Assemblée législative de l'Ontario

The House met at 1000.

Prayers.

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

INTERVENORS AND SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS / SERVICES D'INTERVENTION ET INTERPRETES DE LANGUES DE SIGNES

Mr Malkowski moved resolution 13:

That, in the opinion of this House, recognizing that the time has come for a fundamental assessment of provincial policies and practices concerning intervention services and sign language interpreting services, intervenor training and sign language interpreter training and the availability of intervenors and sign language interpreters in educational settings and in the community generally, the Ministry of Colleges and Universities should immediately undertake a thorough review of those policies and practices, with the scope of the review to include:

(a) the reasons for the current shortage of intervenors and interpreters in this province and its impact on the ability of colleges and universities, elementary and secondary schools, schools for the deaf and community service agencies and employers to hire qualified intervenors and interpreters;

(b) the availability of American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters and langue des signes québécois (LSQ) interpreters, oral interpreters and English and French intervenors in Ontario;

(c) the availability of intervention training programs and sign language interpreter training programs, including either ASL or LSQ, in Ontario;

(d) the appropriateness of current entrance requirements for sign language interpreter training programs, particularly the criteria pertaining to prospective students, sign language fluency;

(e) the number of sign language interpreter instructors who do not have an appropriate sign language interpreter training background;

(f) the effectiveness of current sign language interpreter training curricula and an assessment of curriculum standards in Ontario, including the degree of involvement of experts and consumers in curriculum development and the extent of ongoing consultation;

(g) the availability of funds to cover the costs of intervenor services and interpreter services;

(h) the appropriateness of the currently limited mandates of the ministries of Community and Social Services, Health, Colleges and Universities, Tourism and Recreation, the Attorney General, Skills Development and Education to assist those who need intervenor services and interpreter services, and the policies of those ministries on the provision of those services, particularly in relation to interpreter screening, intervenor screening, service quality and training program quality;

(i) the availability of current intervenor apprenticeship programs and interpreter apprenticeship programs and their funding status;

(j) current practices regarding the hiring of sign language interpreters in educational and other community settings;

(k) the role of the Ministry of Colleges and Universities as it pertains to intervenor and sign language interpreter education, and its mandate to collect province-wide data on issues regarding the quality and effectiveness of the teaching of intervention and sign language interpreting in Ontario;

(l) the reason or reasons why no faculty of education in Ontario currently provides teacher training for instructors in intervenor programs and sign language interpreting programs; and

(m) such other matters that the ministry considers necessary to complete a thorough evaluation of provincial policies and practices concerning intervention services and sign language interpreting services.

Further, in the opinion of this House, the ministries of Colleges and Universities and Skills Development should take immediate steps to establish a provincial intervenor task force and a sign language interpreter task force, with the involvement of representatives of the deaf and deaf blind communities, professional intervenors and sign language interpreters, intervenor providers and sign language interpreter service providers, and intervenor trainers and sign language interpreter trainers, to develop short- and long-term goals for the expansion of intervenor services and sign language interpreter services, and to advise on apprenticeship programs and the establishment of an intervention education program and sign language interpreting education program at the college or university level;

The ministry should immediately establish timetables for pursuing apprenticeship program expansion; and

The ministry should report to the Legislative Assembly on these matters on or before the 31st day of October 1991.

The Deputy Speaker: Pursuant to standing order 94(c)(i), the honourable member has 10 minutes for his presentation.

Mr Malkowski: Before I actually talk a bit about the history of the problems in intervenor and interpreter services, I would like to make sure that the recommendation is included that we get representation from hard-of-hearing groups, deafened groups and parents of deaf children groups; that real-time captioning be considered as a form of interpreting for deafened individuals; that for deaf people who do not understand or access hearing interpreters, deaf intervenor interpreters be added as well; and that, when we spoke of all of the ministries, the Ministry of Correctional Services also be involved in the review of interpreter and intervention services.

I would like to talk a little bit about the history of interpreting and intervention. Those services have only been around professionally since 1980, so it is a very young profession. Interpreters' and intervenors' services prior to 1980 were mainly done by volunteers, family members, relatives and children of deaf or deaf-blind people. Interpreter training programs, in fact, were only established in 1987 and began at only a college level. An intervenor training program will be established this coming fall, and it will be the first program of its kind ever, and also at a college level.

1010

Prior to 1980, when family members and relatives and children were used, many of these intervenors and interpreters were volunteers. The problem with that was there was no code of ethics they followed. Many of the children of deaf or deaf-blind people had to interpret for their parents in matters such as possible divorce cases, or the buying of houses or cars. Again, these people had to depend on their own children, even, for example, to interpret in a parent-teacher interview when the child himself was being discussed. So members can see that a tremendous number of communication problems existed.

Many people did not have the sign language skills or the knowledge and sensitivity and culture. Therefore much information was edited, and emotional involvement on the part of the interpreter or intervenor occurred, which meant there was a great deal of misunderstanding or misinformation. When incorrect decisions were made, often the child or the volunteer interpreter was blamed because effective service did not occur. Still today we see this happening. Some deaf people or deaf-blind people are forced to use their children as interpreters or intervenors simply because they cannot find quality, professional interpreters and cannot get intervenor services. That occurs to this very day.

The fact that there is so limited a number of interpreters and intervenors in the province of Ontario means these people are being used a great deal, which causes burnout. We are seeing physical damage being done to interpreters and intervenors. To give members an example, there are 80,000 deaf people in the province and only approximately 35 full-time interpreters; 600 deaf-blind people in the province and approximately eight full-time intervenors. This of course has a tremendous impact and is extremely frustrating for deaf, deaf-blind, hard-of-hearing and deafened individuals. In trying to access information on a daily basis they are constantly limited. If they are trying to find a job and are able to obtain the job interview, they are told they have to wait two months before they can get an interpreter. The number of opportunities that are lost is tremendous because they cannot get qualified services. For things such as family counselling, legal appointments, doctors' appointments and psychological assessments, often qualified interpreters are not available.

I certainly remember that when I was a student myself, I had a psychological evaluation without an interpreter and they labelled me as a slow learner. I am here today in the House, so I guess I have to question that. I seem to be functioning all right. But the point is that their right of accessibility to information is being denied. For example, deaf people who are in prison are not provided services so they can access support groups, speak to their lawyer or talk to the social worker. Often they are suffering from psychological problems, and while they may be given a referral to a psychiatrist, no interpreter exists. Where is the justice here?

I know of a deaf patient who was left in a hospital for one week. One of the family members flew in to see this individual to make sure he was all right and found out that he was actively hallucinating and talking about killing himself. Luckily that family member happened to be able to sign and began to interpret for the patient, telling the psychiatrist that the patient was hallucinating.

The psychiatrist thought the patient was fine and said: "This is my system. I walk in every day, and if they raise their hand like I do, it means they're okay. If they put their hand down, it means that they're not all right. That's our system of communication." Unfortunately, the deaf patient thought the doctor was simply saying hi, every morning and so waved back. Nobody had bothered to explain this communication system to the deaf patient. Nobody had provided appropriate treatment for this patient. Luckily the family member had found out in time; otherwise that person might have killed himself. Where are the professional ethics and responsibility in this sort of situation?

Deaf-blind people in this province need to access information about the world and yet are given only six hours of intervenor services a week. That six hours a week that they are provided has to include food shopping, talking to friends, having some sort of social contact and trying to access information of the world. I wonder how many members could survive with that type of access.

We all know of Helen Keller, who was a shining example of success. However, she had 24-hour intervention services in the form of Anne Sullivan. I wonder how many other Helen Kellers like her are hidden away, unable to access information, cut off from the world.

I know of a qualified teacher who became deafened. After losing their hearing the person lost their job as well, and applied to get into the teacher of the deaf training program, but was not accepted because the person could not hear, could not sign and could not lip-read. But what about real-time captioning and providing sign-language courses for this person? Instead, that did not happen, and they were denied the service.

Hard-of-hearing people often live in a world of hit-or-miss information and a great deal of misunderstanding occurs. Often we see that the problem is because oral interpreters are not provided.

We can see that all of these cases are extremely frustrating and dramatic. Members may think this is not common, but that is because they are used to everyday access to information. Our lives are not like that. We are dealing with very limited schedules and very frustrating experiences.

That means there are deaf people, deaf-blind people, deafened individuals and hard-of-hearing people ready to become directors, administrators, to study for their PhD, to become lawyers, social workers, counsellors and even politicians. The only thing that is stopping them is the requirement for high-level, highly skilled oral ASL-LSQ interpreters, captioning intervenors, so that they can have full access to information.

We need to establish interpreter training programs and intervenor programs at a university level so that if deaf students want to take their PhD courses, they do not have to use interpreters who do not even have a university background to interpret those courses. We have to see these programs at university level.

We also have to see apprenticeship programs established, so that after graduating from college, students who still need to upgrade their skills have a place to go. It would be like members taking a French course for a year and thinking that they had become French translators. I doubt that the Prime Minister's Office would hire them in that capacity. Therefore, what we need is to see that highly qualified, highly trained interpreters, intervenors and captioning services exist for all individuals, because some day some members out there may also become deaf, hard-of-hearing or maybe deaf-blind, and they too will need interpreters, intervenors and captioning services so they can access information and be able to appreciate the information that exists out there.

We see a lot of deaf and deaf-blind people here with their intervenors or oral interpreters today, and deafened people who can access captioning systems. Now they are actually able to understand the political system. They are up here today in our galleries.

I think it is critical, in summary, that this resolution is important, that all members support this resolution and that we do indeed establish such a review looking at interpreter-intervenor services and captioning services so that we have appropriate training and qualified people; that we have representation from the various interest parties, including deaf, deaf-blind, deafened and hard-of-hearing people so that we actually can establish long- and short-term goals of expansion of services and provision of service to meet the needs of all people. We shall become a model, an effective model I am sure, for the whole world.

1020

Mr Curling: I want to commend the member for York East for bringing forward this resolution. I know of the hard work he had put in even before he was in Parliament, and he continues to fight for those individuals who are being deprived of expressing themselves and playing an important role in our society.

The four minutes or so that I am given is not quite an adequate time to express my emotions and commitment to this cause; however, I will try my best to do so. It is a long way, as the member said, from 1980 and from the time of voluntarism to a more structured manner of dealing with these concerns. Many things have been done.

I can recall, in 1988, that Richard Johnston, the former NDP member for Scarborough West, had met with a member who I think was then representing the Ontario Association of the Deaf in bringing about a resolution which at that time was supported by my party, the Liberal Party, and all members here.

In 1989, I recall too that our government, the Liberal government at the time, the previous government, released two comprehensive studies of educational programs and services in Ontario for the deaf and hard-of-hearing students. People are quite familiar with those programs as a review of the Ontario education programs for deaf and hard-of-hearing students. The other was the review of the Ontario post-secondary programs for deaf and hard-of-hearing students.

In 1990, the same member, Richard Johnston, introduced Bill 112, a private member's bill to amend the Education Act to make American sign language the language of instruction. I also recall that in June 1990, the minister of the day, the member for Renfrew North, announced that the American sign language pilot project would be undertaken, commencing September 1990. The initiative was, as members will recall, in response to the recommendation in the review of education programs for the deaf and hard-of-hearing.

In November of last year, the present Minister of Education announced four measures concerning the education of deaf and hard-of-hearing students, including such things as statements of the government and commitment to the American sign language as an optional language. It stated that within four years these rich, expansive languages will be established as the optional languages for learning in Ontario schools and programs.

Many things have been done in that time. I want to commend at this time the former member, Richard Johnston, for introducing a private member's bill. I urge the government of today, while this private member's bill is a very important one, to take it under its own wing and introduce it and, without much amendment, move forward with this bill. I know the role that the member plays; he is also part of that government. The bill would get much faster clout and we could have it properly debated if we bring it forward as a main bill, because many of us on this side would like to express ourselves and make sure that that commitment is not only said but felt.

At times it is good for us to be a part of this. It is not only the deaf or the blind who are being disfranchised in this society. Black people, for instance, feel disfranchised about the education system and feel that they are not given an opportunity to play an important role. The streaming and many other things they are faced with are just so much. I can understand the frustration of those people who have so much to give and lend and are unable to give it.

My other colleagues would like to speak. I would like to say to them that it would have been great if they had brought it forward as a government bill so that we could all have supported it strongly. I have no hesitation at all in supporting the honourable member's private member's bill.

Mrs Cunningham: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for this unique opportunity in this House. I would like to thank the member who has brought to this House for the first time in the history of Ontario an opportunity for all of us to support the important issue of allowing members of all disabled communities, but in this case especially the deaf and the deaf-blind communities, the opportunity to be full participating members in our society.

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank my colleague the member for Scarborough North, as he spoke on behalf of his government, which I think made great inroads into the improvement of this quality of life that we are talking about. I would like to remind especially those in the gallery today that they have a wonderful role model in this Legislative Assembly this morning. He should be commended for the work he has done in the past and he should be commended especially today for the opportunity that we all have to see what can happen to someone who has been tremendously motivated, who has worked very hard in his life, who has made public life his contribution to the society in Ontario and to the improvement of the lives of others.

No one will be surprised to know that I, on behalf of the Progressive Conservative caucus, and all of us are here to support the resolution of the member for York East and to offer him our great thanks. In doing so, it would be unlike me not to give him some advice, because at the same time the great concern for all of us in this House is that we cannot be in all places at all times. It concerns me a little bit that maybe I will not be at one of these meetings. I would love to be there and to offer any help that I can as a person who has worked in London, Ontario, for the last 18 years.

In my very early years as a school board trustee, I was proud to be made aware of services that we provided both at the Robarts School Regional Centre for Hearing Handicapped and certainly in our own school board where we took a very different approach to teaching young children, not with American sign language but in other ways. I am here today to talk about all ways and especially to support the one that seems to be most important to the member for York East.

I will start by saying that the member's resolution is one that we and other governments, including our own government many years ago, will take seriously. We got started, did not move too quickly but got a lot of additional support from the Liberals, and now we have the NDP government which will move forward and that is what we need.

We should know that deaf education in Ontario has been widely criticized because of a lack of achievement by Ontario's deaf students. We have talked about that at the elementary, secondary and college levels, and no one knows better than the member for York East what I am talking about.

Post-secondary education opportunities are limited because of a lack of support services and, as a result, the deaf and hard-of-hearing communities face barriers to employment, promotion and job training. Even when they get jobs -- and I think a very important part that I have underlined today for the member in his deliberations is the fact that even when we have helped people to become important members, contributing members of our community, when they are so disabled, we do not continue to support them.

I am now talking about the real need for job coaching and job shadowing on an ongoing daily and weekly basis so that employers also understand that it is not easy to be disabled even with the support services, even with the kinds of drive and energy and the degree of success that the member for York East has received. Some of his own young students, colleagues and young people follow him and look at him as a role model. Even with all that support, if employers are not aware of what is happening, of their responsibility and their gains as employers by supporting the disabled community in many facets of life -- but today we are talking about the deaf and hard-of-hearing, the hearing-impaired, the deaf-blind -- that has to be part of our mandate. Even after they have left our school systems and our colleges and universities, disabled people still have a right to ongoing education, and part of their education is educating their employers. I want to underline that today.

If Canada is to remain competitive in today's global economy, we must be able to produce a highly skilled work force of all kinds of people, not just people who have been able to make it on their own without support systems, but people who need support systems. As I stand in this House today, I do not think there is one of us here who does not have a special support system no matter what we are labelled, and I have been labelled many things in the last few days, but I will say that. With happiness I say it.

Of course, if Canada is to remain competitive we also have to make certain that all students are given the opportunity to attend our universities, our colleges and other post-secondary training institutions. Today, however, the services and opportunities, as we have been made very much aware, at the university and college level are not as universal and comprehensive as they ought to be. For this reason I believe it is important for the study of the support and intervenor services to heighten awareness of the need to facilitate educational opportunities for deaf and hard-of-hearing students.

We just have not done a good job of making citizens of Canada and Ontario aware of the necessary support services and what happens because of them, the wonderful degree of accomplishment and the wonderful degree of involvement in our society because people have had those kinds of opportunities. As a society, we must take measures that will make the education offered to all deaf and hearing-impaired students more open and supportive, and must respond to their needs as individuals and as participants of the community.

1030

The study that my colleague the member for York East is proposing today is extremely comprehensive; I do not think I have seen a more comprehensive one. In fact, even at the end he added something he thought was important, and we should put that into it. I thought it was very important. I did not write it down, but I know there was another aspect he wanted us to talk about, and of course if the study is implemented it will hopefully answer a number of questions and make significant recommendations.

In doing my homework for this, I would like to give some credit to those citizens across Ontario who support all of us in our work and just to begin, I will talk first of all about the Canadian National Institute for the Blind. When we ask them for their support or for their encouragement or suggestions, they always respond. As elected representatives, they have never let us down and I would like to say that on the record today.

The Canadian Hearing Society also responded to our requests for information. A number of letters have been sent to my colleagues in the Progressive Conservative Party and to our leader, and we will certainly take their good advice today.

The Bob Rumball Centre for the Deaf has always been extremely helpful in so many ways to the legislators of this province. We count on them for the best advice they can give us as we proceed in the training and education of our young people.

I thought the member for York East would be most appreciative of the Canadian Deafened Persons Association's input, as its representatives pointed out some of the problems they have in getting themselves organized and also in looking for services for people who have become deaf later in life because of accidents or health or other reasons and have had no warning and no training for this disability.

As I look to my own community of London, I would like to thank Sandra Bend, who is the literacy instructor of Deaf-Blind Services in southwestern Ontario and has always been most helpful whenever I have needed some assistance on this matter.

Certainly the Board of Education for the City of London, which I think has been a leading school board in teaching and working with parents of children at a very early age -- one of the first young children I ever met was two years old and now we are taking them into the program even younger at the London board of education and other school boards across Ontario.

I would like now to talk about the concerns of Fanshawe College and other colleges. The administration at that particular college is most supportive and congratulates the member on this resolution this morning. They do however remind us -- and certainly I can speak quite openly about this as the critic for Colleges and Universities, Skills Development and Education -- that when one is looking for programs in our society, one has to provide the support to the universities and the institutions that are providing those kinds of programs, as we talk about training interpreters today and as we talk about the kinds of intervention services that are so necessary for the deaf and the deaf-blind community.

We also have to make certain therefore that we do not -- and I know the members of the government will be quick to criticize if I am not careful in my choice of words. There are many services that the public of Ontario are most happy to pay for and they tell us about them, but they want those services delivered efficiently and effectively. No one knows better than the members of the government how much more efficient we ought to be. I think it is up to every single member of this House to take a look at waste in government and places where we can improve the quality of service so that, at the same time, we are not making this particular program look like an add-on but like something that should be part of the services that are provided now. I know if we take a look at our priorities, we do not have to add additional funding; we have to transfer funding from one program to another. This one should have always been there, in my view. I think we can find the money to do it, so for those who want to be critical, I can say right now I know it is there, and if anybody would take my good advice from time to time, I will find it for him.

At the same time, I think it is very important and I really would like to read a letter that was sent from the University of Western Ontario, because all of us go back to our home communities, and my two colleagues from London this afternoon, I am sure, would do the same thing. I think we are a particularly good team in that we help each other around resolutions, and when I have the opportunity to speak, I hear from them, the member for London South and the member for London Centre.

But today I would like to put on the record one of the notes from Dr Daniel Ling, because he speaks on behalf of certainly his own faculty, which is the applied health sciences at Elborn College. If the member for York East has not been there, I invite him today. They have done a wonderful expansion. They are dealing with small babies. They are looking at transplants, wonderful technology and opportunities for families today that were not available in the past, so we are looking at many ways of dealing with the issue that we talk about today.

Dr Ling says: "It is important at the outset to define the terms used in this resolution. Intervenors are interpreters who work as helpers for deaf-blind persons, whereas interpreters are required for all hearing-impaired people who are unable to understand discourse without the provision of sign language or lip-reading cues provided by another person." It gives us an opportunity to make those distinctions.

He also says: "Because the degree of hearing impairment varies widely among both children and adults no one method of educational instruction or type of interpretation can meet the needs of all hearing-impaired people. Accordingly, Mr Malkowski's resolution should be modified to recognize this." I am going to send this brief to the member for York East so that he can include these concerns from a very widely known educator, Dr Daniel Ling from the University of Western Ontario.

He says: "Unfortunately, adults cannot learn as well as children to interpret the information modern speech technology can provide. However, deaf adults can not only benefit from sign language and oral interpreting, they can also be helped by real-time written translation services that technology can currently help us provide."

I would hope that this study goes to the University of Western Ontario and takes a look at that wonderful new facility we have and that the member for York East will give me his viewpoints and tell me how I can help in my role as an opposition member, because from time to time we can stand up and help the member for York East along in the work he wants to have done.

At the same time, I would like to be kept informed of what is happening with the committee. I would also like to say I do hope we do not lose the good work that has gone on before -- and I will close with this -- the review of Ontario post-secondary education for deaf and hard-of-hearing students, as we take advantage of this opportunity to move about Ontario, to have hearings, to talk about all aspects of training and the need that the member for York East has talked about.

It has been a pleasure to stand here this morning and to take so much time to talk about something I feel so strongly about. I would like to congratulate the member for York East, to say it is a pleasure to have him here and we look forward to his future leadership.

1040

Mrs Haslam: Unlike my colleague across the floor, I am not going to be able to talk for the full 15 minutes. We have many speakers over here and I am afraid my time allotment is not going to be that long, but I would like to talk today about intervention.

What is intervention? The Canadian National Society of the Deaf-Blind defines it as, "The provision of a professional service, paid or voluntary, to facilitate the interaction of a deaf-blind person with his environment."

I would like members to think for a minute about the term "deaf-blind." There are approximately 600 adults in Ontario who are designated deaf-blind and only eight full time intervenors.

Being a teacher, I am going to ask members to kind of bear with me and I am going to give them a scenario. I would like all members to close their eyes right now. Members should just close their eyes. I would like all members now to stop doing whatever they are doing, no turning pages, no writing, no talking, no noise. Imagine living like this. Imagine living in a darkened room with no sound whatsoever.

Think about it. You are not unintelligent. You wish to live an active life. You wish to participate and engage in leisure activities. You wish to learn, but without access to information, these wishes cannot come true. How would you cope? How would you go to school?

I have a letter from a constituent of mine, certain parts of which I would like to share with members. It says:

"Dear Ms Haslam:

"I am the parent of a 20-year-old multisensory-deprived person who has been both deaf and blind from birth. Presently my daughter is attending the W. Ross Macdonald School in Brantford. The school provides an excellent program and she has displayed a steady progression in both communication and living skills through the years.

"In order to interpret her world and to carry on the necessary living skills, she needs constant intervention. Intervention is a facility to ensure that multisensory-deprived persons have access to information and are able to pursue educational, vocational, avocational and social goals.

"At present, the school provides intervention through the week and her family becomes her intervenor on the weekend.

"She is now of school-leaving age. She will graduate in June. If there is no program which can adequately meet her needs, the only choice for her mother and I will be to keep her at home and hire a full-time intervenor, which we cannot afford, or institutionalize her in a total-care setting. Institutionalization would cause definite regression in all areas which we and the school have worked very intently to develop."

We here use our eyes and our ears 24 hours a day. With intervenors and volunteers, people have the opportunity for only six hours of interaction and intervention.

There are various communication methods. One of them is POP, where you spell into the hand of the person you are working for as an intervenor, and that is not easy. Imagine spelling every single word that someone is saying. But for the deaf-blind, this is a common method of communication in the community and, as in the movie about Helen Keller, they must learn this skill, they must be literate.

Intervenors also provide a link between the deaf-blind person and others. They provide instruction in the areas of mobility, communication, life skills like shopping and cooking, support for recreation activities and, also very important, counselling.

As the member for York East mentioned, it is not unusual for children to act as interpreters for their parents, even children eight years of age and even in a court system. When people require professional intervention, it is important that those intervenors have the skills necessary, because the decisions made will affect their lives.

Assessments are sometimes made, just as the member for York East has mentioned, with regard to a deaf-blind person being a slow learner, addressed as a slow learner or learning-disabled. It is not their incapacity to learn; it is their lack of access to learning facilities.

I am aware of a new course that is starting. George Brown College in Toronto has an intervenor training program that is opening in September 1991. It is a two-year certificate course, the first of its kind in the world. These courses are very important. With a properly trained intervenor, the deaf-blind individual could gain access to higher education. Through teaching and facilitation, deaf-blind people would be able to have independence. This is what intervention is all about.

Mr Ruprecht: The presence here today of so many members of the deaf-blind community and others shows their commitment to this resolution. I wish to thank the member for York East for this resolution, as it takes a significant step in the struggle to ensure that members of disabled communities will take their rightful place in terms of integration into our society at all levels.

I am reminded that not too long ago the previous Liberal government, of which I was a member, introduced the resolution by the United Nations proclaiming the Decade for Disabled Persons. The decade actually began in 1983. When we took office in 1985, it was Premier Peterson who decided at that time, along with our cabinet colleagues, that it was important to establish an Office for Disabled Persons. We did that in 1985. As soon as the decision was made to come up with a plan to follow suit with this decision, the United Nations declaration was proclaimed and I had the distinct honour at that time to become Ontario's first minister responsible for disabled persons.

We were conscious then, as soon as we declared the decade in 1985, that within the proclamation was a certain set of principles that could be shown to the people of Ontario, including disabled communities. They would then have some guidelines by which the government of the day and this government could be held accountable for their actions. We were conscious of that.

I think that today, whether it is this government or the previous government, we will be held accountable for this resolution and for other resolutions that will no doubt follow, because it is only fair and just for those members of the disabled communities and others to take their rightful place in the economic and social structure of this country and province.

What are these principles? One of course, the big one, is the principle of dignity and independence. The question would then be asked, because it is the proclamation of the Decade of Disabled Persons, what is this government or future governments or previous governments doing to ensure that there is dignity and independence for disabled persons? What about the question and principle of equal rights? What are we doing as a government to ensure that everyone has equal rights? What are we doing as a government to ensure that there are enough processes of integrating or mechanisms or possibilities of integration being established so that every person may be able to contribute the best way, according to his ability, to the progress and future of this province?

1050

It becomes very clear that the member for York East and his resolution be supported today and that the task force he is asking for, the intervenor and interpreter services task force, be established as soon as possible. We in this House have already indicated our support. I see no disagreement either from our colleagues to our left or our colleagues from this government. There are no persons who will speak in opposition to this task force.

The point will then be made, how soon will this government be able to implement the task force and implement the consequent recommendations that must be flowing from this task force? The responsibility then will be how quickly can the government act and what will it do once the recommendations come out?

In closing, let me congratulate the member for York East and congratulate those who are present here today, because their presence is an indication that they do wish to participate fully in the life of this province and what this province has to offer.

Mr Martin: At this time in our history, as we focus so sharply on questions of Confederation and who we are as a country, I think it is important to look at what we value. If we value actually a healthy, productive, prosperous community and if that is the ideal that all of us aspire to, then we need to listen to all sorts of people as they tell us what it is they need in order to be able to participate fully in the process of this great country evolving and reaching its potential.

My experience with the select committee on Ontario in Confederation as it went through northern Ontario certainly spoke volumes about that whole issue, particularly where it affected the folks whom we speak to today most directly, the deaf community in Ontario. The deaf community in Ontario is represented here. We must listen to them very seriously and take into consideration all that they are telling us and do whatever we can within our power to make sure we put in place those things that they see as essential so that they might reach their potential and participate fully in the society in which they live.

They have gathered here today in large numbers in this chamber. There is a group on its way from Belleville which got hung up in the truckers' demonstration in the province. They have actually abandoned their bus and are catching the GO train from Ajax to be here for the vote at 12 o'clock.

I have about 50 letters here this morning from folks in my own community of Sault Ste Marie, supporting the resolution that the member for York East has presented to us in the chamber this morning. We must not and cannot refuse to listen to this voice. The ability to communicate in their own native language seems to me, as I read the resolution, the key issue here. They are telling us that their native language is American sign language.

What do we value as a country, as a province? If it is people we value and we see people as valuable and want to maximize their potential, then we cannot but move quickly to pass this resolution and move it to a stage of legislation which will allow the folks who are here today and out there across the province to simply want to take their place, as was so ably presented to me at a function I was at recently where we were talking about providing opportunity for the teaching of ASL as a teachable subject. We so often get up hung up on names and language. They mentioned the words "differently abled," and all of us in Ontario today, regardless of our assets or our liabilities, are differently abled. Let's get on with making sure that all of us can participate fully.

Mr Beer: It is a pleasure for me to rise in support of our colleague's resolution today. In the time available to me I would like to look at this motion from three perspectives: personal; some comments on the francophone element of this motion; and, finally, a few comments on the principles that I believe should be involved in carrying out the work of the task force.

I think it is important for those of us who have our hearing and our eyesight to try to look at an issue such as this at times from a personal perspective. I want to share with members part of the journey that I have taken in trying to understand better the needs of the hearing-impaired, of the deaf and the deaf-blind community. I want to refer to several members of my own family, an uncle and aunt of my wife, Gaines and Emma Fawcett. Emma is still alive, living in Brampton.

Gaines and Emma lived very full, vigorous lives. They were both deaf, but that never stopped them from travelling around the world, from living life, as they say, with full vigour. Yet when I look at all of the elements in this resolution, I know that along the way there had to be many obstacles that they faced because the playing field was not an equal one, ways in which the kind of changes that Richard Johnston's bill brought before us in the past few years and that the motion which the member for York East has now brought before us would help not to change the spirit of their lives but to provide them with the help and assistance that at times they required. I think it is very important that we look at it in that respect, because what we are trying to do is to make sure that the access to the kinds of services in fact becomes a reality.

I look at the lives of Gaines and Emma Fawcett and I then think of a much younger person, the daughter of one of my cousins, Melinda Riddle, who is completing this year the preliminary year at Gallaudet University in Washington. She, like Gaines and Emma, is a person of tremendous determination. There is just no question in the world that she will succeed at whatever she decides to do.

But what is exciting, I think, at this point in time, when we look at the changes that are going on in our own country, the United States and other countries is that in fact there will be a more equal playing field and that there will be the kinds of services and programs that we like to see, which will really be of direct assistance. I wish for Melinda no less the spirit and determination that Gaines and Emma have demonstrated throughout their lives, but now and in the future that there will be in all aspects of our lives more support for those who are deaf

J'aimerais souligner aussi l'importance de cette motion pour les francophones sourds et aveugles de notre province, parce que des fois nous oublions l'importance d'assurer les services et les programmes tant pour les francophones que pour les anglophones. Je sais fort bien qu'on va assurer ces services, mais il est très important, ce matin, de souligner ce point.

Finally there is the question of choice, because it seems to me that when we are dealing with services and programs for the disabled we want to create a society in which there is choice, so that we can have the development of ASL and LSQ and at the same time recognize concerns of parents about other kinds of programs and other kinds of support and help that they feel they want for their own families. It is important that we allow that choice. We in the hearing community must be sensitive to the kind of cultural dimensions of the deaf community in particular and to recognize the importance of ASL within that.

It has been a pleasure for me to rise in support of this motion, because I know it will do much for so many people in our province.

1100

Mr Silipo: I am pleased to have the opportunity to rise, however briefly, to add my voice of support to the resolution presented this morning by the member for York East.

Because many people have spoken about the merits of the resolution, I want to simply underline my support for the resolution on the merits and to underscore the need for us to undertake the kind of fundamental assessment of the various provincial policies and practices relating to intervention services and sign language interpreting services and the many other points the member for York East has raised for us in the resolution.

I think the detail of the resolution speaks volumes to the kind of tenacity and thoroughness those of us who have had the opportunity to work with the member for York East have become accustomed to seeing. Certainly, having worked with him on the select committee on Ontario in Confederation, I know full well that tenacity and thoroughness of his dedication to this issue and to issues concerning all Ontarians, and am pleased to be able to support the resolution today.

As we travel led the province with our committee, we heard from a number of deaf people and disabled people and individuals in general. I think it is a tribute, therefore, that the kinds of things we heard across the province are expressed to some extent in the resolution that is here before us and also that there are present here this morning so many individuals who are deaf, deaf and blind or with other disabilities. In looking around, I think I have seen at least three different kinds of interpreting going on. That is a fascinating tribute to the kinds of efforts that have been made and very clearly an indication of the kinds of things we as a Legislature need to continue to push to ensure that people all across Ontario, whatever their ability or disability may be, have the same kinds of opportunities to be full participants in our society.

M. Bisson: C'est avec plaisir que je profite de l'occasion de vous parler de cette motion aujourd'hui. Comme l'ont eu d'autres députés, par exemple le député de York-Nord et le député de Willowdale, j'ai eu la chance de travailler avec le député de York-Est durant les audiences publiques concernant la constitution tenues au mois de février dernier.

Ce qui m'a frappé pendant le temps de toute cette présentation qu'on a vue, en plus de l'expérience de travailler avec le député de York-Est, c'était la question sur les services qui sont offerts -- ou pas offerts, devrais-je dire. On était à Kenora, je pense, ou à Sioux Lookout, où on a rencontré un monsieur sourd et muet qui demeure dans la région nord-ouest de la province. Parmi ses confrères et consoeurs qui ont des problèmes avec leur ouie dans la communauté, personne ne parle. Dans toute sa région, il n'y a personne dans le coin qu'il connaisse avec qui il peut communiquer parce qu'il n'y a personne qui connaît ni la langue des signes québécois ni l'American sign language. Ça fait sept ans, depuis qu'il y demeure, qu'il n'avait parlé à personne. La première personne à qui il avait parlé dans sept ans c'était le député de York-Est pendant nos audiences publiques.

Je me demande comment ça doit être difficile dans une situation semblable de n'avoir personne à qui on peut parler, personne à qui on peut donner nos expériences, personne avec qui on peut communiquer quand on a un problème ou développer une vie communautaire dans notre société.

A part le manque de services dans cette province et dans le pays en général, ceux qui sont sourds et muets n'ont pas la chance d'utiliser le langage, souvent parce qu'il n'y a pas les services en place à travers les systèmes éducatifs ou à travers les services sociaux.

Un point qu'il faut se rappeler qui est très important, c'est qu'il faut donner un peu le contrôle de ce qui se passe avec les services à ceux qui se trouvent dans la communauté elle-même. Si on regarde dans l'éducation pour les interprètes soit de la LSQ ou l'ASL, c'est très important que ceux dans la communauté sont capables de donner ce que eux croient être important pour mener les services eux-mêmes.

Je voudrais que le monde appuie le projet de loi, mais l'important c'est qu'on se rappelle la question de donner à ceux dans la communauté elle-même non seulement de l'input, mais la gérance de leur système d'éducation et la gérance du curriculum nécessaire pour développer les fonctions.

Mr Malkowski: I would like to respond to a few of the comments made by the members. The member for Scarborough North was very helpful in helping us pass Bill 112, and I think there is still some unfinished business for us to do. I would also like to agree with the member for London North. I certainly invite her to be involved in work with the committee and would be happy to get her consultation. I am sure it would be helpful if Dr Ling sent me that letter of invitation. I would be happy to come and take a look at his program and look forward to working with all of them. I think it is also important that we include all options, including auditory-verbal training, ASL, LSQ and so on and that all options be available as well as live-time captioning.

I was very impressed with many of the members, for example the members for Perth, Cochrane South and Dovercourt, who spoke about their own personal experiences, which were very inspiring. I think it has helped us in the whole education process. I also think it is important that we do look at independence and dignity, as was mentioned, and that this is critical. It is important that all of us support the resolution and that the Ministry of Colleges and Universities moves ahead with this resolution and the recommendations that come from it and that we hear from them by 31 October.

In closing, I would like to thank all of the deaf people, hard-of-hearing people, deafened people and deaf-blind people who have come out today with the services that have been provided. It is great to see that you are able to access the political arena. I want to thank particularly Bob Rumball Association of the Deaf, Bob Rumball Centre of the Deaf, Canadian Deafened Persons Association, Canadian Hard of Hearing Association, Canadian Hearing Society, the Canadian National Society of the Deaf-Blind, Ontario Association of the Deaf, Ontario Deaf Sports Association, Ontario Cultural Society of the Deaf, Sheridan College, St Clair College, Ontario Association of Sign Language Interpreters and all the people who gave their support to this resolution.

1110

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT (VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTERS), 1991 / LOI DE 1991 MODIFIANT LE CODE DE LA ROUTE (POMPIERS AUXILIAIRES)

Mrs Fawcett moved second reading of Bill 87, An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act with respect to Volunteer Fire Fighters.

M^me Fawcett propose la deuxième lecture du projet de loi 87, Loi modifiant le Code de la route relativement aux pompiers auxiliaires.

Mrs Fawcett: I am pleased today to be announcing the second reading of Bill 87, which would grant to volunteer firefighters in Ontario the right to have their own designated licence plates. Firefighters on two separate occasions have spoken to me about a conference they attended where they learned that in several states volunteer firefighters receive a distinctive licence plate which designates that they are firefighters. This was effective in assisting them in arriving at the scene of the emergency as quickly as possible. This of course reduces the response time, resulting in the possibility of more lives being saved and less damage done.

When I served on municipal council in the village of Colborne, I was appointed council liaison to the fire department. In that capacity, I learned just how valuable this group of volunteers is in its respective communities. I also came to realize how little we show our appreciation to these brave men and women who risk their lives whenever that familiar fire siren goes off. I believe strongly that granting them their own designated licence plates is the least we can do to assist them in doing their jobs better, and also just plain to give them the recognition they so justly deserve.

Volunteer firefighters play a vital and important role in Ontario's fire fighting service. The facts speak for themselves. The province has 656 fire departments and almost 80% are fully staffed by volunteers. Numerically, volunteers are the backbone of Ontario and Canadian fire fighting services and outnumber career personnel by about four to one. They are essential to the provision of fire fighting forces in towns, villages and rural areas and to some extent in urban centres.

Whether they are called to service by the age-old siren or the modern portable pager, these dedicated people very often put themselves at risk for the safety of others. In rural Ontario it always means travelling either to the fire directly in their own vehicles or driving their vehicles to the fire hall. If the public at large can recognize these men and women in some manner, for instance, by a special licence plate, this will mean a faster job done. Cost savings to small municipalities are tremendous.

Consider this: Full-time firefighters are four times as expensive as volunteers, and fire protection costs per resident decrease as the percentage of volunteers increases. Furthermore, as a percentage of the total municipal revenue, financing a fire department may be as high as 10% for career staff departments, compared to only 1.2% for voluntary departments. As well, home owners, insurance rates are lower in areas protected by their own fire departments. In rural areas this is of the greatest significance, since fire departments would not exist if not for the volunteer firefighters. There is no doubt that the estimated 16,000 part time firefighters who provide fire protection services to rural communities on a volunteer basis form the backbone of Ontario's fire fighting service. These dedicated men and women deserve our recognition.

A dramatic example of their dedication and value to society was more than evident during the tire fire at Hagersville. Volunteer firefighters from 11 departments across Haldimand-Norfolk region, more than 600 altogether, left their jobs, families and warm beds to fight the monster blaze that would not quit. In the end it was the firefighters who would not quit and the monster was slain.

Oft-times I have been on the main street of the village of Colborne when that familiar wail of the fire siren sounded. Because Highway 2 goes through the village, there is always a moderate flow of traffic. On occasion I have attempted to pick out volunteer cars trying to make it to the fire hall to do their duty, but it is very difficult. A designated licence plate would indeed be a start in this recognition process.

The dedicated volunteer firefighter is an inspiration to us all. He or she gives up evenings and weekends to train, and of course in this province often has to turn out in subzero weather to help his or her neighbours. They know the importance of keeping up to date with the challenges of this ever-changing technological world. Aside from extensive formal education at the Ontario Fire College in Gravenhurst, in which they pass the same exams and practical tests as full-time firefighters, volunteers spend many personal hours attending mutual aid meetings and other information sessions.

A mutual aid system operates across the province on a county, district or regional basis. In my riding of Northumberland alone there are 14 fire departments which have made a mutual assistance agreement. They include the departments in the municipalities of Harwood, Hope township, Baltimore, Bewdley, Cobourg, Port Hope, Colborne, Campbellford, Brighton, Murray township, Hastings, Roseneath, Warkworth and the Canadian Forces Base in Trenton.

By combining forces, firefighters not only can go to the assistance of a neighbouring community in the time of emergency, but they also combine funds for more frequent and less costly educational workshops. This ensures that up-to-date techniques and methods are relayed to all members in a region and that there is a standardized degree of skill and knowledge between departments.

Volunteer departments in the 1990s have many more demands and expectations placed on them today. For departments near major highways, members respond to as many highway accidents as structural fires. They are responsible not only for cleaning up fuel, but for freeing victims from the wreckage. Volunteer firefighters are also being trained to handle chemical spills, hazardous waste and are even being given paramedic-type training to respond to medical emergencies.

For these reasons I believe it is important that if at all possible, a car belonging to a volunteer firefighter should never be blocked in. This can happen at a community event that a volunteer might be attending, for example. It is no one's fault that he might be blocked in, because how does the public distinguish the cars? With a specialized licence plate, this kind of problem might be eased somewhat and response time cut down significantly. Also, just knowing that someone qualified in CPR, etc, is in the area can save a life in a drowning or a heart problem, for instance.

All firefighters, no matter where they are located, know that response time to a disaster is a key factor. Most volunteer departments are in rural communities and are continually trying to achieve the five-minute response time. The fact remains that most of the damage in a fire and other emergencies does happen in those first five minutes. Thus speed is of the essence.

However, as the law stands today, every time volunteer firefighters drive to a scene of emergency, they risk losing their personal driver's licence. The public expects and demands emergency help to arrive at the scene as quickly as possible, yet thousands of volunteer firefighters, skilled in a vast area of ways from performing CPR to dealing with chemical spills, are hampered from getting to where they are most needed. I believe we have to help here, and this bill could be a start.

It is critical that the public is aware of who these volunteers are when very often they are trying to rush through a crowd to a disaster scene. This way the authorities already on the scene can facilitate the volunteer's swift passage to where he or she is needed. Just cutting a few minutes in response time can make a difference between life and death. The cost of implementing this amendment would not be significant, but the result, more lives and property saved, certainly is.

I do not wish to infringe upon the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Transportation by dictating specifications of a special licence plate or the combination, let's say, of a plate and a flashing light. This is for the ministry to decide. However, one may consider an example used in the United States. In several states, the plate has a white background with red letters and a Maltese cross, the international symbol for firefighters.

Currently, this legislation to assist volunteer firefighters in their job is in place in 14 states. Similar legislation is strongly being considered in Nova Scotia and a number of maritime provinces. Furthermore, British Columbia and Quebec may consider this bill as a model for their own legislation, since their volunteer firefighters play a very large part in their fire fighting service.

I am sure that every member of this House recognizes the value of volunteer firefighters. Changing lifestyles and social attitudes coupled with the increasing dangers and risk of liability are eroding the availability of this vital component of the fire protection picture.

I feel confident that each and every member can recognize the advantages of Bill 87. It is not complicated, nor is it a costly proposal. Similar legislation is in place throughout North America and has proven to be effective. Surely every member is interested in encouraging and assisting these wonderful men and women, volunteer firefighters, in their efforts to save homes, lives and property. I would very much appreciate members' support for this bill.

Mr McLean: I welcome this opportunity to make a few brief comments about this private member's bill, Bill 87, An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act with respect to Volunteer Fire Fighters.

The purpose of this bill is to authorize the issuance of special licence plates to motor vehicle owners or lessees who are volunteer firefighters. This plate would clearly indicate that the vehicle belongs to a volunteer firefighter.

Citizens in the small municipalities of Ontario rely on volunteer fire fighting staff for the provision of the fire protection services that we supply in this province. These volunteers are usually on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and they give up their evenings and weekends to take courses necessary for upgrading their skills and knowledge of fire fighting practices.

I have no problem with issuing special licence plates to our volunteer firefighters if it results in a quicker response to the scene of a blaze and if it permits them to park in areas close to the scene where parking is usually prohibited. This would then identify that they are volunteers.

While we are considering this bill today, we should also be giving some thought to a bill that I have in Orders and Notices, and it is one that regulates fire alarms. When that bill comes before the House for second reading, I hope that people in this Legislature will realize the importance of that bill as well as the one we are dealing with today. That bill also involves volunteer firefighters and people from the police department. When we are looking at the problems we have today with the emergency reaction we need, my bill would cut down on some of these false alarms.

1120

Today, it costs the fire department in Orillia $500 for a false alarm. Those prices are staggering when you realize they could be avoided if the equipment were used properly. The most common situations involve employees inadvertently triggering an alarm at their place of business. While debating this bill here today, we should also be giving serious consideration to my private member's bill as a bill compatible with this one, because of the seriousness of the fire departments and their responses.

We have more than 16,000 volunteer firefighters in Ontario. I remember a while back there was a request that there be a light to identify them on the way to a fire, which never got to first base, so to speak. I do believe identifying licence plates would be used appropriately and properly. If they were not, there would be some provision for stiff penalties for those volunteers who did not use them properly.

I notice in the bill, with regard to the volunteer fire fighters getting the licence plate, there is also provision that, "A person to whom a number plate has been issued under subsection (3f) shall return to the plate to the ministry forthwith upon ceasing to be a volunteer fire fighter under the Fire Departments Act." I think that is appropriate, because there is a turnover of volunteer firefighters. That section I certainly agree with. When they are no longer involved as volunteers, that plate should be reverted back in.

Simcoe County Mutual Aid is an organization that coordinates across the county the volunteer firefighters. It is an organization that sets up training periods and makes sure the numbers of volunteers are appropriate. The municipality of which I was at one time reeve had 88 volunteers in that one municipality alone, so when you look across the province as a whole, the numbers are staggering.

When emergency vehicles respond to highway accidents and the calls, our volunteer firefighters also are called to those accidents, in most cases on our major highways. There is an important aspect here of Bill 87, and that has to do with the incentive we could give to the volunteers.

I support in principle private member's Bill 87, An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act with respect to Volunteer Fire Fighters, but at the same time I believe there is a very real need for legislation like my private member's bill with regard to the false alarms. Members can stay tuned for that and we will relate that at another time.

We owe it to our police, ambulance and fire officials to give this bill a speedy passage, and I will be supporting the bill here in this Legislature today. Madam Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to say a few words.

Mr Dadamo: I would like to respond to Bill 87 this morning, an act amending the Highway Traffic Act, which is currently being introduced by the member for Northumberland and is also slated for second reading.

Let me say at the outset that I commend the member with regard to this bill. Its purpose, as I see it, is to authorize the issuance of special licence plates to motor vehicle owners or leasers who are volunteer firefighters in order to ensure that such vehicles are readily identifiable while responding to an emergency. It would also serve to recognize the important contribution these men and women make to their communities and to underline their own commitment to public safety in the province of Ontario.

The duties of volunteer firefighters are onerous. They must undergo extensive training and must be prepared to respond to all kinds of emergencies, not just fires. They are trained in CPR, chemical spills and, of course, other emergency situations.

These firefighters give enormous amounts of their personal time to community service. By way of example, they respond in the middle of the night, many times on a moment's notice.

The Ministry of Transportation does not currently have a specialized licence plate series for personal vehicles that are owned or leased by employees or volunteers of any emergency response agency in the province. This includes full-time municipal firefighters, ambulance attendants and, of course, police. Under the existing system, municipal fire department vehicles are registered under the regular commercial series.

The issuance of a special plate series to identify personal vehicles owned or leased by volunteer firefighters would require changes to public awareness programs, law enforcement awareness materials and our vehicle registration system in Ontario. None of these problems, however, is insurmountable, and they pale beside the necessity of this kind of designation of these vehicles when they are responding to an emergency situation.

The majority of damage caused by fire occurs in the first five minutes. The first five minutes is the critical point, the point at which someone's home will be saved or lost. Because of this fact, we cannot underestimate the importance of a firefighter's ability to respond quickly to an emergency situation where people's lives and properties are at stake.

Some people may express concerns that a special licence plate will be in fact a licence to speed. I do not believe that for one moment. The men and women in this province who dedicate themselves to this important community work are doing so because they are concerned about safety and because they care about the lives of their neighbours. I cannot believe it is possible that people who are spending large amounts of their personal time in training and working to save lives and property would do so only in order to drive faster.

In view of these facts, I want to offer my support of this bill in principle and urge the other members of my party to support it as well, recognizing that we will need to explore implementation issues. Of course we will be consulting with firefighters in Ontario in order to explore this bill further.

1130

Mr Offer: Let me say what a pleasure and in fact honour it is for me to partake in this debate on a very important piece of legislation by the member for Northumberland. I speak very much in favour of the legislation.

I believe this is a piece of legislation whose time has really come. It is a piece of legislation that embraces the issue of recognition for those many thousands of individuals who take it upon themselves to act as volunteer firefighters. You know, Madam Speaker, the member has well indicated the incredible number of individuals who do take this as their goal and job.

There are many examples of heroism, of courage, by volunteer firefighters. I believe this designation on the licence plate is one which is necessary not only for recognition purposes, but indeed for safety purposes, because it sends out a message when an individual's licence would be so designated, a message to the public that this individual is a volunteer firefighter and is attempting as best he or she can to go either to the fire station or directly to the place where the emergency is called for.

I believe it is a message which the public wants to hear and a licence plate designation is one which would permit that. It would result in a better response time, it would enhance safety and it would make the job, the role, the task, the duty of the volunteer firefighter just that much easier -- not easy by any stretch of the imagination, but a little less onerous.

Many examples are in existence of the volunteer firefighters. The honourable member for Northumberland has already indicated the many hundreds of individuals who took part in the Hagersville tire fire -- the largest tire fire in North American history -- and that was, in large measure, put out in a very few days, against all odds, and it was their determination which permitted that to happen.

The volunteer fire fighting service is one which has a very storied past. Two or three weeks ago I had occasion to convey a plaque of appreciation to two individuals who reside in my riding, Kirby Burns and Norman Russell, who were members of what was then the Streetsville fire department, which was a volunteer organization and had been since 1937. It was a very interesting, informative celebration. There was a luncheon, with plaques provided to those individuals as recipients, and certainly as symbolic of the efforts of so many others who were part of the Streetsville fire department. I was very pleased and honoured to have the opportunity to be with them that afternoon and hear some of the examples of the department in many years as to how they responded to emergencies.

This particular piece of legislation is one which is necessary for its recognition, for its safety, for its response time improvements. It does not permit those with the licence plate designation to go through red lights or to go through stop signs. It does not permit them to do anything that the normal driver could or cannot do. All it does is send a message to the public that this is a member of the volunteer fire fighting service who is currently on some call of some sort, and we all know the variety of calls that can certainly take place.

I have read the piece of legislation and I believe it is very necessary. I hope all members of the Legislature will support this initiative by the member for Northumberland. There should not be a member in this Legislature who is against this particular piece of legislation. Why? Because there are already licence plates with designations on them. The Lieutenant Governor of this province has the designation on the Lieutenant Governor's licence. In fact, many mayors of many municipalities have, as a designation on their licence plates, the word "mayor;" again, a sense of information to the public. There is certainly no member of this Legislature who should be against any designation on his or her licence plate because each member has the opportunity to have "MPP" put on his or her licence. If it is permissible for all members of this Legislature to have the designation "MPP" with a number following, then surely no member of this Legislature should be against volunteer firefighters having on their licence plates a similar form of designation.

It is a piece of legislation whose time has come. It is one which embraces the concepts of safety, response time and recognition, and it is one which promotes volunteer firefighters and the men and women who have served in that association, the many Kirby Burnses and Norman Russells of my riding and the Streetsville fire department who have given so many years of their time and service to make this place and this province a safer place for all others. I support this legislation wholeheartedly. I commend it to all other members.

Mr Arnott: I am very pleased to have the opportunity to rise and speak for a few minutes on Bill 87, An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act with respect to Volunteer Fire Fighters, and I am pleased to congratulate the member for Northumberland on her excellent initiative.

The purpose of the bill, as I see it, is to authorize the issuance of special licence plates to motor vehicle owners or lessees who are volunteer firefighters. The plate would indicate that the vehicle belongs to a volunteer firefighter.

The way I look at this bill, when I immediately started to read it and tried to decide what the implications were, I see it as an issue of recognition for our volunteer firefighters. In my riding, in Wellington, rural Ontario, we rely greatly on our volunteer firefighters. We could not do without them. The member for Northumberland talked about the cost-effectiveness of having a volunteer fire department over a professional one -- I should not say professional, but a full-time, paid one. Certainly the volunteer firefighters are as professional as we can get. We need that cost-effectiveness in rural Ontario. The province of Ontario has to support our volunteer fire departments so that they can have the resources to adequately do the job which they are doing at the present time.

The professionalism of our volunteer firefighters is absolutely wonderful and I think, as the member for Mississauga North indicated, we in this Legislature should have a good understanding of how the volunteer firefighters have to operate. As we have the option to have our own designated licence plate, like the volunteer firefighters, we are on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and I think that we understand as well as anyone the public service commitment that often requires to be called out of bed in the middle of the night or whatever. I think we should be conscious of that, and we should be willing to recognize the firefighters in any way we can and thank them in any way we can.

There were some questions that came to my mind when I started perusing the bill. I wondered if perhaps a flashing light on the dash of the car might be a good idea as well in terms of recognition. If members can imagine a firefighter having to race to the scene of a fire or race to his fire department office to get on his truck, if he had any assistance to better enable the cars around him to recognize that he was in a hurry, I think that would be a plus and hence something that should be explored. I also think that if members look at other professions and jobs that require emergency response -- physicians come to mind immediately, police officers on an off-duty basis perhaps, ambulance workers -- many of them require an immediate, urgent response, and time is very much of the essence. So we should probably consider those groups as well if we are talking about giving designated plates for volunteer firefighters.

I was pleased to hear the comments from the member for Windsor-Sandwich and his indication of support, because I think that holds a lot of sway on that side of the government. I am very pleased to hear that the Ministry of Transportation will take a receptive view to this bill, because I know that in my riding there are fire departments that have had concerns about policies coming from the Ministry of Transportation.

Most recently, I received a letter from Fire Chief A.G. Slade of the Puslinch volunteer fire department, one of the busiest and most professional departments in my riding. They have an additional obligation, having to respond often to accidents on the 401, which bisects Puslinch township, if there is an accident there. Because of the fact that the present government is not giving adequate police resources in the south part of my riding, and the undermanning problem we have in the Guelph area and the south and east of the riding, the fire department is asked, and obligated, to respond often to police calls, unfortunately, because we do not have enough police resources.

1140

But on another issue that is affecting the Puslinch Fire Department, it recently received a letter from the Ministry of Transportation, dated 15 March, from the head of program administration and evaluation, which indicates that the ministry wants some sort of change which will affect my fire department in Puslinch. It states in the letter:

"It has recently come to my attention that the authority to certify the competency of drivers associated with the Wellington County Mutual Aid has been granted several years ago. This practice contradicts the policies and procedures governing the driver certification program in that: (1) drivers are not employees of the named recognized authority and, (2) the named recognized authority official has insufficient control over each fire department to ensure the integrity of the delivery of initial and ongoing training."

I spoke to Fire Chief Slade on this and I certainly agree with his response to this letter which is that the existing system for training firefighters in Wellington county, as sponsored by Wellington County Mutual Aid, is very satisfactory and in fact safer than what the ministry is proposing.

In response to this letter, I got together with Chief Slade and we worked together and responded to the minister about two weeks ago, indicating our concern about the ministry's initiative to change the existing system in Wellington county. We feel in Wellington county that Captain Don McCrone from Guelph has been very important in ensuring a very safe measure of operation of fire vehicles in Wellington county and that any initiative from Queen's Park that will prevent him from being able to offer his advice and assistance, which he does, again, after hours, on the weekends -- he makes himself available to all the fire departments in the county that require his advice and his counsel -- far better I think than the system the ministry may be suggesting.

So I feel very strongly about this and I hope that the Ministry of Transportation and the minister specifically -- I see him in the House at the moment -- will respond to our concerns in an appropriate way.

I would like to close by urging all members of this House to support Bill 87. I think it is a very important common sense initiative, and I hope we will have unanimous support for this bill.

Mr Mills: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Unlike my colleague, the member for Simcoe East, I wear glasses, but I recognize your gender from a distance and I am glad you are in the Chair this morning.

I am very pleased to rise and speak in support of this bill this morning on a couple of planks. The member for Northumberland's riding joins mine in Durham East, and we have some services that cross the border of the two ridings: police and, notably perhaps, education. So I am pleased to stand here this morning and speak as the member for Durham East and also as parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General. We in this House know that the fire fighting of the province is under the umbrella of the Solicitor General, but the people who may be watching the proceedings here this morning may not be quite clear about that. The fire fighting portion operated by the Solicitor General is under the supervision of a very fine assistant deputy minister.

I appreciate this morning the comments that the member for Northumberland has made on Bill 87, An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act with respect to Volunteer Fire Fighters, and many of the things she said I concur with. I am not going to waste time repeating them because they are on the record, and the fact that I concur with them is also on the record.

Volunteer firefighters are truly the backbone of public safety in Ontario, and at this point I would just like to make note and read into the record the many fine volunteers that man fire stations in the riding of Durham East. They are to be found in Bethany, Blackstock, Bowmanville, Brooklin, Curtis, Hampton, Janetville, Newcastle Village, Newtonville, where I live in Orono, Oshawa, Pontypool, Port Perry and Whitby, a riding I share with my honourable friend to the left of me.

When one considers that more than 550 fire departments in Ontario are served exclusively by volunteers, one can appreciate how valuable they are to the citizens of Ontario. Also, Madam Speaker, I do not have to remind you of the cost that regular firefighters would add to the bill for the province, when these people do this on a volunteer basis.

We owe these dedicated officials a great deal and we should do whatever we can, not only to recognize their contributions but to facilitate their work and other public safety endeavours. However, as we have heard from the member for Windsor-Sandwich, there are some technical difficulties with this bill, and I for one think we may be opening the door and that every organization may want some sort of specialized licence plates. That is one of the concerns I have. I know, as an ex-member of the military in Canada, there was a drive some years ago that we could have special licence plates to recognize our service to this country, so we know that there are a number of difficulties with this bill.

Last week the Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs passed a resolution at its convention requesting the government to issue special licence plates for volunteer firefighters. However, in making this recommendation they also recognized the number of technical difficulties which would have to be overcome for the effective implementation of this program. There are several options that could be used in this area, such as window stickers, decals and licence plate holders, and I believe these can best be explored in a forum where the views and expertise of all the parties can be obtained.

I heard comments from the member for Simcoe East and the member for Wellington in so far as why we could not do something about lights. I would like to let them know it is my belief that this is under consideration and some discussion at the Ministry of the Solicitor General right now. They may be looking into some alternatives.

In summary, the Solicitor General fully supports the principle and the intent of this legislation as a symbol of recognition of the dedicated service provided by the volunteer firefighters of Ontario and as a symbol of the need to facilitate their efforts to improve the safety of our communities. However, a caution: We need to find a mechanism to achieve this which is efficient, effective and responsive. I am sure this can be achieved.

On a last note, I heard some comment in the House this morning about the MPPs' licence plates. I believe members can get them and put a number after them. Thankfully, I have not gone that route. I drove Highway 401 last night to a meeting of the good neighbours in my riding, and I was very glad that my licence plate reads, RUBY 88, which indicates that in 1988 my wife and I celebrated our 40th wedding anniversary. On that note, I will close.

1150

Mr Conway: My good friend from Colborne, the member for Northumberland, asked me to speak to this bill, and I thought I would take a few moments to say a few words. My friend from Colborne is a very thoughtful member of the Legislature and she said it very well, I thought, in her opening remarks.

On the question of licence plates, I have spoken over the years quite negatively actually about a subject that has developed in the course of some of this debate. I felt since the day I was elected the whole idea that members of the Legislature or, for that matter, members of Parliament ought to have special licence plates was just at a very minor level quite ridiculous. In fact I think it anticipated a certain dimension of conflict of interest. I have always felt, what is in the community that has an interest in looking at licence plates? Police officers. Why would members of the Legislature want to advertise their special status to members of the police? God knows, I am stopped enough and I am happy to report --

Interjections.

Mr Conway: My friend the member for Durham East said his licence plate is RUBY 88. I think mine is 524 HWZ.

I think my friend the member for Etobicoke-Rexdale might even remember a debate or two years ago when we were talking about some of these questions. I really do feel at a very secondary level that the idea that members of Parliament get the MHC designation and MLAs get the MPP designation should be dispensed with. I repeat that from my point of view there really is only one group of people in the community that has an interest in reading licence plates. I do not think members of Parliament should be advertising their special status to those people, because there is a capacity there for compromise. It has probably not ever happened, but it seems me to that is one designation that should be dispensed with.

In this case, as my friend from Colborne, the member for Northumberland, has stated so eloquently, those of us who particularly represent rural communities -- and I doubt that there are any other members of the Legislature who have a constituency more thoroughly rural than mine -- appreciate the importance that the volunteer fire services provide to the community.

Just last Saturday I was in the hamlet of Quadeville in the southwest part of the county of Renfrew and on that very happy occasion we were officiating at the opening of the new fire hall. The ruggedly rural united townships of Brudenell and Lyndoch in the county of Renfrew have a very substantial volunteer fire department, which has petitioned me on several occasions over the years about the inadequacy of provincial assistance, particularly for purposes of capital purchases like equipment. We have been through that. My friend from Orono, the member for Durham East, has probably reviewed some of the files himself in his capacity as parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General.

There are a number of areas, for whatever good or bad reason, where Ontario has not been able to provide assistance to the volunteer fire departments, but certainly this is one area where apparently there is a real desire by the association and by individual members of volunteer fire services for the special licence plate designation. I do not see in this case, as I do in the case earlier mentioned, a problem.

Apparently it is unanimous in the view of the members who have spoken to this debate that we ought to support this. I would recommend that. I think it is a good idea because it would support this very important part of the volunteer community and because the community of volunteer fire departments has made a specific request for consideration.

I simply want to join the members from Wellington, Colborne and Orono and others who have indicated their interest in and support for this resolution by adding my support and by adding again a personal word of comment and commendations for the scores of people in my county of Renfrew, where we have some 36 municipalities, most of which are very rural, all of which I believe are served in one way or another by hundreds of men and women who give enormous amounts of their time, of their financial support and of their energy to ensure that those of us who live in the cottage country or in the small hamlets are well and ably supported by these very excellent volunteer firefighters.

Hon Mr Philip: I just want to rise as the Minister of Transportation and congratulate the member for Northumberland on identifying a real need. I have expressed to her my support for this bill and I have suggested to her that my staff and I are willing to work with her in looking at ways in which we may be able to implement certainly the intent of the bill in perhaps an unbureaucratic, inexpensive way. I am concerned that if we go ahead with it in a certain way, it could be quite expensive, but I am sure we can resolve those problems. I want to congratulate her for bringing it to the attention of the House and to my attention as the minister. My ministry will be working with her to implement the contents of this bill. I give her full credit for it.

I also would be remiss if I did not say that I do agree with some of the comments of the member for Renfrew North. Maybe he and I can convince our colleagues to do something about the concerns he has expressed that I think I have expressed in opposition. Perhaps it is time we look at those concerns as well.

Mr Owens: I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the member for Northumberland for bringing this bill forward. I think we all realize part of the problem with being the last or next-to-last speaker is that all the good things have been said, but I think some of them bear repeating.

We recognize that the volunteer fire department is made up of hardworking volunteers, individuals who put their lives at risk for zero pay and for zero benefits. They do not just come out on nice spring evenings; they are there no matter what the weather, no matter what the time of day. We need to recognize these folks in some way. I think the least we can do for them is to make specialized licence plates.

As the parliamentary assistant to the Ministry of Correctional Services, I can say that we need all the job creation programs we can give for the folks who are currently guests in our institutions.

These firefighters are required to participate in extensive training exercises. No longer do we have the days of the bucket brigades where we see in some of the older films, which I of course am too young to remember, the buckets going from hand to hand to put out the fires. Those days are long gone. As the member for Windsor-Sandwich mentioned, volunteer firefighters are now expected to deal with chemical spills, traffic accidents and all sorts of mayhem that we create for ourselves in this society.

In closing, I am glad that our Minister of Transportation will be working closely with the member to implement this program. I congratulate the member once again for bringing this bill to this House.

Mr Perruzza: I think all has been said in this debate that needs to be said with respect to the bill, but I do want to voice an acknowledgement which I think the third party would do well to take. This morning an opposition member brought forward an initiative. That initiative has been embraced by what I can see is an overwhelming majority of our party. The minister has stood in this House as well and has both applauded the initiative and reassured the member of the official opposition that her initiative will be well taken and well received by his ministry.

It shows that there is a level of co-operativeness, of good spirit. There is really good spirit in this House this morning, and I hope it carries on into the debate in the afternoon. I think the Conservatives would do well to take this kind of spirit, this kind of initiative, this kind of compromise into the debate this afternoon and stop the blatant, obstructive grandstanding that they have been carrying on with for the last several days on an initiative that really --

The Acting Speaker (Mrs Haslam): Time. Thank you.

Mrs Fawcett: I really want to express my sincere gratitude to all members in this House this morning for their support of this bill. I believe that volunteer firefighters across this province are very happy to have received all of the accolades that have been given.

I want to thank my two caucus colleagues for their remarks and their fine support. I do want to say a special word of thanks to the minister because it is very special that he has taken the time to come into the House this morning and speak of co-operation, which I certainly will give, in coming to a decision on the kind of designation that we wish to give these men and women who deserve it. Perhaps too, included in this consultation, would be the firefighters' association, so that we can really come up with something that everyone is happy with.

I want to reiterate that in no way is this a licence to speed, just as several members have said. This is recognition only, recognition that they deserve.

Two of the members, the member for Simcoe East and the member for Wellington, did mention a light. Actually, there is a section right now of the Highway Traffic Act that states that a volunteer firefighter may carry on the left front fender of his motor vehicle an amber and white flashing light showing the letters VFF. Unfortunately, that light is no longer manufactured, so we really need some other method. I quote from a letter of Jerry Candler from the township of Sidney, a fire prevention officer. He said they are using a rotating green light, but I think together we can consult.

Once again, I thank everyone for support in this very important matter.

INTERVENORS AND SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS SERVICES D'INTERVENTION ET INTERPRETÈS DE LANGUES DE SIGNES

The Acting Speaker: Mr Malkowski has moved resolution 13.

Motion agreed to.

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AMENDMENT ACT (VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTERS), 1991 / LOI DE 1991 MODIFIANT LE CODE DE LA ROUTE (POMPIERS AUXILIAIRES)

The Acting Speaker: Mrs Fawcett has moved second reading of Bill 87.

Motion agreed to.

The Acting Speaker: Pursuant to standing order 94(k), the bill is referred to committee of the whole House.

Mr Bisson: Madam Speaker, on a point of order: In regard to the bill, is it supposed to be a committee of the House, not of the whole House?

The Acting Speaker: Your point of order is incorrect. It does go to committee of the whole House.

Mr Jackson: They are killing the bill. You don't want to refer it to a private committee.

The Acting Speaker: That is fine. Thank you.

Hon Mr Philip: My understanding was that members wanted it to go to the standing committee on administration of justice, and I think that is where it should go.

Mr Bisson: On a point of order, Madam Speaker: I was not out of order.

The Acting Speaker: There was no one standing, and until somebody stands, it does go to committee of the whole House.

Shall this bill be referred to the justice committee? All those in favour of this question? Agreed.

Bill ordered for standing committee on administration of justice.

Le projet de loi est déféré au comité permanent de l'administration de la justice.

The House recessed at 12:03.

AFTERNOON SITTING

The House resumed at 1330.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

EASTER SEAL RUN/WALKATHON

Mr Beer: On the morning of Sunday 26 May months of planning and years of experience will culminate in the 15th annual Persechini Easter Seal Run/Walkathon.

What started in 1976 as a small group of club members and friends having a bit of a lark has grown into an event requiring hundreds of volunteer workers and involving more than 2,250 participants. As the brainchild of Joe and Rosalia Persechini grows into its third decade, it is difficult to measure its impact. In cold financial terms the event has contributed more than $660,000 to charity. This year the goal is to raise $100,000.

In more human terms, the activity translates into a deeper understanding of the work of Easter Seals, a framework within which friendships and community spirit are forged and an opportunity for individuals to make an important contribution. To give special meaning to the 15th anniversary, David Blackwell, the co-chair of the run, has invited back all the Easter Seal Timmys and Tammys.

The annual effort adds up to real dollars being raised for the Easter Seal Society, which supports a variety of work, all of it focused on improving the lot of disabled children and their families. The society is at the forefront of research into the cause, treatment and prevention of paediatric disability, diseases that disable children.

To Joe and Rosalia Persechini, Dave Blackwell and everyone involved, I know we all wish them a most successful 15th run.

TENDERING PROCESS

Mr B. Murdoch: I would like to bring to the attention of this House and the Minister of Health my very real concern with the policy of awarding contracts to companies which import equipment from the United States rather than to those which manufacture their goods in this country at competitive prices.

Edwards, of Owen Sound in my riding, a unit of General Signal Ltd, has been supplying and servicing fire alarm equipment to hospitals in this province for some time. Since the election it has bid on two jobs, one at Oakville-Trafalgar Memorial Hospital and the other at the Kitchener-Waterloo Hospital. On both occasions Edwards bid according to the plans and specifications. This past time, after the bids were opened, the hospital decided to have the successful contractor submit an alternative supplier outside the tendering process, against the wishes of Edwards. Edwards was not allowed to respond to the alternative bid.

In the past it has been inappropriate to consider alternative approaches after the tender process without allowing competitors the opportunity to also reconsider.

Something very peculiar is happening here and I would ask the minister to investigate. Edwards employs 800 people in Ontario and is the only major fire alarm manufacturer to produce its equipment in Canada. As of today no purchase orders have been submitted, so the situation can still be rectified if the minister moves immediately to do so.

However, should this practice of not allowing fair competition continue without a reasonable explanation, it will mean a severe loss of jobs in my riding and in the province in general. With our economy already suffering, this will --

The Speaker: Thank you.

LABOUR ISSUES

Mr Hayes: I spent 27 years in the auto industry. Over those years I have fought hard representing workers, fighting for decent health and safety legislation, improvements in workers' compensation and wage protection, while the members opposite fought against any of those improvements. I also worked hard against free trade, the GST and high interest rates while the members opposite supported free trade, high interest rates and deregulation of the trucking industry, which all cost tens of thousands of jobs in this country.

It really upsets me when I see politicians -- especially the Tories, who are antilabour and have continually suppressed workers in this country -- suddenly change their tune and proclaim they are on the side of labour. This is hypocrisy and an insult to me and all my colleagues who have worked hard on behalf of the workers. I am very pleased that we finally have a Minister of Labour, the member for Hamilton East, who cares for workers in this country.

GLOBAL WARMING

Mr McGuinty: The most serious environmental challenge facing us today is the threat of global warming. If unchecked, scientists agree the buildup of greenhouse gases will have its greatest impact on the northernmost countries, such as Canada.

In order to better wrestle with this problem, the previous government struck a select committee on energy, issued a discussion paper on global warming and committed to releasing a white paper in December 1990.

The NDP, prior to the election, made a specific commitment to reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Since the election, we have seen no movement of any kind on the part of this government to address global warming.

But the outside world has not stood still. Germany, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Australia, Japan, Norway, Sweden, the European Community as a whole, Canada, the states of Oregon and New York, and the cities of Toronto and Vancouver have all made specific commitments to reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

Our province has a proud history of being a world leader in terms of environmental and energy initiatives, but we are slipping badly on the global warming front.

Global warming demands a response from this government. Instead, we have only questions. Does this government intend to address global warming and if so, how and when? What about Ontario Hydro, a large contributor to global warming? What direction will the government be giving to Marc Eliesen, the new chairman, and to Al Holt, the person who I understand will be the new president?

We are tired of asking questions. Global warming demands a response now.

TRUCKING INDUSTRY

Mr Villeneuve: In this government's hurry to provide various benefits, it seems that the only ones missing are those that will help employees remain as employees -- the employers who sign the cheques.

This budget has not made it easier for any employers to create jobs or to keep jobs in Ontario. In fact, the opposite is happening. This budget is prolonging the procession.

Glengarry Transport Ltd, for instance, will only survive now if its employees take a 42.5% wage cut over the next three years. That is what high payroll taxes, diesel fuel taxes, tire taxes, income taxes and other taxes have done.

The Treasurer and members opposite should be aware that GTL, Canada's fourth-largest trucking company, was forced into declaring bankruptcy last week. It should come as no surprise that the company found higher taxes and higher costs of doing business in Ontario to be the main reasons for its losses in recent years. GTL has depots in about 19 Ontario and Quebec cities and 800-plus employees. Even though GTL is a major trucking operation, it has retained its head office in Alexandria, my metropolis, since 1948.

I do not want to see Ontario lose more employers like GTL. In fact, I want to see more employers like Glengarry Transport come here to Ontario. Unfortunately, with this government no one is coming to Ontario.

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Mr Bisson: It is with great pride that I have the chance to stand in the House today and to introduce a couple of people to all members present. We have present in the gallery today two fine individuals, one of them being Charles Belanger, who is the president of Laurentian University, as well as Robert Gervais, who is the president of Northern College.

They have been working for a while, I would say, in putting together first-year university programs for the people living in the community of Timmins. As some members might know, university programs are presently not offered in our home community of Timmins, one of the largest communities in northern Ontario not having university programs. Because of the work done by these individuals and other people within our communities, we are now able to go into the position of hopefully being able to offer, starting in this upcoming year, first-year university programs for the people inside the community.

I think the thing we also need to underline with this is that it goes to show what could happen when we get together and decide to work together and do not sit there calling each other names. What we do is get together in partnerships with people from government, from industry, from different sectors, to see what we can do when we put our minds together. What we see today is exactly what can happen when we decide to cooperate and not play games.

1340

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF CHINESE CANADIANS

Mr Ruprecht: I would like to introduce to members of the House the co-ordinating committee and members thereof of the National Conference of Chinese Canadians, which will take place in Toronto this weekend: Ping Tan, Victor Lee and Kai Tao.

This weekend will see the largest number of Chinese Canadians coming to Toronto from coast to coast to discuss a number of very important items to Chinese Canadians. Chinese Canadians, who wish to be proud Canadians, want to discuss a number of issues, such as the head tax, where Chinese had to pay $500 per head when they came to Canada. And what about the Chinese Immigration Act from 1923 to 1947?

At this conference we are also going to be discussing the present situation. What about immigration to this country? How about the Constitution that we are talking about as Canadians? What about multicultural issues? These are the issues from the past and the present that Chinese Canadians are going to be discussing. We in this House would like to congratulate them for coming to Toronto, choosing this place and coming to grips with their past and with their present.

VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

Mrs Witmer: Recent statistics show that violence against women is increasing, despite heightened public awareness. By 24 April of this year, there were 56 reported cases of sexual assault in Metro, compared with 40 cases last year. Victims of sexual assault are waiting up to six weeks in Metropolitan Toronto to receive counselling. Sexual assault centres are beginning to lose their credibility because they are not in a position to offer immediate counselling services to the victims.

It has been reported that it takes the Barbra Schlifer Commemorative Clinic, a clinic that offers counselling and legal advice to victims, up to 10 days to return a phone call. This is the case in spite of the fact that the majority of women still do not even report sexual assault because they do not think they will be believed.

It is appalling that there is no province-wide program that both informs and supports victims of sexual assault and that there is nothing in the present law that ensures that victims of sexual abuse or violence are entitled to support services.

It is time the government enacted victims' rights legislation that would ensure that all victims are entitled to support programs and that all victims are notified if an assailant escapes or has applied for parole or day passes. Surely it is time this government recognized that women need these services now.

PLANT CLOSURE

Mr Wood: On 9 May, a day-long conference in Timmins was held by the Mushkegowuk first nations of James Bay and Hudson Bay. This event brought together over 100 native and non-native leaders to talk about building bridges between our communities.

At a news conference that day, the Mushkegowuk council clarified its position on the proposed sale of the Spruce Falls powerhouse at Smoky Falls, 75 kilometres downriver from Kapuskasing, as well as Kimberly Clark/New York Times's ultimatum to close three of the four paper machines at Spruce Falls, which would result in the discharge of 1,000 workers on 18 November of this year.

I am well aware of the letters and phone calls most of the 130 members in this House have received from the workers and business community in Kapuskasing concerned with finding new owners for the mill.

It is important to know that most of my friends and former co-workers at Spruce Falls, where I worked for more than 28 years, were expecting news of automation and modernization with layoffs of up to 500 people for the last 10 or 15 years. They never expected this to be part of the routine collective bargaining, which has been stalled since last year at this time.

A working committee led by the Deputy Minister of Northern Development is seriously looking for new investors and owners to take over the operation of Spruce Falls from Kimberly Clark-New York Times. With everyone working in solidarity, we can achieve our goals.

PARLIAMENTARY PROCESS

The Speaker: Members will know that since Monday last, 13 May, I have been considering a point of order raised by the honourable House leader for the government. In doing so, I am also considering the arguments presented in the House by other members and also some considerable written material that has been provided to me up until 6 o'clock last evening.

I would like to thank all of the honourable members for the assistance they have provided, and I must advise the House that because of the very serious nature of the point of order presented I will need a bit more time to consider my decision. Therefore, I shall give my decision on Monday 27 May.

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

The Speaker: I would also like to take this opportunity to draw members' attention to the fact that this is the last day our current group of pages will be serving us, and I am sure I speak on behalf of all members when I thank them very much for the dedicated service they have provided to all of us both in the House and throughout the assembly. I would invite all members to show their appreciation for our pages.

[Applause]

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

ONTARIO'S CREDIT RATING

Hon Mr Laughren: I would like to take this opportunity to inform the members of the Legislature about the current state of Ontario's credit rating.

During the past week, I, along with Treasury staff, have been meeting with representatives of four bond-rating agencies who review and post Ontario's rating. In these meetings, we detailed our government's decision to allow the deficit to rise this year in order to fight the worst recession since the Second World War. In addition, I outlined our medium-term fiscal plan, including our commitment to reduce the operating deficit.

However, one bond-rating agency, Moody's, today has informed me that it has decided to lower Ontario's credit rating from triple A to AA2.

I am concerned about the lowered rating because of the potential impact on Ontario's borrowing costs at a time when the province and its people are being hardest hit by the recession. Our commitment to effectively manage Ontario's fiscal position and reduce and contain the deficit is clear. This deficit reduction will be evident as we pursue our medium-term fiscal plan as outlined in the budget. I want to assure the House and the people of Ontario that this government has the political will to ensure that Ontario's finances will be managed prudently and vital services will be maintained.

I would like to emphasize that we believe our approach to the deficit is the most responsible choice we could make, given the economic and fiscal conditions facing our province. We also believe Ontario's economic base remains strong, and that once the economic recovery begins, we can significantly reduce the province's operating deficit.

Clearly, this rating change will have an impact on our borrowing costs. I would like to stress, however, that it is difficult to estimate exactly what the impact of this rating change will be. There are a number of factors which influence borrowing costs. The bond rating is only one of these. Other and, I might add, more important factors are US interest rates, the Bank of Canada interest rate policy and inflation.

Indeed, the most important factor is the general level of interest rates. In the past few months there have been frequent weekly declines in the Bank of Canada rate and overall the prime lending rate has declined four percentage points over the past year. Yet the Bank of Canada continues to hold Canadian interest rates more than three percentage points higher than US rates. This adds significantly to Ontario's cost of borrowing.

A rating change from triple A to AA2 is estimated to add about $2.5 million for every $1 billion borrowed in the public bond markets. As I have noted previously, the province has a diversified borrowing strategy and only a portion of the costs of our financial requirements will be affected by the ratings change.

International investors have for some time been aware of the severe impact of the recession on Ontario's economy. It is likely that there has already been a moderate increase in Ontario's borrowing costs to reflect its changed economic position. Despite this, Ontario still retains a high credit rating within the triple A standard.

I am proud that through this budget we are investing more than $4 billion of this deficit to renew the province's infrastructure, including our schools, roads and other public facilities. This investment will not only provide enduring assets for Ontario communities, but is also an important investment in our province's future. In addition, the money we spend today will create or maintain 70,000 jobs for the people of Ontario.

I also want to emphasize that, unlike the federal government, we are not prepared to abandon our commitments to vital services that Ontarians need now more than ever. This government decided to maintain health care, education and social assistance services.

While prudent fiscal management is one of the fundamental priorities of this government, it is not the only one. Unlike the federal government, we are determined to alleviate some of the distressing human costs of this recession. We believe that government has a responsibility to support employment and economic growth in times of recession. Government can and should be active in supporting the transition to a more productive, sustainable and equitable economy. We are confident that investors will continue to recognize the fundamental strength of Ontario and to view Ontario government bonds as high-quality, secure investments.

1350

PROVINCIAL SCHOOLS

Hon Mrs Boyd: I wish to inform members of the steps I am taking to ensure the safety and welfare of students in Ontario's provincial schools in light of recent allegations of abuse.

I have established a review team comprised of experts from my ministry, the Ministry of Community and Social Services and the Ministry of the Attorney General. This review team, to be headed by a senior staff person seconded from the Ministry of Community and Social Services, will determine the adequacy of current policies and practices intended to promote the health, welfare and safety of students in provincial schools.

On 15 April 1991, the Ministry of Community and Social Services investigations unit commenced an investigation. Although no charges have been laid by the police to date, three staff members have been placed on leave, with pay, pending investigation. The city of London police, the Halton regional police, the Children's Aid Society of London-Middlesex and the Halton Children's Aid Society are involved in ongoing investigations.

In addition, as a precautionary measure, I directed my ministry to secure all relevant files from provincial schools and the demonstration schools. The files are currently being maintained at offsite locations for safekeeping and to assist investigators in their work. Appropriate access to student files has been arranged to ensure that their medical and educational plans are maintained, and we are taking steps to ensure that freedom of information concerns are respected.

Provincial schools are located in the following locations: Milton, the Ernest C. Drury School; London, the Robarts School; Belleville, Sir James Whitney School; Brantford, W. Ross Macdonald School; Ottawa, Centre Jules-Léger.

On Friday 10 May, I issued a news release which outlined the status of the investigations to date, and announced that Ministry of Education experts in family violence will provide co-ordination and support to parents, students and staff. It is my intention to ensure that parents continue to be kept informed of the government's measures, and I wish to reassure them that the safety and wellbeing of the students currently in our provincial schools is my ministry's highest priority. A letter will be sent to all parents of children currently enrolled at the schools. This letter will outline the steps we have taken and encourage them to use the support system which we have in place to assist families to deal with sensitive and serious matters.

My ministry is equally concerned that those who may have been students at the provincial schools in the past, and their families, are assured of support, safety and respect, should they decide to come forward to provide assistance in this investigation. The review team itself will also be seeking input directly from both current and past students and their families.

At the same time, we must safeguard the rights of present and past employees of the schools. Despite the allegations which have been made, the dedication and professionalism of the majority of provincial school staff members are not in question. It is my expectation that actions by my ministry and those of other investigating agencies will ensure that the provincial schools provide quality care and education for deaf, blind and learning-disabled students in our province.

POLITICAL ACTIVITY BY CROWN EMPLOYEES

Hon Ms Lankin: I am pleased to inform the House that the government is today releasing a discussion paper on extending political activity rights for Ontario crown employees. In the speech from the throne, we stated our commitment to recognize the right of the employees of ministries, agencies, boards and commissions to take part in political activities. The release of this paper represents a major step towards fulfilling that commitment.

Many of the existing limits on political activity and public comment by crown employees are much too restrictive. Indeed, some have been challenged in the court. The Ontario Law Reform Commission has also recommended that rules be relaxed to give most crown employees more freedom.

This government is taking action to meet those challenges and recommendations. At the same time, the government also recognized the need to strike an appropriate balance between permitting crown employees to exercise their individual democratic rights and protecting the public interest in an efficient, politically neutral public service.

Governments of all political parties, crown employees and the public all have an interest in the political neutrality of the public service. Governments need neutral, objective advice and the faithful execution of their policies. Crown employees must feel secure that their political activities or abstention from such activity will not affect hiring and advancement in the public service. Above all, the people of Ontario must be confident that their relationship with government is not affected by the political affiliation of the crown employees who provide public services.

This discussion paper addresses those concerns, sets out some key principles, identifies areas in need of reform and proposes some options for change. The discussion paper proposes a tiered system, with progressively more political activity rights for employees in each of three categories.

A restricted category would be excluded from taking part in most political activities. This category would include deputy ministers and senior managers -- the senior officials who provide advice to the government.

An intermediate level would receive increased political activity rights, with some limited restrictions. This category would include managers and employees who make value judgements which affect the public, such as allocating funds, evaluating proposals and adjudicating disputes.

An unrestricted category, which would include all other crown employees, would enjoy full freedom to exercise all their democratic rights. We estimate that this model would extend political activity rights for more than 65,000 crown employees.

The Solicitor General is currently reviewing political activity rights for police officers in Ontario. The issue of political rights for members of the Ontario Provincial Police, who are currently covered by the Public Service Act, will be addressed during the review.

I would like to emphasize two points. First, this government is committed to a major extension of political activity rights to the vast majority of crown employees. Second, we are not committed to the particular details of the model proposed in the discussion paper; this is a genuine appeal to the people in Ontario to help us draft the best possible reform.

We would like interested parties to respond to this discussion paper as soon as possible so that we can introduce new legislation in the fall.

I would invite all members of this Legislature to give us the benefit of their views. Together, we can extend political activity rights to thousands of people in Ontario who have been denied this basic democratic freedom for far too long.

COMMUNITY COLLEGES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

Hon Mr Allen: During the last seven years, two strikes have occurred at our colleges of applied arts and technology. Following the first strike, the previous government appointed Jeffrey Gandz in 1987 to assess the suitability of the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act to the current and future needs of the college system.

Today, three years after the former government released the Gandz report to the public, I am very pleased to announce that this government will be introducing amendments to the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act as recommended in the report.

These amendments will address two issues which the Gandz report identified as major factors clouding the current college bargaining environment. They are the extension of bargaining rights to about 12,500 college part-time employees and the establishment of an employers, association.

Currently, both the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act and the Ontario Labour Relations Act effectively deny part-time staff at our colleges the fundamental right to participate in any form of collective bargaining. This is an unfair exclusion that is out of step with the situation that generally prevails in the public sector, including the Ontario public service.

Therefore, we will be introducing amendments which will extend bargaining rights to all college part-time staff working on a regular and continuous basis, regardless of the hours worked.

Two new bargaining units will also be formed: one for part-time academic staff and one for part-time support staff. Employee organizations wishing to represent the two new units will be required to apply for certification under the Ontario Labour Relations Act. Provisions will be made for the future merging of the part-time units with the full-time units if the parties so choose.

The only exception to this will be for sessional staff, that is, full-time academic staff employed up to 12 months in 24 months, and part-time counsellors and librarians. These individuals, who have a strong community of interest with the full-time academic staff, will be folded into the existing full-time academic unit.

The second thrust of the amendments will be the establishment of an employers' association. The association will be established as a crown agency. Responsibility for collective bargaining and for making recommendations on the salaries and the conditions of employment of non-unionized staff will be transferred from the Ontario Council of Regents to the new employers' association. The Council of Regents will retain its responsibilities as sponsor for the college pension plan pending the general review of pension management in the public sector.

The establishment of the association reflects the support of both college boards of governors and the Council of Regents for Dr Gandz's finding that the responsibility for bargaining should lie with the parties responsible for implementing the bargaining outcomes.

The transfer of the Council of Regents' bargaining responsibilities, which by their very nature involve an adversarial relationship, strengthens the role of the Council of Regents as the provider of in-depth, objective advice to the Minister of Colleges and Universities on strategic plans and policy issues affecting the entire college system.

I will be introducing the legislation relating to these amendments as soon as possible. I do want to emphasize, however, that whenever the legislation is passed, it will not come into effect while the negotiations for a new collective agreement are in progress.

I would also like to note that the introduction of these initiatives at this time does not preclude further amendments to the legislation once the government has had an opportunity to undertake a review of both the Crown Employees Collective Bargaining Act and the Ontario Labour Relations Act.

The initiatives I have announced today show that this government is committed to improving the colleges' collective bargaining environment. I am confident that these initiatives will lead to more constructive management-staff relations in the college system and that they will contribute to the revitalization of the health and viability of our colleges of applied arts and technology.

1400

RESPONSES

ONTARIO'S CREDIT RATING

Mr Nixon: The taxpayers of the province were deeply disappointed when the Treasurer read his budget, and we are not surprised to hear that the credit rating has been reduced. I probably have more sympathy with the situation the Treasurer is experiencing than anyone, since when I first became Treasurer our rating was reduced almost immediately. I can remember his comments at the time and they were, as usual, moderate and well informed.

The indication, however, in this instance is somewhat more pessimistic. We were of course in an economy which was growing rapidly. The rate of increase was substantial and so we were able to win back the triple A rating rather quickly and move on to a fully balanced budget for the first time since 1971.

It is interesting to note that in fact the total debt of the province when Bill Davis became Premier was $5 billion and when he left that office it was $30 billion. As a matter of fact, the leader of the third party was a member of that government. It is interesting to note his conversion on the road to fourth party.

But in this instance I am concerned that the plans set out by the Treasurer for recouping fiscal responsibility are somewhat inadequate. I hope to deal with that more thoroughly in question period again, because he does not intend to reduce the deficit much below $8 billion for the next four years, essentially the term of office of this party.

It concerns everyone, I believe, that this really means the credit rating is permanently lost, and it is not one step, it is two steps. So the cost, particularly since the borrowing is going to be very large, would certainly be between $30 million and $50 million and is something that should concern all of us. The Treasurer has indicated that the rule of thumb is $2.5 million per billion, although his officials said differently at the committee that was reviewing this.

We are deeply concerned about this. We regret the loss of the credit rating. It was not unexpected, and we do not feel the Treasurer's announced plans to recoup fiscal responsibility are sufficient.

PROVINCIAL SCHOOLS

Mr Beer: I rise to comment on the statement by the Minister of Education. Clearly any statement of this kind is a difficult one to make and we are glad to see that a number of steps have been taken. I think it is of most concern when we recognize that those who are directly affected in terms of the allegations are from the most vulnerable parts of our society.

It is terribly important that the province move to ensure that there is public confidence in our institutions. With that in mind, I am glad to see that the minister has announced there will be a review of current practices and procedures. I would strongly urge the minister to make a commitment that when the report is completed, it will be made public. I believe that when a year ago we had to go through a similar set of allegations of abuse and Joanne Campbell headed up a task force, it was important that report was made public so everyone could see exactly what kinds of procedures are in place to ensure the safety of the young people who are in these provincial institutions.

The second part that it seems to me is critical is the work to be done with those who have suffered abuse. I think we recognized, again from last year, that having a well-thought-out support system to assist those people was critical, as was encouraging others who perhaps have not yet come forward to do so. I recognize that is in the report and we certainly hope that all of those steps will lead to ensuring public confidence and that people will be helped. As I say, I would urge the minister to make that report public once it is completed.

COMMUNITY COLLEGES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

Mr Offer: I respond to the statement by the honourable Minister of Colleges and Universities. This announcement is one which is complex in terms of its implications and certainly its ramifications. We will be taking a very close look not only as to the statement which he has made today but also in terms of the amendments which the minister is going to be introducing at some time in the future.

In terms of his statement, I send notice that it seems to be silent on the whole issue of the scope and funding of the part-time bargaining rights and certainly on the funding of the new employers' association. Who is going to be paying for this association? How are the funds going to be obtained? This statement is certainly silent as to that aspect.

Finally, I would like to indicate that we are taking a look at the consultation which he has endeavoured and undergone in this matter.

PROVINCIAL SCHOOLS

Mrs Cunningham: I would like first of all to respond with a great degree of disappointment that I am sure the minister and others in this House share with regard to the need for the investigation into allegations of abuse at the provincial schools for the deaf and blind.

All of the critics have worked with the minister to make certain that this investigation goes smoothly. I think on a day like today, when most of us witnessed the statement by the member for York East, who was concerned about fundamental changes in provincial policies and practices concerning intervention services and sign language interpreting and intervenor training, and basically with improvements to access to universities and colleges for deaf students, that we are now faced with a situation in Ontario where we expect and demand that our professionals act just like that, in the best interests of care-giving.

I hope that at the end of this investigation we will find out that nothing took place which we should be concerned about. I hope that will be the result of the investigation.

COMMUNITY COLLEGES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

Mrs Cunningham: I would also like to respond to the statement from the Minister of Skills Development with regard to negotiations and the collective bargaining process. What we can say is that we are concerned a little bit about the Ontario Council of Regents losing its responsibility and the minister in fact establishing a crown agency. It is at short notice that we get these reports, but it is not my understanding that this was in fact the recommendation made in the study. If it was, I will stand to be corrected, but another crown agency is not something we are looking forward to supporting on this side of the House, with the numbers of civil servants that will certainly once again be required.

Second, we are looking forward to local bargaining as part of the recommendations that should be accepted by the minister, and we will look forward to further refinements to this whole process so that our college system can do exactly what it is expected to do: keep students in school.

POLITICAL ACTIVITY BY CROWN EMPLOYEES

Mr Harris: Briefly, I have a comment on the statement by the Chairman of Management Board of Cabinet. She says, "The Solicitor General is currently reviewing political activity rights for police officers in Ontario." I think the minister probably juxtaposed the words. I think she is a little mixed up. I thought it was the police officers who were investigating the Solicitor General, reviewing his political activities. Perhaps the minister may want to rise and correct that.

ONTARIO'S CREDIT RATING

Mr Harris: I could not help but think a little bit today of déjà vu. When the Liberal Treasurer brought in his first budget, we got started on this slippery slope of massive spending. Right away we got put on credit watch and had to pay more for our borrowing. Now today, we have the Treasurer -- and I think we have been there before. I was outside today in a rally. There I was sandwiched between the worst Treasurer in the province's history and the second-worst Treasurer in the province's history.

The last time this province was in a recession, there were signs of fiscal restraint. There was fiscal responsibility. There were not massive tax hikes. We maintained the credit rating. We laid a foundation in the early 1980s to come out of that recession with the strongest period of growth this province has ever had.

We see no sign of that happening with the devastating spending of the Liberals over the last five years and the carrying on of that pattern now by the New Democratic Party. We are not setting the stage for growth during this recessionary period.

I cannot help but comment on the Treasurer's line. He says, "Prudent fiscal management is one of the fundamental priorities of this government." That is 180 degrees -- a statement nobody in this province believes.

Mr Stockwell: To hear the Treasurer trying to fob off the responsibility for the drop in the credit rating is absolutely absurd.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop the clock, please. I realize there are a number of interested members. If you could just contain your enthusiasm for at least 30 seconds, the member for Etobicoke West could make his comments.

Mr Stockwell: For the Treasurer to try and fob off the responsibility for this drop in the credit rating on anyone else -- be it interest rates, the federal government or the interest rates across the border -- is absolutely irresponsible. This credit rating has dropped because those people are bankrupt on economic policy. They are costing the taxpayers money in borrowing costs they should not have to pay. They do not have any idea what they are doing over there and they are bumping into each other in the dark. My impression of this is that it is simply a case that the government has lost its --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Now that we have captured everyone's attention, perhaps we can have oral questions.

1410

ORAL QUESTIONS

BUDGET

Mr Nixon: I want to pursue the matter pertaining to the Treasurer's announcement by directing a question to him. He is quoted from a speech just a day or two ago with reference to his belief that an aggressive deficit reduction plan should be undertaken. To quote his words: "We are fiercely determined to do that. Quite frankly, our credibility depends on it."

We have already discussed the $9.7-billion deficit. We have not had a chance to debate the budget in the Legislature extensively as yet. I regret I have not had a chance to make my usual well-considered speech, but in reading the budget I was quite taken aback by the indication that the deficit will stay above $7.8 billion for the next four years. Does the Treasurer really believe this is aggressively reducing the deficit? Does he believe there is any way that the credit rating will be restored with the deficit at that level, and does he not agree with me that his credibility will be lost unless he does a better job than that?

Hon Mr Laughren: There has been at least as much concern expressed about those three years from now as there has been about the deficit this year. I think most people understand that we are in a very severe recession and that the deficit was going to climb. We could argue about whether or not it was going to be $8 billion or $9.7 billion, but basically everyone accepted the fact that we were going to have a very high deficit for 1991-92.

The question really is how quickly we can reduce that deficit in the three years following that, which was in our medium-term fiscal plan laid out in the budget. I was absolutely convinced and I still am that it was terribly important that we put in the budget document itself numbers that were believable and achievable. That is what I said to the audience I was speaking to on that particular day. It would have been easy to put numbers in the budget document that showed a lower deficit three years from now or four years from now, but I was absolutely --

The Speaker: Would the Treasurer conclude his remarks, please.

Hon Mr Laughren: -- determined not to do that to make me or someone else feel better at this time, but rather to put out a set of numbers that we can achieve and hopefully improve on.

Mr Nixon: I respect the Treasurer's aim in this regard, but it does not make me feel any better, particularly since his indications are that his revenues will grow by at least 10% in each year. He further projects a return to real growth of something between 3% and 4%, which is substantial growth. My own view is that we will be lucky as a province to achieve that. The only answer for even maintaining the levels he is saying are realistic is further substantial increases in taxation.

Mr Speaker, you may remember my colleagues, in asking questions previously on the budget, elicited from the Treasurer that these tax increases might be in the order of $5 billion, and yet the Treasurer is quoted as saying that over those years they would amount to only $500 million. That was in the Toronto Star. There is a good deal of confusion here.

I suppose in a sense we have to wait and see what happens, but since the Treasurer has made a commitment, one that is not matched by the Premier -- as a matter of fact, when I look at them and see the aggressive response from the Premier, I can think of nothing but Arsenic and Old Lace. But as far as the old-lace response is concerned, he wants to get the numbers right. So, is the tax increase in the next three to four years going to be $5 billion or $500 million -- some people think that is even more -- or will it in fact be closer to $8 billion, which I project is a nearer assessment of what the Treasurer's plan will work out to be?

Hon Mr Laughren: The numbers in the medium term fiscal plan to which the Leader of the Opposition refers are the ones that take us at the end of three years after this to a deficit of $7.8 billion. That is based on certain assumptions: that there will be growth in the economy; that there will be tax increases over those years -- I do not know precisely how many -- and also that the Treasury Board, which we are in the process of creating, will be able to do a fairly aggressive and, I hope, a very good job on expenditure management. Having said all that, I do not need to remind the Leader of the Opposition how difficult it is to accurately forecast into the future.

Mr Nixon: The Treasurer is correct when he says he cannot accurately forecast into the future, but he did insist on including in his budget indications of what the deficits would be. That must be based on a projection of expenditure, something in the order of 12% to 13% presumably, because that is certainly what they have started off with. At the same time, he must surely have made a projection based on real growth, which is 3% to 4% of taxation that is going to come forward.

I wonder if the Treasurer could clarify for the House, and maybe for the readers of the Toronto Star, whether the figure is $5 billion, which he and his officials gave the committee and also gave this House in answer to a question from the honourable member for Renfrew North, or $500 million, which is his report to a meeting earlier this week. Can he clarify that?

Hon Mr Laughren: I was surprised to read the -- no, I am not denying I said it; it is quite conceivable I did in a moment of weakness. By the way, the member for Renfrew North was the one who was reading the document, I thought most accurately. I should say to the leader of the official opposition, though, that he should be careful about taking those numbers in the medium-term forecast and making any kind of precise assumptions on the precise level of taxation or expenditures.

We felt, given the size of the deficit this year, that it was prudent to indicate that we had a plan for the following three years that would indicate that, in all of those years, revenues were going to exceed expenditures and that we were absolutely determined to start on a deficit reduction program immediately after this recession-driven deficit. We feel very strongly, and the leader said it in his first question, that all eyes are on us in terms of how we are able to manage the deficit from this year on.

1420

TRUCKING INDUSTRY

Mr Mancini: The Treasurer is aware that trucking is a $5-billion industry in our province, and for every trucker on the road there are other workers employed to service and repair the trucks, to load the trailers, and in truck and trailer manufacturing and sales. The Ontario Trucking Association estimates that there are over 228,000 workers directly employed in the trucking industry in this province, or 5% of the total labour force. Truck transportation is responsible for over 70% of our trade with the United States. This is an industry that needs to be able to compete in the international marketplace.

The NDP government seems to have forgotten that it has been in office over the last few months, since September, and that it holds the responsibility of government and that it has the responsibility to help the trucking industry. What new financial measures can the Treasurer announce today to help Ontario truckers?

Hon Mr Laughren: I thank the member for the question on a very important matter. As the member may know, the Minister of Transportation and I met with representatives of the trucking industry yesterday afternoon to hear about their problems. There is no question that the trucking industry is in some difficulty in this province, absolutely no question about that.

To be fair, the member would acknowledge the fact that the Minister of Transportation made a major acknowledgement of that fact when he issued or imposed a moratorium on the issuance of new licences in the industry. That was a major commitment by this government to the trucking industry in this province. The member should cast his mind back a little bit and think about who it was who deregulated the trucking industry in this province and put it in the predicament it is in now, anyway.

Mr Mancini: It seems that the Treasurer does not want to listen to the opposition. Maybe he is going to listen to the people who are going to call. I urge everyone out there who supports the industry to call Pink Floyd and let him know how they feel about the actions of the NDP government.

The NDP socialist government has blamed every other government in North America for the problems associated with the trucking industry, but it was the NDP socialist government that introduced a 30% increase in the diesel fuel tax. This is a made-in-Ontario, made-at-Queen's-Park, made-by-the-NDP tax. The new NDP tax can cost truckers $15 in additional tax every time they fill up their tanks. The new diesel tax will cost independent truckers at least $4,000 a year, this new NDP tax.

Will the Treasurer agree that this tax basically wipes out all of the benefits from the recently lowered interest rates and, furthermore, that this tax will rob our economy of thousands of jobs?

Mr Scott: The number is 965-6361.

Hon Mr Laughren: I hope the number is correct that the member has given.

The member for Essex South is not being particularly fair when he indicates that this tax is anybody's problem in the trucking industry. The trucking industry has been in some difficulty for over a year now. As a matter of fact, if I wanted to pinpoint a date, it was back in 1988 that the difficulties began. If I wanted to pinpoint the beginning of the problems for the trucking industry, it would be back to when the Liberal government deregulated the industry, not a tax that has not even affected the industry yet.

The Speaker: Stop the clock, please. Before we proceed, the Sergeant at Arms has asked if I would make a request of members that for the next little while if they would just leave the water glasses where they are, they will be duly collected and we will issue new glasses for those of you who wish to have a drink of water. There is nothing funny about the water, but we have had a little problem with breakage and some of the glasses have some broken glass in them, so we are attempting to retrieve the glasses as quickly as possible.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Maybe I was wrong. There is something funny in the water.

Mr Mancini: We want the government to respond. If the Treasurer believes that the industry is in the straits he has described and if he believes that the decline has in fact been ongoing for a period of time, why did he burden the industry with a 30% increase on its fuel tax when it was looking to him to keep his promises?

When he said in the last election campaign that he would have low-interest loans; when he indicated that he would be friendly to the industry; when the industry has told him and his ministers that it wanted the fuel tax cuts and it wanted sales tax exemptions, I say to the Treasurer, when is he going to respond in a positive way to the trucking industry? We are waiting for his response.

Hon Mr Laughren: To be fair to the member opposite, we have already responded by the moratorium on new licences in the industry. As well, the Ministry of Transportation is doing a transborder cost study on the entire trucking industry, and that is an important study. I told the representatives of the trucking industry yesterday that, when the results of that study were known, we would sit down and talk to them again about what the real problems in the trucking industry were, and if there was anything the government could do.

I think the member opposite would agree with me that a government does not respond to a blockade with an instant change in public policy. That is not the way we intend to make our change to public policy in this province.

Mr Harris: My question is to the Premier. Today on the front steps of the Legislature we all witnessed the start of a major tax revolt in this province. The taxpayers of Ontario are furious. They are so furious they called for the Treasurer's resignation. They do not believe the Premier has a mandate to mortgage their future. They do not believe this budget is going to save jobs in Ontario. They do not believe that this budget is what Ontario needs.

Here is a sign I was given at that rally. It says, "If you voted NDP you owe me $10 billion." I do not blame the voters of this province who voted NDP. I believe that the voters who voted NDP in fact made an honest mistake. I blame the Premier. He is not giving them what they expected; he is not giving them what they voted for. How does he justify giving all Ontarians a $10-billion mortgage for them to pay?

Hon Mr Rae: The simple reality is -- and I am sure the leader of the third party in his heart of hearts realizes this -- that in every recession which this province has undergone, whether it was under a Tory government or under a Liberal government or under a New Democratic Party government, the fact of the matter is that deficits have resulted because governments have made the commitment that they are going to reach out and provide some assistance for people who are affected by the recession. That is exactly what we have done.

As opposed to Tory governments, as opposed to Tory administrations which have cut and which have attacked people's standard of living, we have determined to do the very best we can for people in this most difficult of economic circumstances. I think in the light of all that has taken place across the country, and I would even say across North America, what we have done is the most responsible thing that could have been done in the circumstances.

1430

Mr Harris: There is not one single person in this province who will not feel the ill effects of this budget. I ask the Premier to take a look at what the truckers of this province have been forced to resort to. Just as no one buys the federal government pointing the finger at the province for those aspects affecting the trucking industry that are federal, nobody buys the Premier or the Treasurer of this province pointing the finger at Ottawa for those areas of concern that are within provincial responsibility. We are losing trucking companies. We are losing jobs daily. Part of the problem rests on the Premier's shoulders, and he knows that.

Aside from all the provincial areas affecting the trucking industry and now compounded by the new 3.4-cent-a-litre fuel tax, surely the Premier owes the truckers an explanation. Does he have an explanation as to why increasing the costs of trucking in Ontario is somehow helping to solve the problem and somehow justifies allowing him to point the finger at Ottawa?

Hon Mr Rae: It is not a question of pointing fingers; it a question of recognizing what decisions have been made. In 1988 the member's party and the Liberal government supported the deregulation of the trucking industry in this province when we said that the impact would be a substantial loss of jobs in this province. We warned them about that fact. We said that. We have offered to co-operate with the federal government in terms of dealing with this very significant problem.

The state of Michigan has not deregulated. Our truckers do not have access to Michigan licences the way that Michigan drivers have access here. The member's party supported that when it was supporting the Liberal government.

The simple fact of the matter is that the deregulation of the trucking industry has contributed significantly to the problems that we now face as a province and that the industry now faces. I would be very surprised if the leader of the third party was saying he would condone the kind of blockading activity on Highway 401 that we have seen over the last day as a constructive way of dealing with the problem, because I don't think it is a constructive way of dealing with the problem.

Mr Harris: Obviously the truckers of this province share the same frustration with the voters of this province, with the taxpayers, with those concerned: They do not know how to get the Premier's attention. It is most unfortunate that they have to resort to those measures to get his attention.

The Premier is great at pointing fingers. He points the fingers at Ottawa, he points them to the south, he points them to Europe, he points them to the Liberals, he points them to me. My party in Ontario did not bring in legislation for reregulation.

Interjection.

Mr Harris: You just listen. Listen, yappy. Listen, you stupid yapper, to what happened.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Perhaps I was wrong. Perhaps there is something funny in the water. If the government side could just calm a bit, the leader of the third party has the right to place his supplementary, and he shall do so.

Mr Harris: When the Liberals brought in the truck reregulation for Ontario and my party introduced the amendment to say there must be reciprocity with every other jurisdiction before that is implemented, where was the Premier? Where was his party when we brought that in so that we would have a level playing field when reregulation went through?

Hon Mr Rae: I will tell the leader of the third party as quietly and calmly as I possibly can exactly what happened during those days, because I think it is important for us to simply recall it. We were opposed to the free trade agreement which contributed to federal deregulation. We have consistently said that.

My colleague the member for Nipigon and my colleague the member for Etobicoke-Rexdale, now the Minister of Transportation, pointed out day after day, on the basis of evidence we had from the trucking industry in this province, that the effect of deregulation in 1988 would be to affect jobs, job security. It would cost us jobs. The member's party supported that legislation; we did not. We continue to oppose it and we are determined to work now with the trucking industry to make sure we are able to have a climate in which it is possible for Canadian truckers to continue to work.

Mr Harris: The Premier is quite right; first, we supported that move because we felt that if we had a responsible government that did not tax us out of competitiveness, our truckers could compete with the best in the world; second, we moved amendments to insist there be reciprocity, and the Premier refused to support them.

BUDGET

Mr Harris: My second question is of the Treasurer. This morning, during the Mike Harris task force on the 1991 budget, we heard from Dave Purdon --

Interjections.

The Speaker: I am in no position to judge how humorous a remark is or is not, but what I can judge is that there is a level of noise, which is basically emanating from the government benches, preventing the leader of the third party from placing his question. I would appreciate your co-operation so that he can place his second question.

Mr Harris: Dave Purdon, owner of the shoe repair and leather shop in Bracebridge, appeared before the task force. This is the same cobbler who, just a few weeks ago, resoled the Treasurer's shoes in time for his budget debate. Let me quote Mr Purdon. He said: "This government is not listening to people like myself who want to work. I'm disappointed. I'm not happy with the budget."

Mr Purdon believed that resoling the Treasurer's shoes was a sign he would be practising restraint in his budget. He was wrong. Instead, the Treasurer delivered a budget that is 180 degrees in the opposite direction. What does the Treasurer have to say to Mr Purdon and others like him who believe that this budget is not only hurting Ontario but hurting people like Mr Purdon?

Hon Mr Laughren: I am almost tempted to say that my shoes fell apart the next day, but Mr Purdon did a wonderful job in resoling my shoes.

I would say to Mr Purdon and to the leader of the third party that a lot of people look only at the deficit and do not look at what we did with that deficit. We maintained or created 70,000 jobs in this province. We did not cut programs in health care and education. We were determined to preserve those programs, and Mr Purdon and many other people like Mr Purdon, I think, will benefit enormously by this budget in the years to come.

1440

Mr Harris: I do not understand how the Treasurer can be proud of losing 200,000 jobs on the one hand and creating 70,000 on the other, for a net loss of in excess of 100,000 jobs, by any measure. I do not know how he is proud of that.

It has been over two weeks since the Treasurer dropped the Floyd bomb on Ontario taxpayers. Now, I want him to listen to what informed observers have been saying. From the Globe and Mail, "Bob Rae Takes His First Big Step and Shoots Himself in the Foot," from the Ottawa Citizen, "Ontario Budget Makes the Wrong Choices," from the Hamilton Spectator, "Danger Ahead: NDP Driving Us Into Debt," from the Kingston Whig-Standard, "The Most Irresponsible Provincial Budget Ever," from the Financial Post, "Wrong Course for Ontario," and finally, from the Toronto Star, "Any Kid Could Have Done a Better Job."

The Treasurer has not listened so far, but surely he must be having second thoughts. Is everyone in the province wrong except him?

Hon Mr Laughren: As a matter of fact, I do not think that most people in the province are wrong. I think most people in the province agree with us, that it was important in the worst recession since the Second World War to maintain those irnportant programs.

The leader of the third party gets to his feet and makes speeches all across this province saying that the deficit is too high and it should have been kept down perhaps to $3 billion -- perhaps to zero, I do not know -- but he never talks about the programs he would cut to get the deficit lower.

It is a fact that the recession hit this province harder than any other province -- much harder -- and I believe we responded in a very responsible way. I am as proud of the budget now as I was the day I delivered it.

Mr Stockwell: My question, of course, is of the Treasurer. I suppose after speaking this afternoon he must be running out of paper bags. There appears to be a lot of people in this province hyperventilating.

I have with me today over 2,000 faxes. These faxes come from people right across Ontario. I want to present these faxes to the Treasurer, thousands and thousands. They will not even stay together, there are so many.

Hon Mr Cooke: Sort of like your caucus.

Mr Stockwell: There are not 2,000 in our caucus, as a matter of fact. I wish there were.

The people in the province have faxed this back to tell the Treasurer not to increase the deficit and not to increase the taxes. There are thousands of people across this province who think he is doing the wrong thing. There were thousands of people outside today who suggested to him that he has an oppressive budget that is squashing free enterprise and crushing the competitive edge that this province once enjoyed.

Bob White has jumped off the Treasurer's ship. He does not agree with the budget any more. Auto workers do not agree with his budget any more. The people of this province do not agree. Why does the Treasurer not do the open and accessible thing? Why does he not hear from the people? The people think this budget stinks. If the Treasurer is not prepared to hear from them, then why does he not resign?

Hon Mr Laughren: I do not know why the member is being so mean. I received a very enthusiastic response when I spoke to the gathering outside the front of the Legislature earlier today. They were very enthusiastic. I do appreciate the copies of the fax notices, but I have to confess to the member that I really think I am more worried about all those people across the province who do not have a fax machine.

Interjections.

The Speaker: It is enough of a challenge to maintain decorum in here without supplying answers for people. The member for Oriole has been waiting patiently to place her question.

LAND USE PLANNING

Mrs Caplan: On Tuesday of this week, the Minister of Municipal Affairs flew to Grey county to tell county council that he was so concerned about irregularities with its municipal planning approvals in that county that all future approvals would have to be reviewed by his ministry officials. In effect, the minister took over the responsibilities for planning from Grey county. When, a few months ago, irregularities in planning became a public issue regarding the city of York, the minister refused to take any direct action. My question today is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Would he please explain why he chose to intervene in the county of Grey but not in the city of York?

Hon Mr Cooke: I very much appreciate the question. I noticed yesterday, when we made the announcement in the House, that the former Minister of the Environment, the member for St Catharines, seemed to agree with the position that this government had taken. I think one of the reasons that he agreed with the position --

Mr Nixon: No, you said he agreed.

Hon Mr Cooke: Well, he applauded the statement. I have no idea whether he just applauded for the heck of it or whether he meant it.

I think anybody who is concerned about the environment, and certainly the member for St Catharines and my colleague who went with me, the Minister of the Environment, both shared the point of view that in Grey county there were some significant problems with planning. As the editorial in the Owen Sound paper says, yesterday I believe it was, this matter has been known by the Conservative Party in the past and by the Liberal Party in the past, and finally a government took action to protect the environment in this province. We did that proudly.

1450

Mrs Caplan: In his throne speech, the Premier said he was going to address cynicism in this province. I would suggest to him that the answer by his minister now has done nothing to live up to that commitment.

For the record, let me tell the minister that in the county of York and in the city of York, as well as the county of Grey, there have been alarming allegations regarding the planning process. However, in the county of York the minister released two detailed government investigations. In the county of Grey the minister released two detailed government investigations. In the city of York the minister kept the government investigations under wraps.

In Grey the minister said the county "must immediately develop procedures" for planning. However, in the city of York the minister "strongly advised the city to bring in outside municipal consultants to undertake a complete administrative review." In Grey the minister forced the county to draft a new official plan; in the city of York he did not. In Grey all future planning approvals will be reviewed by the province; in the city of York there is no such restriction.

I know and the people of this province know that the Premier and the independent NDP member for Oakwood happen to represent the city of York, while Grey county is only represented by a member of the opposition. The minister has not explained --

The Speaker: Supplementary, please.

Mrs Caplan: -- why the double standard. The minister has not explained why he treated these municipalities separately. He should answer the question. Why the double standard?

Hon Mr Cooke: Perhaps if the member for Oriole has something to say, if she has some inferences, my friend should put the facts on the table. She should have a few guts and try to tell us what she is saying. If the member is saying that there was political interference, I would simply ask her to look at the facts. She knows as well as I do that in the city of the York the police are involved in an investigation. We cannot have an inquiry in the city of York. The police are there. If she is saying that we should interfere with a police investigation, she is very irresponsible in making that suggestion.

CASE OF BRIAN RAPSON

Mr Carr: My question is for the Solicitor General. As he will know, this is Police Week. During Police Week it is traditional for politicians of all stripes to make statements saluting the valour and the abilities of the working police officers.

Mrs Caplan: Why one standard for Grey and another for York?

Hon Mr Cooke: You didn't have the guts to act on either.

Mr Scott: Scuttling out.

The Speaker: The member for St George-St David, I would appreciate your attention. It is difficult enough to debate one issue at a time, let alone two. I was attempting to hear the question being placed by the member for Oakville South. The member for Oriole will please contain herself.

Mr Carr: That is okay. My mother likes it when I get up and have to start again.

The question is to the Solicitor General. I hope he can hear me. This is Police Week, during which it is traditional for politicians of all stripes to make statements saluting the valour and abilities of the working police officers in this province. But the Solicitor General has chosen a new tack this year. Rather than acting as a supporter and advocate of the police, he has decided to act as the architect of their destruction.

Police officers in this province are highly demoralized, to the point where they passed a resolution calling on the Solicitor General's government to establish an independent inquiry into how criminal charges are laid against police officers. On behalf of all of the province's demoralized police, why did this government reintroduce the charges against Brian Rapson?

Hon Mr Farnan: I am going to answer the first question. I am going to ignore the last question.

First of all, on three separate occasions during Police Week I went to functions to celebrate Police Week. These functions were held in Orillia, Cambridge and Sault Ste Marie. My basic message was that I believe that police are heroes. I believe that we very often have unsung heroes, tens of thousands of officers, men and women serving this province, providing protection. Indeed, when 10,000 officers do their shift and they do it well, we do not hear very much about it in the media, whether it is newspaper, radio or television. One of my goals as Solicitor General is to make sure that the good work of police officers in this province is on the front pages and appreciated by all the people of the province.

Mr Carr: My colleagues and I also participated in Police Week, but we were not out to openings, cutting ribbons. We were out sitting in the front seat with the police officers, riding with them, seeing at first hand what happens on the street. In fact, today I just came from a meeting with the RCMP, the Metro police and the OPP. During a discussion over the drug situation, the question, when they opened it up to me, was why politicians, and in particular this new government, are not supportive of the police in this province. I would ask the Solicitor General to at least tell the police officers, if he is not planning to establish the independent probe that the police force has asked for, why not. If he is, could we please have a date when he is going to implement it?

Hon Mr Farnan: Let me commend my critic from the Conservative Party. I commend him for taking an interest in policing matters. I commend him for going out and talking to policing services within this province. I suggest that is something we should all do. Then, after we have done that, in a constructive manner as legislators we should get together and work constructively not only to maintain but to enhance the excellence of policing in the province of Ontario.

Mr B. Ward: My question is for the Minister of Labour, but before I ask, I must say I am disappointed in the recent behaviour of the third party and the delaying tactics that it is using. Day after day I sit here and observe the wasting of tax dollars in the reading of mundane bills that have no true meaning. I believe they are delaying the business of this House --

The Speaker: Does the member have a question?

Mr B. Ward: -- because they are afraid that our budget and our policies will assist the working people.

The Speaker: If the member has a question, he should place it quickly.

Mr B. Ward: I will place my question as quickly as possible, Mr Speaker --

Mr Ferguson: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: According to the regulations of the House, in putting an oral question no argument or opinion is to be offered in putting the question. You can consult the rules. Quite frankly, I am tired of that rule being enforced on a consistent basis when it is a question by the government member. However, this side of the House continually has to listen to editorial comments from the other side of the House. Mr Speaker, it is your call on this matter, but what I am suggesting to you --

The Speaker: Would you take your seat, please. The member for Kitchener is correct about the point of order. Indeed, I certainly draw to all members' attention the fact that questions should be placed without editorial comment and they should be short and to the point. I would ask the member for Brantford to place his question.

WAGE PROTECTION

Mr B. Ward: As concisely as I can, my question is to the Minister of Labour. We are attempting to push through a bill on the wage protection fund. What impact would the Conservative delaying tactics have on the implementation of our government's wage protection fund?

Hon Mr Mackenzie: I thank my colleague for the question. I think it is a legitimate one. We have now surpassed 13,000 people who have filed claims who are probably entitled to a fair amount of money from plant shutdowns in the province. None of those workers is able to collect that money, because of the delaying tactics of the third party in this House.

Mr B. Ward: We all know how tough the economy is locally in the Brantford and Kitchener area. Could the minister give us an idea of how many workers there are in the Brantford-Kitchener area who may qualify for this particular fund?

Hon Mr Mackenzie: The way they are grouped, I cannot give him an exact figure, but it is in the neighbourhood of 1,100 workers in the Kitchener-Waterloo area.

1500

PENSION FUNDS

Mr Offer: I have a question to the Minister of Financial Institutions. There has recently been an article in the Toronto Star under the headline "DRG Seeking Pension Cash To Buy Shares." Pensioners belonging to the DRG salaried employees pension plan have contacted the minister's pension commission on many occasions looking for guidance. The pensioners and workers are trying to prevent an apparent attempt by the company to circumvent the moratorium on withdrawal of surplus pension funds put in place by the previous government. Among other things, the company is trying to access the surplus funds to float a high-risk share offering to company employees. They cannot get a straight answer.

Will the minister be allowing the pension commission to pass through this blatant attempt at drawing off surplus pension funds?

Hon Mr Charlton: Let me say two things about the question the member has raised.

First, the minister does not "allow" the pension commission; the pension commission has legislation which it enforces, and it makes its rulings based on the existing laws in the province, not at the direction of the minister. Having said that, I am not familiar with all the details of the case in question. I will look into them for the member and get back to him.

Mr Offer: I am surprised at the response by the minister, as it was something which has been covered quite extensively in the media.

As he is looking into this matter -- for the first time, surprisingly -- he will be aware that withdrawals of surplus funds are not allowed if absolutely 100% of the employees are not in full agreement. Clearly this is not the case in this instance, as concerned pension plan members have formed a pension advisory committee to oppose the company plan.

The minister must also be aware that this move by the company clearly violates the spirit of the moratorium and the Premier's own policy that pension surpluses belong to the plan members, and that if there are surplus funds the surplus should be used to improve benefits for plan members.

Can the minister assure the plan members, both former and active, that no funds will be withdrawn from the surplus if even one of them objects?

Hon Mr Charlton: As I suggested to the member, I will look into the matter and get back to him regarding the details of the case. Right at this moment we are also in the process of arranging a meeting with the affected employees of DRG Inc and we will make a full report to the House and to the member when we have all the details.

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

Mr Harnick: My question is for the Minister of Financial Institutions. As he well knows, 78% of public opinion, together with numerous victims' rights groups, as witnessed by the many petitions and coupons that have been tabled in this Legislature, have evidenced support for the government's stated promise to restore the right of innocent accident victims to sue.

In light of yesterday's announcement, in which the government broke the promise surrounding the timing of the legislation to be introduced, can the minister assure this House and the people of Ontario that the government will keep its promise and restore the right of innocent accident victims to sue?

Hon Mr Charlton: I am thankful that somebody finally got up and asked the question again. I thought the members were deserting the issue themselves.

The member is well aware that in the announcement yesterday I said clearly that final decisions on the makeup of the government's insurance package have not been made. When the government is ready to introduce its legislation here in the House, it will do as all governments in the past in this province have done and make all the announcements associated with the makeup of that plan.

Mr Harnick: I am really pleased he was happy about the question he got, but we are still getting the same kinds of non-answers.

Seventy-eight per cent of people want the minister to keep his promise and restore the right to sue. He tells us this will not be accomplished until the fall. In the meantime innocent accident victims are going without compensation. In the interim, while he dithers about doing whatever he is doing, why does he not eliminate the existing threshold and help the innocent accident victims? His delay is only profiting the insurance companies. He should lower the threshold and get rid of the threshold in the meantime.

Hon Mr Charlton: Obviously the member has some real difficulty understanding the auto insurance system in the province of Ontario. There are some innocent accident victims who are going without the right to sue; there is no innocent accident victim going without benefits. We have a substantial no-fault system in place in this province which is providing them with benefits. The right to sue to make up for those benefits the plan does not provide, or some other mechanism, is part of what we are looking at in terms of the review, but none of those innocent victims, except perhaps those who have run out under the cap, is going without benefits. They are going without the right to sue for more.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION

Mr Dadamo: I have a question for the Minister of Labour. The minister is well aware of the plight of older injured workers who are forced to live on very small pensions and pension supplements under section 135 of the Workers' Compensation Act. In fact, a vast majority of these workers, who are so disabled they can never hope to return to productive employment, are forced on to welfare.

Surely the minister agrees that this is unjust, and I would ask him what he intends to do about this tragic situation.

Hon Mr Mackenzie: I cannot help but agree totally with the member about the plight of older workers. It is one of the most objectionable things about Bill 162. There must be a better way to treat older injured workers in the province. I have asked the top officers of the board to look into this situation on a priority basis. It seems to me we have to come up with a way not to make a serious injury a one-way ticket to poverty in the province of Ontario.

POLLUTION CONTROL

Mrs Sullivan: My question is to the Minister of the Environment. The minister's response to my question last week indicated that she is revamping the municipal-industrial strategy for abatement program. We understand that the minister plans to merge MISA along with the clean air programs by establishing contaminant standards for all media in a toxic-reduction approach.

The minister knows that industry, municipalities and environmentalists have dedicated time and resources to the Liberal MISA program. Industry in particular has invested funds based on the program's monitoring regulations, and there is significant capital investment planning under way for the abatement cycle.

Will the minister tell the House what her timetable is for the development and implementation of her new water and air program, and knowing there will be a hiatus or gap before that comes into position, what her direction to industry will be in the interim period until her rules come into effect?

Hon Mrs Grier: I do not think I was quite as definitive as the member indicates in my response to her question last week. I said to her that I was examining the MISA program, looking at better ways of accelerating that program and getting us towards cleaner lakes and rivers all across this province.

Certainly the initial work done in the monitoring section of the MISA program is extremely valuable data to have, and that monitoring is not yet completed. It soon will be. The opportunity is appropriate to examine how we are going to proceed as we move to the regulatory phase, and that examination has not yet been completed.

Mrs Sullivan: The minister will know that some of the sectors affected by MISA were due to have regulations put into effect last December. I think of the federal chemical industry. The minister will also know that dialogue and joint consultation on the technological process and process change is vital in developing useful regulations.

First of all, I am asking whether the minister will advise whom she is now in consultation with in connection with new regulations; and second, whether she will assure the House that any changes to MISA are not being developed in isolation and that she will consult and is consulting now with all stake holders including environmentalists, industry and municipalities in the development of any new program which she brings forward, new toxic reduction strategies and new abatement regulations.

Hon Mrs Grier: I must take issue with the member's statement that regulations were due last December. I do not think that was the date. I would remind her that when the MISA program was first announced, it was supposed to be completed by 1989. I am faced with a program that is long overdue and that was not going to be stringent enough to get us to virtual elimination of many of the discharges which concern us.

The program has in place joint technical committees, MISA advisory committees and a very good process of consultation which was put in place by the former government. That consultation is continuing and certainly will continue as I refine and develop my regulations.

1510

WAGE PROTECTION

Mrs Witmer: I have a question for the Minister of Labour. The employee wage protection program, as outlined in Bill 70, covers all businesses in Ontario, no matter how small, and it makes no allowance for non-profit and charitable organizations.

Presently, volunteer directors of non-profit organizations receive no compensation, as the minister well knows, yet this bill will make those individuals liable for wages, vacation, termination and severance pay. This represents a significant new risk for these volunteers. A parent who is a director of a day care centre could be held personally liable, even if the centre closed due to events beyond his or her control. Is it the government's intention to make the directors and the officers of non-profit and charitable organizations personally liable for unpaid wages?

Hon Mr Mackenzie: I think the member knows that officers and directors, including those of non-profit organizations, can be liable now under the Ontario Corporations Act. That is an issue I raised in the opening statement in the debate on this bill. If we get on to it, we might go into it further, and are prepared to listen to the arguments. Our chief intent in the legislation is to make sure that money that has actually been earned by workers is paid to them, and that is the intent of the legislation.

Mrs Witmer: I would like to remind the minister that ever since this bill was introduced, my office has been inundated with written briefs and phone calls. In fact, last Friday afternoon we received a call that was particularly disturbing, and I would like to share it with the minister.

A woman called to say that her company had been in a very precarious position for at least one year and because of Bill 70, she wanted me to know, the decision had now been made to immediately close that afternoon, instead of risking bankruptcy. On Friday 10 May, 30 more people in this province lost their jobs.

As I said before when this bill was introduced, although this deals with the temporary pain of unemployment, this bill does not create one new job, and now we see it is even going to contribute to further loss of jobs because of fear of this legislation.

All of the material I have received indicates that this bill is very seriously flawed by the premise of making officers liable. It does not make sense to put responsibility on the shoulders of the people who have no control over a firm's fortunes.

Given the amount of criticism, will the minister withdraw this bill and will he produce an alternative model that is going to protect the unpaid wages of workers in this province and protect their jobs?

Hon Mr Mackenzie: I am surprised the member has not looked more closely at the bill. That is exactly what the bill does, allow for the payment of wages that are already earned, wages or vacation pay or termination or severance. That is exactly what the bill does, and I am surprised she would not want to see that kind of coverage there. The proof is in more than 13,000 people waiting for payment already, including a good number in her region.

PENSION FUNDS

Mr Martin: My question this afternoon is for the Minister of Financial Institutions. As he and many of us are aware, there is a phenomenon becoming more and more popular in our country and in our province at this time where big companies walk in and take over smaller companies, take the resources there and in many cases leave the community devastated because it is the only industry in that community. One such example of that is what may happen in Sault Ste Marie if we do not come to an agreement on its future.

However, my question is around the accountability for pension funds originally guaranteed to the people who work in the smaller company. Who is responsible?

Hon Mr Charlton: There is no single answer to that question. Under the Pension Benefits Act, it depends on how a buyout or a takeover occurs. The buyout is one company buying out another company, which becomes a merger, and the company that is doing the buying has the option of taking the pension plan and responsibility for it or deciding in the buyout not to do that, in which case the original owner, the seller, would have to wind up the plan under the direction of the Ontario Pension Commission with all of the guarantees that provides.

In the case of a straight buyout of a company, as we had happen in Sault Ste Marie with Algoma -- and I assume that is the company the member is referring to -- where the company stays intact, the legislation as it presently stands is unfortunately not clear in terms of the obligations of the new owner of the company, because the company is the sponsor of the pension plan. Having said that, we are looking into the question that I think is in the workers' minds at Algoma Steel in terms of the relationship between the owner of that company and the company itself, and the responsibilities for the pension plan. The task force is looking into the whole question.

VISITOR

The Speaker: The time for oral questions has expired. I invite members to welcome to our chamber this afternoon a former member for Scarborough Centre, Margaret Renwick, seated in the gallery.

NATIVE HUNTING AND FISHING

Hon Mr Wildman: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I rise to bring to your attention, under rules of debate, standing order 23, which says:

"23. In debate, a member shall be called to order by the Speaker if he or she:...

"(h) Makes allegations against another member.

"(i) Imputes false or unavowed motives to another member."

Yesterday in my absence, my friend the member for Simcoe East, a member for whom I have always had the highest respect and affection, twice alleged that I had politically interfered in the judicial process. This could not be further from the truth, and the particular instance to which he was referring has been explained in discussions and exchanges in this House. I am not raising the question of the veracity of the charge but the question as to why a member making such an allegation was not called to order.

The Speaker: I appreciate the point of order raised by the member. He may also know that usually the individual members are relied upon to bring to the Speaker's attention those matters which members feel are out of order. That should be done immediately when the remark is made. The member obviously is at some disadvantage in that he was not in the chamber at the time, nor did any of his colleagues raise the point. I do appreciate the fact that he has brought it to my attention, and I will respond to him in writing later on.

PETITIONS

PARLIAMENTARY PROCESS

Mr Drainville: I have a petition here to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Progressive Conservative Party has usurped the power and position of the government through undemocratic use of the standing orders of the assembly; and

"Whereas the Progressive Conservative Party has cost the taxpayers of Ontario $290,000 a day over the period of their childish and misguided activities; and

"Whereas the Progressive Conservative Party has wasted nearly $3 million of taxpayers, money; and

"Whereas the Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party has characterized himself as a tax fighter, when he and his party are really tax wasters;

"We, the undersigned citizens of the province of Ontario, ask the government of Ontario to subtract the $3 million that have been wasted so far from the caucus budget of the Progressive Conservative Party. They must be made to know that their waste of taxpayers' dollars is unacceptable to those who have to pay the bill. In short, they need to begin to do their job."

1520

OATH OF ALLEGIANCE

Mrs Sullivan: I have a petition from several people in Halton Centre addressed to the Legislative Assembly as follows:

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

"That the assembly shall demand that the government of Ontario rescind its decision to eliminate the oath of allegiance to the Queen of Canada for police officers, who must uphold laws that are proclaimed in the name of Elizabeth II."

I am pleased to affix my signature to this petition.

DAY CARE

Mr Jackson: It is interesting that the member for Victoria-Haliburton must not have supported the petition he read because he did not affix his name to it.

The Speaker: Your petition? Do you have a petition?

Mr Jackson: My petition? No problem.

"We, the undersigned, request that the Minister of Community and Social Services take action immediately to rectify the further salary inequity announced by her government 31 January 1991 for early childhood educators in Ontario.

"We believe that freedom of choice, pay equity and non-discrimination are the backbone of our democratic society. Furthermore, parents must retain the right to select the day care of their choice."

I support this resolution and I have affixed my signature to it. It is on behalf of the Woodland Children's Centre in Burlington.

BUDGET

Mr Stockwell: I have a petition, which reads as follows:

"Whereas the 1991 budget of the province of Ontario proposes measures which will substantially increase the provincial debt and the provincial deficit;

"Whereas the 1991 budget of the province of Ontario imposes $1 billion in new taxes on consumers and workers;

"Whereas the policies proposed in the 1991 budget would further undermine the competitiveness of Ontario firms;

"We, the undersigned, do respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario to refer the 1991 budget in its entirety to a standing committee of the Legislative Assembly for public hearings around the province."

I have affixed my name to this petition and I will put it before you.

Mr Harnick: I have a petition. It reads as follows:

"Whereas the 1991 budget of the province of Ontario proposes measures which will substantially increase the provincial debt and the provincial deficit;

"Whereas the 1991 budget of the province of Ontario imposes $1 billion in new taxes on consumers and workers;

"Whereas the policies proposed in the 1991 budget would further undermine the competitiveness of Ontario firms;

"We, the undersigned, do respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario to refer the 1991 budget in its entirety to a standing committee of the Legislative Assembly for public hearings around the province."

I have respectfully affixed my name to this petition.

Mr J. Wilson: I am pleased to rise and present this petition as my party's critic for Tourism and Recreation.

"Whereas the 1991 budget of the province of Ontario proposes measures which will substantially increase the provincial debt and the provincial deficit;

"Whereas the 1991 budget of the province of Ontario imposes $1 billion in new taxes on consumers and workers;

"Whereas the policies proposed in the 1991 budget would further undermine the competitiveness of Ontario firms;

"We, the undersigned, do respectfully petition the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario to refer the 1991 budget in its entirety to a standing committee of the Legislative Assembly for public hearings around the province."

I too have affixed my name to this and present this now to you.

Mr Sterling: I did have a petition, but since the member for Victoria-Haliburton wanted to get on with the business, I do move that we pass to committee reports.

The Speaker: Just a moment. We have not finished petitions. I thought you were presenting a petition.

Mr Sterling: I have the floor. I have moved that we pass to committee reports.

Mr Harnick: They did it last week, Mr. Speaker. You might remember.

You accepted it. You said it was fine.

The Speaker: Just a minute. I am sorry. I misunderstood the member's motion. You wish to move to committee reports.

Mr Sterling: Yes. Are you going to put the question?

The Speaker: The member for Carleton moves that we now move to reports by committees.

1556

The House divided on Mr Sterling's motion, which was agreed to on the following vote:

Ayes 66; nays 13.

REPORT BY COMMITTEE

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

Mr McLean from the standing committee on government agencies presented the report on the appointments review process and moved the adoption of its recommendations.

Mr McLean: Very briefly, I wanted to comment on the report. It is a report done by all members of the standing committee on government agencies, boards and commissions. The committee worked long and hard at the new process that is in place. The report is a full report. There is, however, a dissenting report from the Conservatives and the Liberals. However, the report is full and complete and it is here to be dealt with in this Legislature.

I move the adjournment of the debate.

1632

The House divided on Mr McLean's motion, which was agreed to on the following vote:

Ayes 76; nays 0.

Mr McLean: Mr Speaker, I move that we proceed to introduction of bills.

1705

The House divided on Mr McLean's motion, which was agreed to on the following vote:

Ayes 72; nays 0.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

CORNWALL AREA ECONOMIC PROTECTION ACT, 1991 / LOI DE 1991 SUR LA PROTECTION ÉCONOMIQUE DE LA RÉGION DE CORNWALL

Mr Elston, on behalf of Mr Cleary, moved first reading of Bill 102, An Act to protect the Economies of the Border Communities of the Cornwall Area.

M. Elston, au nom de M. Cleary, propose la première lecture du projet de loi 102, Loi sur la protection économique des communautés frontières de la région de Cornwall.

Motion agreed to.

La motion est adoptée.

Mr Elston: If I might just add a couple of brief remarks, it deals with an issue which is weighing heavily upon the member for Cornwall's mind, which is of course the cross-border shopping and problems associated with the economy in Cornwall. He will be dealing with this issue in private members' time at our next sitting for private members' business. I appreciate the co-operation of the House in allowing me to introduce it on his behalf, because it is of course a very severe problem economically and, as a result, socially in that particular part of Ontario, as it is right across the province.

While we have had some other bills which have been introduced for other reasons, the feeling and the sense of the member for Cornwall is quite clear that the community of Cornwall is at risk if steps are not taken to ensure that in fact its economy is protected.

VICTIMS' BILL OF RIGHTS ACT, 1991 / LOI DE 1991 SUR LA DÉCLARATION DES DROITS DES VICTIMES

Mr Elston, on behalf of Mr Jackson, moved first reading of Bill 103, An Act to establish the Rights of Victims of Crime.

M. Elston, au nom de M. Jackson, propose la première lecture du projet de loi 103, Loi portant déclaration des droits des victimes d'actes criminels.

Motion agreed to.

La motion est adoptée.

Mr Elston: Just a few remarks, Mr Speaker. Again, thank you for the co-operation of the House in allowing me to introduce this bill on behalf of the member for Burlington South. Although I represent a different party, this is a private member's bill again, and I think it will be debated on the next Thursday when we deal with these items. It was only because I happened to be here at the time the member for Burlington South had to be called away that he left this material with me, and for no other reason. I do not wish to unnecessarily alarm the Speaker, because the staff may have to change a whole series of seats if this becomes the usual sort of thing to occur.

I do want to say that the subject matter of this is for all of us extremely important and I think that all of us will want to have something to say about the issue for the Victims' Bill of Rights Act which the member for Burlington South has wished to be introduced and that I have done on his behalf today.

CITY OF KINGSTON ECONOMIC PROTECTION ACT, 1991 / LOI DE 1991 SUR LA PROTECTION ÉCONOMIQUE DE LA CITÉ DE KINGSTON

Mr Sterling moved first reading of Bill 104, An Act to protect the Economy of the Border Community of the City of Kingston.

M. Sterling propose la première lecture du projet de loi 104, Loi sur la protection économique de la communauté frontière de la cité de Kingston.

1715

The House divided on Mr Sterling's motion, which was agreed to on the following vote:

La motion de M. Sterling, mise aux voix, est adoptée:

Ayes/Pour-61

Allen, Arnott, Beer, Bisson, Boyd, Carr, Carter, Charlton, Christopherson, Cooper, Cunningham, Dadamo, Drainville, Elston, Eves, Ferguson, Fletcher, Frankford, Gigantes, Grier, Harnick, Harrington, Haslam, Hayes, Hope, Huget, Jamison, Johnson, Kwinter, Lessard, MacKinnon, Malkowski, Mancini, Marchese, Martel, Mathyssen, McLean, Mills, Morrow, Murdoch, B., Murdock, S., O'Connor, Offer, Owens, Perruzza, Philip, E., Phillips, G., Pilkey, Poole, Silipo, Sterling, Stockwell, Sutherland, Ward, B., Ward, M., White, Wilson, G., Wilson, J., Winninger, Witmer, Wood.

Nays/Contre-0

Mr Sterling: I and the members of the Progressive Conservative caucus are concerned about border communities. Therefore, I have introduced this bill. The purpose of this bill is to protect --

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker (Mr Villeneuve): The honourable member for Carleton has the floor. I know it is Thursday afternoon and we are all anxious, however -- the honourable member for Carleton.

Mr Sterling: The purpose of this bill is to protect the economy of the border community of the city of Kingston in eastern Ontario by ensuring that government-imposed costs do not undermine the competitiveness of the businesses and the city itself in that community. They are very concerned.

CITY OF WINDSOR ECONOMIC PROTECTION ACT, 1991 / LOI DE 1991 SUR LA PROTECTION ÉCONOMIQUE DE LA CITÉ DE WINDSOR

Mr Sterling moved first reading of Bill 105, An Act to protect the Economy of the Border Community of the City of Windsor.

M. Sterling propose la première lecture du projet de loi 105, Loi sur la protection économique de la communauté frontière de la cité de Windsor.

Motion agreed to.

La motion est adoptée.

Mr Sterling: The city of Windsor is probably feeling the effects of cross-border shopping more than any other community in Ontario. We in our caucus want to take some positive steps to stop this cross-border shopping and protect businesses and companies that are trying to survive in this non-competitive Ontario that has been created by this government.

The purpose of this bill is to protect the economy of this border community of the city of Windsor by ensuring that costs imposed by this government do not undermine the effectiveness of the companies and businesses that operate in the fine city of Windsor.

RAINY RIVER ECONOMIC PROTECTION ACT, 1991 / LOI DE 1991 SUR LA PROTECTION ÉCONOMIQUE DE LA VILLE DE RAINY RIVER

Mr Eves moved first reading of Bill 106, An Act to protect the Economy of the Border Community of the Town of Rainy River.

M. Eves propose la première lecture du projet de loi 106, Loi sur la protection économique de la communauté frontière de la ville de Rainy River.

1728

The House divided on Mr Eves's motion, which was agreed to on the following vote:

La motion de M. Eves, mise aux voix, est adoptée:

Ayes/Pour-62

Allen, Arnott, Beer, Bisson, Carr, Carter, Charlton, Churley, Cooper, Cunningham, Dadamo, Drainville, Elston, Eves, Ferguson, Fletcher, Frankford, Gigantes, Grier, Harnick, Haslam, Hayes, Henderson, Hope, Huget, Jamison, Johnson, Kwinter, Lessard, MacKinnon, Malkowski, Mancini, Marchese, Martel, Mathyssen, Mills, Morrow, Murdoch, B., Murdock, S., O'Connor, Offer, Owens, Perruzza, Philip, E., Phillips, G., Pilkey, Poole, Ruprecht, Silipo, Sterling, Stockwell, Sullivan, Sutherland, Ward, B., Ward, M., White, Wilson, G., Wilson, J., Winninger, Wiseman, Witmer, Wood.

Nays/Contre-0

The Acting Speaker: Mr Eves, would you have a few comments on your bill?

Mr Eves: No, it speaks for itself.

I move that we now proceed to orders of the day.

Miss Martel: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: It seems to me that is not in order. We would move automatically to that next order of business.

Mr Sterling: No, there may be other bills. I have another bill I want to introduce.

The Acting Speaker: Further introduction of bills.

Mr Sterling: He has moved a motion.

The Acting Speaker: The honourable member for Parry Sound has a motion on the floor.

Mr Eves: That is correct. I have moved that we proceed to orders of the day.

1803

The House divided on Mr Eves's motion, which was agreed to on the following vote:

Ayes 53; nays 0.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Hon Miss Martel: I would like to outline to the House the business for the week beginning Monday 27 May.

On Monday 27 May, we will consider second reading of Bill 40, An Act to amend the Mortgages Act.

On Tuesday 28 May, there is a Liberal opposition day standing in the name of Mr Bradley.

On Wednesday 29 May, there will be second reading of the health professionals' regulation legislation.

On Thursday 30 May in the afternoon, we will commence with second reading of Bill 74, An Act respecting the Provision of Advocacy Services to Vulnerable Persons. We also have two private members' items: ballot item 21, second reading of Bill 37 standing in the name of Mr McLean, and ballot item 22, a resolution standing in the name of Mr Martin.

The Acting Speaker: It now being past 6 of the clock, may I take this opportunity of saying to all of our pages who have served us so well over the last number of weeks, thank you for being such kind people to us. We sincerely hope that you have not learned too many bad habits and that this is not adieu but au revoir, and will ye no' come back again.

The House adjourned at 1807.