances we face, and I am not blaming anybody for those circumstances. We are in a recession. We are going to do what we can with the means with which we have been provided. We have made as clear as we can in the throne speech those areas in which we are going to move right away. We are also making clear that there are some things that are going to take a little more time and we are going to do the very best we can to live up to the commitments we have made as a government.

1440

Mr Harris: I think that if we go back to the campaign, the Agenda for People, the Premier will recall my message was that we could not make any commitments until we saw the books. I said we did not want to raise any new taxes. I admitted there would be some very tough decisions that would have to be made, and the Premier is finding that out.

In the Toronto Star on 13 August, the then leader of the NDP, now Premier, said, "I really think people are fed up with politicians making promises they can't keep." What will add to the cynicism and to the distrust of all of us is not levelling with people as soon as he realized that promises cannot be kept. Are there any others than what we have heard about? Is there one? The Premier must surely have assessed the situation as opposed to announcing them when the deadline comes for them. Are there any others, one or more, that he can disclose to us today as soon as he is aware of them?

Hon Mr Rae: I think we have already indicated that as soon as we are aware of circumstances which lead --

Mr Elston: Who? We were aware.

Interjections.

Hon Mr Rae: Well, there have been comments that have been made here with respect to the Consumers' Gas issue. I made that very clear. If the members want to ask a question on why we decided to move ahead with the British Gas proposal, I think it was, in the circumstances, the best possible deal we could get for the people of the province.

I say to the leader of the third party that we are going to do the best we can. I think the throne speech indicated clearly the directions in which we are going to move. We have indicated what it is we are going to try to do as a government. We have tried to be as clear as we can. We do not have all the money in the world. We are doing the best we can. If the member has specific questions with respect to specific issues that he wants to put forward with respect to what we are going to do, I would be more than pleased to try to answer them.

Mr Harris: I gave him six. He did not respond. I asked him to name one that he was not planning at this time to keep and he did not give us one, so I am assuming he plans to keep all the rest. We will be watching, I assure him.

INVESTMENT IN ONTARIO

Mr Harris: My second question is for the Premier. I wonder if the Premier could show me in this throne speech document that was read yesterday one thing that would entice a business person from Europe or the Far East or from anywhere to invest or locate a new venture and thus create jobs in Ontario.

Hon Mr Rae: In my discussions with business people about the province -- I have had discussions with business people here, I have had discussions with business people in New York, I have been visited by people from Japan and from other countries -- basically what they are looking for is a quality of life, a workforce that is going to give them the kind of leadership they are looking for. They are looking for a truly competitive economy in the sense that they look to the nature of the workforce, they look to the quality of the education system, they look to the focus with which government is prepared to sit down and work with them in partnership.

That is what it is that leads them to say that this is going to be a good place for them to invest, and these are the kinds of decisions that are being made every day by business people. These are the things we have to look for.

I think that has got to be the direction in which Ontario goes in terms of increasing its competitiveness. That is the way for us to proceed. That is the way we are intending to proceed as a government. Again, I think we are doing this in a difficult time in terms of recession because many business people are not investing anywhere at all right now. It is that climate we are trying to turn around. We are indicating that we are prepared to stimulate the economy at a time when few other governments are prepared to show that leadership and we are prepared to work in partnership with them in that regard.

Mr Harris: The throne speech document states, "Recessions hurt people." Presumably the major reason a recession hurts people is because people lose their jobs.

Again, I would ask the Premier, where in this throne speech is there anything that would encourage new investment to locate in Ontario, thereby creating the jobs to help get Ontario out of this recession?

Hon Mr Rae: We have shown our confidence in the economy by saying that right away we are going to invest $700 million in this province. I was encouraged today to listen to the mayor of Toronto on the radio saying that if the province was willing to put in $700 million, then a lot of municipalities are going to want to come on board in order to join that because they realize that there is work there.

That is as positive a message as we can send. Frankly, what I have been trying to do as leader of the government is to talk personally to business people, to talk extensively with all the people of the province and to tell them very directly that this province is a place where we want business to grow, but where we also want business to be fair. I think that is the modern way to do business and that is how this government intends to do business in the 1990s.

Mr Harris: The $700-million announcement says that in spite of the fact that we are $2.5 billion in the hole, we are going to go another $700 million in the hole. The Premier has now told me that municipalities will spend. That will presumably create increased property taxation.

What I am interested in is to find out whether there will be one private sector job left in this province after a certain point in time. I am not interested in the government jobs at this particular point.

The throne speech contains absolutely nothing that admits that Ontario is not a competitive jurisdiction to locate a business in. It contains no commitments for attracting new business to Ontario. It contains no plans for long-term, private sector job creation or maintaining private sector jobs that are there.

I would like to know if the Premier could tell us whether he believes that the jobs we need to get this province out of the current recession are going to come completely from the public sector, or, if he thinks they are going to come from the private sector, what in the throne speech is going to encourage that?

Hon Mr Rae: I believe in a partnership. I think there are local businessmen in North Bay who are going to benefit from the fact that this government is going to be investing in North Bay. I cannot believe that the leader of the third party really believes that it is going to be bad for contractors, that it is going to be bad for small business, that it is going to be bad for other people who depend on a good infrastructure in terms of attracting other investment, that it is really going to be bad.

I would say to the leader of the third party that if he sees a world in which people do not work in partnership, then that is not my definition of the world. High interest rates make it difficult. The high dollar makes it difficult. When I talk to business people, those are the two things that they point to in terms of world conditions, in terms of Canada's attractiveness as a place to invest, which right now are making it tough.

But if he is attempting to say that there is somehow going to be a never-ending conflict between the notion of public investment and the private sector, I do not share that view. We cannot grow without the private sector and, if I may say so, the private sector depends as well on a good education system, on an intelligent approach to labour relations and on a co-operative approach to skills training. We all depend on a good public sector and public investment as much as we depend on private investment. The two have to go together and that is our approach.

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

Mrs McLeod: My question is to the Minister of Community and Social Services. A great many people who were expecting to hear from a social reform government were very disappointed yesterday. Certainly, those people who are involved in a fight against poverty had a particular reason to believe and to expect that they would see more in that throne speech than simply a vague pledge to continue to reform Ontario's social assistance system.

I want the minister to know that we are fully supportive of reform of the social assistance system. It was a Liberal government that brought in the Blueprint for Reform. But it is a sad reality that we all recognize that in recent months the recession has swallowed up the very real gains that the Liberal government initiatives were able to achieve, and right now the welfare rolls across this province are soaring. The increased demand for food banks is making it an almost impossible situation to respond to. The people on welfare, the people who are using the food banks, these are the people who really are directly affected by this recession.

I know that the minister knows this situation is urgent. I know that she knows there are people out there who are struggling, that there are children who are hungry, and I know that she knows it is not enough simply to talk about what will be done in the life of this government. Will the minister please tell us what she is going to do tomorrow?

1450

Hon Mrs Akande: I am very happy to answer this question, and I am happy too to hear that the member is interested in what we are going to do about poverty.

This government has indeed inherited not a happy package. Poverty sits prime in our focus and we are going to deal with it inter inisterially. We are not going to look for one single answer from one single minister and from one single ministry. We are looking at the causes of poverty. We are looking at certainly making sure that people have an adequate income, and that is people throughout, whether that has to be addressed through minimum wage or if it has to be addressed through an increase in social assistance. We are looking at putting people back to work.

So our government is focusing on those kinds of initiatives which support people, in spite of the fact that those areas have been neglected. We are looking at subsidizing the income of those people who in fact are striving to get off social assistance and assisting them by extending in other areas that provide for their needs.

Mrs McLeod: Long-range plans are important and they are certainly commendable, but what I want to talk to the minister about today is a record that her government brings in, and it is a record of promises, very specific promises, to deal with very immediate and very real problems.

Let me remind the minister of the promise in Agenda for People, that a New Democratic government would ensure that families no longer have to choose between paying the rent or eating, and that $300 million would be committed to providing the safety net that is so desperately needed today.

This is not an issue which needs to be studied. People across Ontario have already supported the Blueprint for Reform. The minister's Premier promised, in response to a questionnaire from the Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants, that the government would move forward on social assistance with a clear timetable. When will the minister bring forward the timetable that her Premier has promised?

Hon Mrs Akande: Timetable, indeed. I would suggest that, in fact, if the Liberal government took three years to mess up the situation, it will at least give us three months to plan, not to study its cure.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mrs Cunningham: My question is for the Minister of Education, my colleague the member for London Centre. One of the minister's major campaign platforms across Ontario during this recent provincial election was to raise the provincial share of education costs to 60% over five years. The five-year plan is expected to cost $7.5 billion. However, yesterday the Premier said a Fair Tax Commission will be looking into the issue. Does this mean that the minister is rethinking or going to study her 60% funding commitment to school boards?

Hon Mrs Boyd: The Ministry of Education is as concerned as all of us are, as citizens and as taxpayers, about this issue. The system of funding education that we have inherited from the previous two governments is miserable and not fixable. We are not prepared to tinker with that system without looking at all the possible options. I argued very strenuously in cabinet that education funding be part of the commission on fair taxation so that we could look at giving real tax relief to property taxpayers in the municipalities, and look at the best way in which to meet the promise to which we are still committed, that the provincial government will assume 60% of the funding of education in this province.

Mrs Cunningham: The minister knows me very well and she knows how fed up I am with reports and how long we have listened to these kinds of promises. We are really, truly expecting a difference.

The third report of the select committee on education talked about co-operation around a new funding mechanism. It was supported by school boards and teachers across this province. This is not new. This kind of stuff has been talked about for the last decade. We need action now. Can the minister tell me when the government will be responding to this report, and how soon can we expect to see a new funding model for education in the province of Ontario?

Hon Mrs Boyd: The member is well aware that the members of our party were very supportive of the recommendations that came forward from the select committee. As the Premier said in the earlier question, we look forward to introducing these kinds of budget and taxation issues at budget time, as is customary in this House. The member can expect that by that point we will have very clear answers about the direction in which we are going, and that is a reasonable timetable for us to be meeting.

TAXATION

Mr Silipo: My question is for the Treasurer. The announcement yesterday in the throne speech of plans to establish a Fair Tax Commission was indeed, in my view, welcome news.

In my riding of Dovercourt, working families are struggling to get by day by day. At the same time, they see that many of the corporations they work for pay little or no tax. Will the Fair Tax Commission look at the tax write-offs and loopholes that corporations have at their disposal?

Hon Mr Laughren: I thank my friend the member for Dovercourt for the question. The member for Dovercourt should know that when we are establishing our Fair Tax Commission, it is our intention that it will look at all aspects of taxation in the province, because I agree with him that the perception out there across the province is that we do not have a fair tax system. Because I feel very strongly -- and I know this will surprise some members opposite -- that I do not have all the answers myself, we need some --

Interjections.

Hon Mr Laughren: The members should know that I do not have all the answers, and that by establishing a Fair Tax Commission, I hope very much that that commission will take a look at some of the loopholes that are there now, at the whole question of a minimum corporate tax, the question of an inheritance tax or some kind of wealth tax, income tax relief for taxpayers in the province, the question of a land speculation tax, and of course the whole matter of tax expenditures that are presently in effect in the province.

Having waited 19 years for that question, I hope I have provided a satisfactory answer.

1500

Mr Silipo: I think we could all agree that the issue of taxes is something about which everyone has something to say. I would like to ask the Treasurer how he will ensure that the commission conducts its work fairly and democratically.

Hon Mr Laughren: That is a perceptive question the member for Dovercourt asks. I do want to assure him most seriously that when we establish the commission, there are two ways I hope we are able to do that: One is the way in which the commission is appointed, the people who are on the commission and the groups they come from as they sit on that commission; the second is the way in which they communicate with the public at large. There are various interest groups they meet with. We are most concerned that there is a collaborative effort as we examine the tax system in the province.

It is our hope that when the process is finished, and I am hoping as well that this will not take for ever -- quite frankly, that was the main reason we did not want a full- blown royal commission; we wanted some fairly quick answers on some of these issues so that we can move with dispatch to make the tax system fairer in Ontario.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr Beer: My question is to the Minister of Education. I also welcome her to this House and congratulate her on her appointment. Together with the member for London North and all members, I know we want to work with the minister in ensuring that Ontario has the best education system possible.

My question to the minister follows from the question of my colleague the member for London North, and is regarding the specific commitment that the minister's party made during the election regarding the 60% funding, and second, to the commitment made by the Premier -- and I have a copy here of a letter which he sent on 29 August to the chairman of the Metropolitan Toronto School Board. I would like to quote one part of that letter.

The Premier, the then Leader of the Opposition, said in his letter: "Metro would clearly benefit by our proposal to increase provincial funding to 60%. New Democrats would seek to restore Metro's funding to at least the 1981 level of 21%"

It seems to me that we have had all kinds of studies that I would have assumed the government, before making a pledge of 60% and before making a pledge of going to 21%, would have determined that indeed that was possible to do, and that we would have seen expression of that in the throne speech.

Can the minister tell us if her government is planning to carry out that commitment to fund at least the 1981 level of 21% of Metropolitan Toronto's school cost, and can she set out for the House and for the people of this province today the way in which she is going to achieve that objective?

Hon Mrs Boyd: Just with respect to the generalities of the question which preceded the exact one, I would like to indicate to the member involved that this is a promise the Liberals made and did not deliver on. We intend to deliver on it.

With respect to the current funding situation for Metropolitan Toronto, we are just now receiving the final figures on which to base the general legislative grant announcements and I will give that answer to the member as soon as I have the information in hand.

Mr Beer: I would simply remind the minister that what we are concerned about here are specific commitments made by the new government. I think it is only appropriate that we try to determine whether in fact she is going to keep those commitments and, if so, how.

Another part of the education funding issue relates to capital. The minister would be aware that during the period we were in government, significant increases in funding were made for capital expansion for the construction of new schools. Indeed, in the last budget some $332 million was pledged for school capital construction.

In the throne speech, there was mention made of a fund of some $700 million. What I would like to ask the minister is: Can she tell the House that she will keep to the $332-million capital commitment of the previous government, and how much of the $700 million is going to be allocated to school capital? Can the minister make sure that any new moneys are over and above the $332 million and that indeed the $700 million is new dollars?

Hon Mrs Boyd: I certainly can tell the member that the funds that have been flowed for capital that were promised previously will continue. One of the reasons for that, of course, is that his government flowed them through long into the future -- I think 1994 are the last ones that are through -- and the communities involved are counting on those dollars and have begun their plans for those dollars.

It is not the intention of the Treasurer's fund that those not be new dollars. The Ministry of Education will be putting forward the short-term projects that would come under that plan, as will other ministries. We will be making decisions about how that money will be allocated separately from the capital funding for education.

HEALTH CARE

Mr Eves: I have a question for the Minister of Health. I would like to welcome the minister back to the Legislature in her new capacity as the Minister of Health. I am going to pass out some free advice, and it is probably worth what it is costing her: I certainly hope she has thrown away her predecessor's cue cards during question period.

Can the minister explain to this Legislature why an issue as important as health care, where her ministry spends some -- as I am sure she is aware -- $16 billion during this fiscal year, was virtually left out of the throne speech?

Hon Mrs Gigantes: I will be glad to try to answer the question. I appreciate the member's kind welcome back. I should note that the Speaker and I have had an absolutely identical career in the House, so we are always glad to see each other again.

I think the member will understand that when you already spend close to $16 billion -- it is not quite $16 billion a year yet -- and one third of the total provincial budget in Health, you are going to be very careful about talking about any new programs. There are, however, new kinds of goals we would like to establish in health care, and I can assure the member that as the weeks and months go by I will be bringing forward to this Legislature changes in programs associated with the strengthening of goals for a healthy public policy in Ontario, and be glad to share them with the House and subject them to questioning and suggestions.

Mr Eves: We know and we are glad to hear that the minister has goals in mind that she would like to achieve in the health care system, but there are some very serious immediate problems in the health care system such as the nursing shortage and her Premier's commitment for pay equity to the nursing profession to bring nursing salaries up to the levels where they should be. The minister does not have many months to consider this. She has a few short weeks until 31 March 1991 to deal with that issue in particular. There are waiting lists for all different types of treatment and surgery in Ontario. There are thousands of beds that are closed in this province. All of those issues need very immediate and direct action on her part. What specific action is the minister taking to deal with those three specific issues immediately, and does she not think that they are worth more than a throwaway line in the throne speech?

Hon Mrs Gigantes: I cannot advise the member on what he should do with the line in his throne speech, but I am not going to throw mine away. All those problems that he addresses in his question are serious problems; they are immediate problems. I do not wish to say that I feel my life rushing away in front of me as I think about these problems, but they are very serious and immediate problems. I want him to take heart from the fact that I believe a lot of good work has been done in the field of health in this province, that we have a lot of goodwill, expertise and knowhow to build on in the delivery of health care services, and I am sure that with the resources we have available, we will be able to address those problems, which are urgent and which are serious, over the next few weeks and months.

1510

COURT SYSTEM

Mr Lessard: My question is directed to the Attorney General and it deals with delays in criminal prosecutions. That is an issue that was dealt with earlier this afternoon.

It is obvious that we have inherited a system that is suffering from the neglect of the previous government. As a result, victims of crime must face the injustice of seeing alleged criminals go free without their day in court. I was pleased to hear that the Attorney General is introducing specific proposals to deal with the problems of court backlogs, and I noted that those proposals are very general in nature.

It appears to me that it is obvious that the problems are much more severe in some parts of the province than they are in others. I know that in the city of Windsor and the county of Essex a couple of years ago there was a problem with court backlogs, and simple criminal matters were taking up to nine months to be prosecuted. Through the co-operation and partnership of the Criminal Lawyers Association of Windsor and Essex County, judges, court administrators and the crown attorney, this delay was reduced to about five months.

Given that in the city of Windsor this backlog has been dealt with successfully, can the minister give us some explanation as to why this problem still exists in some areas of the province and not in others?

Hon Mr Hampton: I want to thank the member for what is a very good question and a carefully put question.

I want to say first of all that the member is quite correct; there is not a court backlog in general throughout the province, but there are court backlogs which are rather severe in some locations, specifically the suburban Metropolitan Toronto area and what is basically known as the greater Toronto area, the Kitchener area and in part in Ottawa. If the member looks at the picture on a province-wide basis, he will see that in general, where there has been a large population growth, there can be a problem. As well, in areas that have a large international airport, such as the Brampton area, that contributes to the problem with the number of drug charges and so on. So there are a number of factors.

However, the fact still remains that some areas have managed the problem better than others. I want to acknowledge that in the Windsor area, the regional crown attorney and the regional senior judges have done an excellent job in terms of making the court system work well. That is one of the challenges we face. There is a management issue here. The system has to be managed better and there is the challenge there for the judiciary and there is a challenge there for crown attorneys and a challenge there for the police to indeed manage the system better, as has been done in the Windsor area.

HIGHWAY 416

Mr Daigeler: My question is to the Minister of Health. People in eastern Ontario, and in Ottawa-Carleton in particular, are in an uproar today because of her government's refusal to make a firm commitment towards the completion of the Highway 416 project. As the minister knows only too well, since she comes from Ottawa Centre, we have been waiting for this link between the nation's capital and Highway 401 for over 25 years. People in eastern Ontario will not back down on what has been promised to us by my government when we were in power.

Is this dithering on the government's part an indication that the NDP will follow the Mulroney lead of penalizing the Ottawa area because it voted mostly Liberal in the last election?

Hon Mrs Gigantes: Mr Speaker, I believe the question should be redirected to the Minister of Transportation.

The Speaker: Redirect.

Hon Mr Philip: I would be pleased to answer the member's question.

Highway 416 will be completed; it will be completed on time. The delay that the member talks about was a delay that was created by the previous government. I have reviewed the reasons for that delay and find that the Minister of Transportation for the previous government acted properly, that in fact the delay was called for, that there were some problems concerning unstable soil and if that problem had not been corrected there could have been grave damage in the construction to the homes along Highway 416. The minister acted appropriately, under the previous government, in causing that delay.

We are now proceeding and I am sure that the member, when he goes back home, will find that I have communicated that to the various interest groups and they are very happy at the progress that we are making on Highway 416.

Mrs Y. O'Neill: My supplementary question will be directed to the Minister of Transportation, with regret. I find it almost unbelievable that the member who is responsible for eastern Ontario is not willing to answer a question about her area of the province.

Certainly the statement the minister has made in the House today is very different from that he made in the press yesterday. There seems to be a great deal of conflict in his statements in the press and in this House. I want him to reconfirm his time lines. He has said "on time." That is not what was reported in the press yesterday. Would he please reaffirm in this House his commitment and the time lines he is willing to fulfil?

Hon Mr Philip: I would like to point out to the member that a minister can only, by the rules of this House, answer a question related to his own portfolio. The member should know better than to direct a transportation question to the Minister of Health, no matter how qualified that member may be to answer transportation questions.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Would the minister take his seat, please. I certainly appreciate your assistance in interpreting the rules. Perhaps you would be kind enough to leave that to me. If you choose to respond to the question, we all would be delighted to hear the answer.

Hon Mr Philip: I would be happy to respond to the question. I can assure the member that the highway will be completed on time, on schedule and, indeed, that the original delay which was caused by her government has been taken care of, that all of the problems have been dealt with and that we are proceeding as quickly as possible.

PLANT CLOSURE

Mr Tilson: My question is to the Minister of Labour. I know the minister is aware of the circumstances concerning the closure last week of the Fedders plant in Orangeville. I would like to ask the minister how he reacts to an employer, such as Fedders, which takes the unusual step of laying off two thirds of its striking force, cancels two scheduled meetings with the ministry mediator, only to show up at a third meeting to announce the closure of its production facility.

Hon Mr Mackenzie: I think the member should be aware that one of the reasons we are looking at extensive changes to the Employment Standards Act and the Labour Relations Act in Ontario is as a result of a perception that things are unfair in terms of the way workers are treated in this particular province and the fact that we have a situation that is truly scary, where there is a 77% increase in the number of workers affected by permanent shutdowns and partial shutdowns in this province over the last year.

1520

Mr Tilson: I am glad to hear the minister take that position because the Fedders case is certainly but one of many plant shutdowns around the province where workers are being left high and dry. Considering the fact that the government's Agenda for People contains a commitment to improve the severance and notice provisions of the Employment Standards Act, and the throne speech vaguely refers to stronger measures of layoff notice, severance and other adjustment issues, will the minister now tell the House precisely what he is going to do in this area and when?

Hon Mr Mackenzie: The member will also know that we took the first steps with the announcement of the establishment of a wage protection fund in the province of Ontario. We will be fleshing that out in a very short period of time. The amendments and the changes to the Employment Standards Act and the worker adjustment programs, including notice and severance, will be announced in this House in due course.

TAXATION

Mr Owens: My question is for the Treasurer. One of the most important issues that came up at the doorstep during this last election was taxation. As a matter of fact, one of the reasons that we are sitting on this side of the House is as a result of the taxation policies of the former government. My question to the Treasurer then is, will appointment of this commission preclude this government from implementing any of the programs that we described during the election?

Hon Mr Laughren: No. It is very much my hope that when the commission is appointed that will not preclude it from giving us some interim reports with recommendations. It also is my hope that by the 1991-92 budget -- in other words, next spring -- we will be able to implement at least some of those fair tax promises that were in our Agenda for People. We very much want to go forward with those. At the same time, I also want to make sure that there is an opportunity for some interim reports to come back from the Fair Tax Commission so that we have a more knowledgeable base on which we make those decisions.

MOTIONS

PRESIDING OFFICERS

Miss Martel moved that Mr Morin, member for the electoral district of Carleton East, be appointed Deputy Speaker and Chair of the Committee of the Whole House; that Mrs Haslam, member for the electoral district of Perth, be appointed First Deputy Chair of the Committee of the Whole House, and that Mr Villeneuve, member for the electoral district of Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry, be appointed Second Deputy Chair of the Committee of the Whole House.

Motion agreed to.

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Miss Martel moved that, notwithstanding standing order 94(a), the House will not meet on Thursday mornings to consider private members' public business until Thursday 13 December 1990, and that, notwithstanding standing order 94(h), notice for the first four ballot items be given not later than Monday 10 December 1990.

Motion agreed to.

PETITION

TRAFFIC SIGNALS

Mr Cousens: It is a pleasure to make the first petition in this House in the new session for the people of Markham and Unionville. I made it several times to the previous government. They did not listen to it, so we will see what happens this time.

"To the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

"Whereas the absence of traffic signals on Highway 7 at the entrance of Union Villa and the shops of Unionville Plaza in the town of Markham poses a serious threat to pedestrian and driver safety, we request that the Ministry of Transportation move immediately to install traffic signals at the abovementioned location so as to safely alternate a right of way between conflicting flows of vehicle and pedestrian traffic."

Signed by me and signed by at least 100 people in and around the Markham area who are suffering with this terrible problem. Let's hope the new Minister of Transportation acts a lot more expeditiously than the former minister.

The Speaker: May I take this opportunity to remind members that when presenting petitions all that is required is a short summary of the substance. It is not necessary to read it verbatim nor to editorialize.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

TOWN OF RICHMOND HILL ACT, 1990

Mr Sorbara moved first reading of Bill Pr26, An Act respecting the Town of Richmond Hill.

Motion agreed to.

REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF OTTAWA-CARLETON STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1990

Mr Chiarelli moved first reading of Bill 2, An Act to amend the Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton Act and the Municipal Elections Act respecting the election of the Chairman of the Regional Council.

Motion agreed to.

Mr Chiarelli: The bill is to provide for the election of the chairman of the regional council of the regional municipality of Ottawa-Carleton by direct vote of the electors in the regional municipality.

CITY OF VANIER ACT, 1990

Mr Grandmaître moved first reading of Bill Pr30, An Act respecting the City of Vanier.

Motion agreed to.

CITY OF WINDSOR ACT, 1990

Mr Lessard moved first reading of Bill Pr21, An Act respecting the City of Windsor.

Motion agreed to.

Mr Runciman: I have a point of order on the rotation system.

The Speaker: We are introducing bills, and it is the member who is seen first by the Speaker. The Speaker will get to every person who wishes to introduce a bill today.

CITY OF TORONTO ACT, 1990

Ms Churley moved first reading of Bill Pr1, An Act respecting the City of Toronto.

Motion agreed to.

Ms Churley: Mr Speaker, I have six of these. Do I do them each individually?

The Speaker: Yes.

CITY OF TORONTO ACT, 1990

Ms Churley moved first reading of Bill Pr25, An Act respecting the City of Toronto.

Motion agreed to.

CITY OF TORONTO ACT, 1990

Ms Churley moved first reading of Bill Pr27, An Act respecting the City of Toronto.

Motion agreed to.

CITY OF TORONTO ACT, 1990

Ms Churley moved first reading of Bill Pr32, An Act respecting the City of Toronto.

Motion agreed to.

CITY OF TORONTO ACT, 1990

Ms Churley moved first reading of Bill Pr33, An Act respecting the City of Toronto.

Motion agreed to.

CITY OF TORONTO ACT, 1990

Ms Churley moved first reading of Bill Pr34, An Act respecting the City of Toronto.

Motion agreed to.

CITY OF TORONTO ACT, 1990

Ms Churley moved first reading of Bill Pr35, An Act respecting the City of Toronto.

Motion agreed to.

WOLFE CONSORTIUM FOR ADVANCED STUDIES INC ACT, 1990

Mr Runciman moved first reading of Bill Pr46, An Act respecting the Wolfe Consortium for Advanced Studies Inc.

Motion agreed to.

1540

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE

Consideration of the speech of His Honour the Lieutenant Governor at the opening of the session.

Mr Malkowski moved, seconded by Mrs Mathyssen, that an humble address be presented to His Honour the Lieutenant Governor as follows:

To the Honourable Lincoln M. Alexander, a member of Her Majesty's Privy Council for Canada, Knight of Grace of the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of St John of Jerusalem, one of Her Majesty's counsel learned in the law, bachelor of arts, doctor of laws, colonel in Her Majesty's armed forces supplementary reserve, Lieutenant Governor of Ontario:

We, Her Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario, now assembled, beg leave to thank Your Honour for the gracious speech Your Honour has addressed to us.

Mr Malkowski: I am truly honoured and privileged to move the adoption of the speech from the throne. I believe that this throne speech captures the essence of the "new Ontario" as envisioned by our government, led by Premier Bob Rae and the New Democratic Party.

I know, Mr Speaker, that you indeed support and embody the principles by which we will, as a people, be governed in these very tough times ahead. This speech offers not only practical solutions but also the philosophical guidance necessary in a time construed by many as economically and politically bankrupt.

Mr Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you and to wish you well in keeping the House in order. I am sure that we will have many spirited debates. When I was elected to the Legislature to represent the riding of York East, I made a commitment to listen to my constituents. I would hope that collectively we, as members of the Legislature, ensure that we do our best to remember that we are here to serve the people first.

It would be remiss of me if I did not address some historic firsts. I think that it is no accident of history that as the first deaf politician in the world who uses American sign language, I am in the Legislature. Perhaps fortune was kind on 6 September 1990, but if it were not for the Ontario New Democratic Party and its commitment to the principles of equity and equality, frankly, I would not be here. I know that I am the first of many representing the "new Ontario" who sit in this House.

This "new Ontario" is one in which all our institutions will more accurately reflect the wider society in which we live. This is an Ontario of openness, one that is a partnership with those previously denied access to not just the corridors of power but also jobs, education and housing. I mean those who are disabled, including deaf people, racial minorities, aboriginal people, francophones and women.

I hope I can convey the parameters of what this "new Ontario" will encompass. As you know, Mr Speaker, I am the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Citizenship, and I am very proud to participate in the challenges that face us in this government and in our ministry.

As a long-time community advocate, and not just for the deaf, I know that we have a lot of work ahead of us in redressing inequity. Our ministry mandate requires that we address the concerns of seniors and the disabled. All that is contained in race relations, employment equity and human rights is in our purview.

I would emphasize, however, that we solely are not responsible for the results. This is a government that encourages and wants involvement by the people and for the people. I would reiterate the throne speech: "politics is about far more than what we can all get: it is also about what we owe each other."

Our job as the government is to ensure the mechanisms for access. One of the measures will take the form of both employment equity legislation and adjusting the pay equity legislation to excluded women workers.

Earlier, I mentioned historic firsts and I would like to acknowledge that the last time social democrats held the seat in York East was from 1949 to 1951 when Agnes Macphail, a tireless fighter, reformer and CCFer, held York East.

Members will recall that Agnes Macphail, who was also the first female member of Parliament in Ottawa, spoke in the Ontario Legislature and said: "I realize too that there is nothing so powerful as an idea whose day has arrived. Timing is the thing!...we are passing through an age of social consciousness and many things are being accomplished now that could not have been done a generation ago."

One of Macphail's greatest triumphs was the passage of a bill granting equal pay for equal work for men and women in Ontario. I feel we have to finish this job, started almost 40 years ago. Macphail always said: "My interest has been and is still -- and will I think remain -- the people, and the people least able to look out for themselves. I have never been interested in the powerful and the rich, because I think that they get more than their share anyway."

I think this is an appropriate time to talk about the political and economic realities facing us as a government. We will govern in the interests of working people, ordinary people, those most vulnerable. It is our task to ensure that although we are severely constrained by the recession, we need to protect the increasing numbers of those most vulnerable.

I believe, as our government does, that the introduction of employment equity legislation will go a long way to help alleviate the problems of some of those constituents who have been previously excluded from the economy. The message in the province of Ontario is that inequity, intolerance, bigotry and discrimination of any sort can no longer be tolerated. Fair hiring practices are only one solution to tackling this systemic problem.

I think it is important to say that the message delivered by His Honour is really just the beginning of a dialogue which will continue with the people of Ontario. I think it is also fair to say that it is unrealistic to expect, as the public has been led to expect, that everything everyone wants is contained in the throne speech. This is a difficult message to give to people, especially in these times of instant news.

It is politically unrealistic and economically not viable in times of restraint to promise something to everyone. It is fair to say that this is the continuation of the agenda for the people of Ontario that our government set in motion some time ago. It is fair to say political and economic adjustments take time. Our government has an economic plan that will include both long-term and short-term measures that will help alleviate poverty.

I know that we can talk about all these things in the abstract. However, each one of us can think of a particular family caught between workers' compensation and welfare, the single mom working several jobs, tenants paying too much rent, the Thursday drop-in for seniors, the barber on the corner street, the pastor working in his or her community, the shopkeepers at our local plazas. This is who I am really talking about. I know and have spoken to a lot of people in York East.

York East is largely the area known as the borough of East York, ranging from modest, single-family homes to very large apartment buildings, to very expensive homes. Macphail refers to the "historic and populous constituency of York East." I suspect, however, that the York East she was referring to was still rural by our standards. The York East of today is very much a small town experiencing big-city problems of development, high rents, a diverse ethnic population, a large senior population and nowhere to grow without a great deal of change. The problems to some extent appear invisible; however, they are not.

1550

The increasing number of calls to my office reflects the economic downturn. I am truly afraid for those who will, because of spiralling rental costs, increased tax burdens, those unemployed because of ill health, age, lack of training or education, and those who are the working poor, have to do without.

I do know that a number of measures, as outlined in our government's agenda, will go a long way to help.

I think we have to understand that our message is about people. It is about how we talk to each other and also how we treat each other. When we talk about the environment, housing or jobs, we should understand that these issues are inextricably linked with how we treat each other and what we owe each other.

Mrs Mathyssen: May I add my congratulations on your election, Mr Speaker.

I am most honoured today to second the motion to adopt the speech from the throne. I would also like to say it is my great privilege to humbly stand before this House as the chosen representative of the people of Middlesex. It is a job I intend to do with diligence and integrity.

I would also like to congratulate the member for York East on his eloquently stated motion for adoption of the speech from the throne.

The riding of Middlesex has a wonderful diversity of economic activity and population. It is comprised of all of Middlesex county with two segments of the city of London, one that extends east of the Clarke Sideroad to the city limits, and another east of Highbury and north of Huron Street. This rural and urban mix, some 77,000 strong, gives the riding a rich and complex nature while posing a number of challenges.

I have spent the last 10 weeks since the September election meeting with individuals, seniors, students, interest groups, hospital boards, care givers, administrators, boards of education, educators, as well as town and township councillors, in an effort to better understand the concerns of the people of Middlesex.

I am most gratified and certainly proud to be a part of a government that has stated its commitment to consultation with and inclusion of the people it serves. I know I can bring the concerns of the people of Middlesex to this place and their voices will be heard.

I would like to acquaint members with the constituents of Middlesex and the challenges facing us and our communities. I would like to begin with the rural residents of the riding and provide a sense of the perennial struggle of many of these farm families to survive and keep the family farm as part of Ontario's landscape.

Middlesex county has some of the best agricultural land in Ontario. The production of our farmers ranges over the entire spectrum of agricultural commodities, but these people, who work in the second-largest industry in Ontario, face overwhelming problems. The problems that have dogged Ontario's farm population since the early 1980s seem to have now reached crisis proportion.

Middlesex producers are grappling with low returns for commodities. Farmers are paid at levels that have progressively eroded over the last decade. Even the returns of producers of supply-managed commodities receiving their cost of production have not kept pace with inflation. This, coupled with the high interest rate policy of the Bank of Canada, has left many farm families tottering on the brink of a frightening and uncertain future.

This uncertainty affects the quality of life among Middlesex farm families and has put into question the future of agriculture, not just because of the financial cost, but also because of the human cost.

I recently met with a group of women -- my neighbours in fact -- who pioneered a Middlesex chapter of Women for the Survival of Agriculture. Their message was very clear and very direct. They are fighting for the survival of their families and their way of life. They have seen the havoc that hard economic times visits upon the family. These people of integrity and commitment cannot -- must not -- be abandoned. The family farm must not be lost. We need the next generation of farmers.

I would also like to mention in this regard the almost unbearable pressure placed on the producers whose land surrounds large urban centres. Despite the skill, knowledge, labour, large investment and devotion to a rural lifestyle, these farmers are finding that the sale of the land itself is their only solution to hard economic realities. Parcels of land from these farms are sold to developers in an effort to find the money to go on. This attempt at survival ironically has led to the death of the land. It is taken out of production, it is paved over, buildings appear and it is gone for ever.

As the countryside loses its capacity to produce food, we face a very real threat to our food supply. Food is the key to our ability to determine what happens in Ontario. We cannot afford to become dependent on others for this most vital necessity.

The urban sector benefits from a strong rural base, and the benefits go beyond just a food supply. The farmer is a consumer too. Farm families support businesses, pay taxes and utilize urban services. For the farmers of Middlesex, for the urban dwellers of Middlesex, I applaud the government's commitment to improve programs to stabilize farm incomes and ensure that rural Ontarians, the farmers of my riding, will be able to provide for their families and our families while they continue to live on the land.

The urban residents of Middlesex come from not just the city of London, but from the many small towns and villages dotting the county. The smaller community, whether it be Parkhill, Westminster, Melbourne, Strathroy, Newbury, Wardsville, Ilderton or Nairn, embodies a spirit of commitment to the wellbeing of each of the members of that community.

I have been approached by a number of groups from the small centres of Middlesex seeking assistance so they can, through their volunteer organizations and committees, provide housing for seniors, the handicapped and lower-income families, and services for the elderly, for those requiring home care and non-profit child care centres. These are all worthy projects and the fact that there are so many people in the towns and village of Middlesex devoted to giving time and energy to such undertakings gives a sense of the kind of people who live in my riding.

The spirit of care-giving, of volunteerism that marks Ontario's society as a society that seeks to enhance the quality of life among its members still exists and is at the centre of why so many people are drawn to make their homes in these small municipalities. As a result, these smaller centres have become the victims of their own success. Tremendous pressure has been put on these towns and villages to expand and develop residentially, commercially and industrially.

This growth demands that sewer and water services be extended beyond the traditional urban areas. If we are to ensure an environment that is clean and safe for our children, we must come to terms with the handling of waste and pollutants. I am gratified to see the government's commitment to the environmental health of the province.

In addition, the availability of clean, safe drinking water, once so much a part of what we took for granted in Middlesex, and indeed in Ontario, is an increasing concern.

A number of my constituent communities have experienced severe water shortages, as well as poor water quality. The fear of contamination of water supplies is ever present. Clean water is an essential. We can take its availability for granted no more. This is part of the environmental challenge all Ontarians face. Our new government's pledge to a Safe Drinking Water Act will help my constituent communities to acquire the water supply they need, and the pledge to the protection of the Great Lakes will be a welcome relief to the communities that hope to secure fresh water supplies from the lakes in the future.

1600

The constituents I represent from the city of London live in the northern and eastern part of the city. They represent a wide range of backgrounds, incomes and interests. Many of them work in jobs connected to small businesses as well as to the service, manufacturing and automotive industries. The Ford plant at Talbotville in the riding of Elgin provides not only primary employment but many spinoff jobs that are essential to the economic wellbeing of my constituents.

These are the people who create the wealth. They are a very real part of what makes Ontario strong, but they too are vulnerable. The realities of free trade and the downturn in the economy threaten their ability to provide for their families. They are turning to the government of Ontario for help to avoid painful upheavals in their lives. The wage protection fund initiated by the new government is certainly a significant part of that help. Another is the proposed solution through education.

This educational solution is most welcome. The people of Middlesex are concerned about the education of their children. They want young Ontarians to have the background that will prepare them to meet the challenges of a global community. They want their children to reach their full potential in a stable, properly funded educational system. As the job market becomes less labour intensive, it becomes incumbent upon the education system to enable the citizens of Middlesex, indeed Ontario, to participate fully in the economic life of the province.

The second part of the education solution is the retraining and upgrading of the skills of those constituents who are dependent upon a manufacturing sector currently in decline. The throne speech has clearly shown that employers and industry have a vital role to play in the support of these upgrading programs.

The new government's promise to work with the private sector in research and development speaks of a new era of co-operation in investment in ourselves. This initiative speaks of faith in the ability of Ontarians to create new jobs based on innovation and new technology. It speaks to something we have always known, something the people of Canada, the people of Middlesex have always known, and that is that we can do it better than anyone in the world.

The next group of Middlesex constituents I would like to tell you about are not urban, are not rural, are not from small towns or a big city, but rather are from all of these. They are the vulnerable members of our society. Though I have always been aware of their plight, this last 10 weeks has brought me much closer to a true understanding of the urgency of that plight. They are the senior citizens, the recipients of social assistance and the working poor who are at the mercy of an unresponsive rent control system.

Sadly, landlords in my constituency still use intimidation and threats of eviction to frighten tenants into submission. Last Friday evening, I received a telephone call that was a cry for help. The tenants of an apartment complex had just been notified that the landlord's rent control appeal had been upheld and that the tenants are now faced with payment of back rent in addition to a monthly increase of 40 per cent. For many of them struggling on fixed incomes, minimum wage or social assistance, it was news of catastrophic proportions.

Other tenants in Middlesex live in substandard apartment units that absentee landlords refuse to repair. These tenants have also been calling out for real rent control and now, at last, they will have it.

Others in my constituency are victims of poverty and despair. They need affordable housing, employment equity, pay equity, reliable and affordable child care, affordable automobile insurance and a fairer tax system; in short, a chance to share in the greatness of Ontario instead of being at the mercy of those who have prevented their full participation. This speech from the throne has given them a ray of hope.

There is one last group of Middlesex constituents that I would like to include. In the southwestern part of my constituency are three communities of native people. After the events of this past summer, I was concerned that it would take a long time for me to build the kind of bonds and communication, trust and friendship that would enable me to truly represent them in the Ontario Legislature.

I had known some of these Muncey, Chippewa and Oneida people as my students in the school where I taught English. I had known others as school friends and colleagues who counselled the native students, but I had never known about their community life and I did not know how I could be the representative they deserved.

The solution to my concern presented itself very recently. I was invited to the Remembrance Day service and community dinner held on the reserve. As with all such acts of remembrance, there was reverence and solemnity in the official service, but under that sincere act of remembrance was a joyful celebration of and commitment to the land the veterans had served and died to protect. It was a service like no other of which I had been part. Of the 126 native people in attendance, 32 were veterans. The ceremony and dinner that followed was a time of comradeship, mutual respect and unqualified acceptance. They embraced my participation and the participation of others from the non-native community with friendship and grace.

This community is currently busy organizing to provide a new school for its elementary children. I was given the chance to see people who are finding enthusiastic, talented leaders among them. I am most proud to say that I am a member of a government committed to fair negotiations with first nations as they move towards self-government.

In conclusion, I would like to share the message I have heard over and over from the people of Middlesex. They have entrusted us with the task to govern fairly, honestly and with courage. They deserve nothing less. On the first evening of our new government, 1 October 1990, as I moved among the crowds who came to their Legislative Assembly, I knew the people were truly here. Yesterday's speech from the throne gives voice to their aspirations, their hopes and their dreams. Once again, I would like to second the motion to adopt the speech from the throne, because it says indeed that the people are truly here.

Mr Nixon: Before I move adjournment, as for the agreement that normally occurs, I just want to extend my congratulations to the mover and seconder who have just spoken. The member for York East had an excellent presentation and I heartily concur with his interest, commitment and sensitivity to the social programs of the province and the requirement that the government and the House direct its attention to ameliorating the inadequacies that have somehow survived the last five years, in fact the last 123 years.

I thought I should just mention that his predecessor, Christine Hart, was also well respected in this House. She has gone on perforce to other responsibilities, but she was a close friend and colleague of mine and I just wanted to mention how much her service in the community and this House was appreciated.

I was also particularly interested in the comments made by the seconder for a number of reasons. I am a farmer myself and she comes from a rural area I paid close attention to her comments about the utilization of farmland and the way farmers are put to a point almost in extremes in order to finance their operations, with low prices and inadequate financing, by having to, heaven help us, sell lots in the agricultural community. So it is interesting to hear her views in this connection as they reflect Middlesex county.

I just wanted to mention something that I would either mention now or in my address that will continue tomorrow, briefly, that her closing comments which stimulated such an enthusiastic response and approval, to the effect that somehow the people are now here, has another side to it. I feel frankly that the democratic process, which up until now has not returned a New Democratic government, has not been totally flawed, in spite of her views and the views of the present leader of the government in that regard. The democratic process has been alive and well and working as effectively as her predecessor and my predecessors could make it.

As a matter of fact, there is a comment in the speech itself, to which I would think the Premier, if he had anything to do with this, might have given further consideration. It is on page 1: "As a group of people accustomed to being on the outside of the established power structures in Ontario, my government will open Queen's Park to those who have never before had an effective voice in the corridors of power."

[Applause]

Mr Nixon: I notice particularly that those who are extracted from the extreme socialist core of the party are most enthused by this, because somehow they feel they have been excluded. I am concerned that that attitude may very well carry over inappropriately to their new responsibilities.

I further want to say, if I may, that the honourable member may recall her predecessor, Doug Reycraft, once again a colleague of mine, who worked quite closely with me in the work of the Treasury, as did Christine Hart. While I welcome her to the House and appreciate her comments, I wanted to comment at this time that he in his way, which was effective and important, served his community here, and I wanted to express my appreciation.

In so doing, Mr Speaker, I move the adjournment of the debate.

On motion by Mr Nixon, the debate was adjourned.

The House adjourned at 1612.