ANNUAL REPORT, PROVINCIAL AUDITOR
ATTENDANCE OF PREMIER AND MINISTER OF FINANCE
The House met at 1331.
Prayers.
MEMBERS' STATEMENTS
FOREST INDUSTRY
Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora): I rise today to bring to the attention of the Minister of Natural Resources and all members of this House the sense of overwhelming frustration and dissatisfaction that residents of my riding are feeling as a result of a recent meeting of the Old Growth Policy Advisory Committee in the community of Dryden.
As the minister is well aware, forestry and its related industries are very important to the overall economy of the northwest and the province as a whole. The minister's own Forest Industry Action Group revealed in its recent report that over 75% of all manufacturing jobs in northwestern Ontario are dependent on the forest products industry. Yet people in my riding are very sceptical of the commitment this government has to the forest industry when they see the work being done by the MNR's old-growth advisory committee. For over two years the committee has been trying to define an old-growth forest but has yet to come up with a definition.
A meeting in Dryden on November 24 was supposed to be an opportunity for committee members to explain what they were studying. The committee succeeded only in raising the fears of residents in my riding about job loss and forest industry cutbacks because of its inability to provide clear answers to the most fundamental of questions.
This uncertainty, combined with the fact that there is no representation on the committee from west of Thunder Bay, displays a significant flaw in your government's forest policy strategy.
I urge the minister to command the committee to examine the socioeconomic effects on residents, communities and businesses in our part of the province before continuing on with its narrow mandate.
HUMAN RIGHTS LEGISLATION
Mr W. Donald Cousens (Markham): Racism flourishes not only where it is encouraged but where it is tolerated. The only way to prevent it from taking hold in society is to be constantly on guard against those individuals and groups that espouse racial hatred and to crack down on them immediately.
Individuals and groups in our society that promote hate either in verbal or written form, aimed at certain people in our society such as Jewish people, aboriginals or ethnic minorities, do nothing to build tolerance and respect. Encouraged by the lack of government action to stop them, groups such as neo-Nazis and the Christian Heritage Front are allowed to flourish.
The Ontario Human Rights Code grants all of us the right to be protected from discrimination regardless of race, sex, disability or sexual orientation. This right should also be extended to protect all of us from hate propaganda.
In June 1993, I introduced Bill 55, An Act to amend the Human Rights Code. This was in response to the rise in crimes of hate and hate propaganda that is epidemic in our communities. Since then, the debate on the issue of hate propaganda has grown. Many have discussed the issue with me and I have listened. The debate has largely focused on the balance between freedom of expression and the right to be protected from discrimination and hate propaganda. It is a difficult balance to achieve.
Encouraged by all the response to my bill, I have taken all points of view into consideration. The end result is that while this bill stimulated the debate on how to protect all of us from hate propaganda, it could not achieve the balance.
I respect the need for freedom of expression. Yet I must question how in our society we allow hatred of others to grow, and I must caution against this.
The Speaker (Hon David Warner): The member's time has expired.
Mr Cousens: Can I just have one final paragraph?
The Speaker: Agreed? Agreed.
Mr Cousens: All of us must take up the cause of finding a way to protect people from hate propaganda. The challenge to do this now rests with each of us. Bill 55 will die on the order paper because it failed to balance the need for freedom of expression and protection from hate. We must continue to find a solution to this issue. It will not be easy but we must try.
JOBS ONTARIO YOUTH
Ms Zanana L. Akande (St Andrew-St Patrick): The results are in, and I am pleased to report today that the 1993 Jobs Ontario Youth program was a tremendous success. In total, 6,835 jobs were created, exceeding the program target by 835 positions. More placements than anticipated were created in each of the four cities delivering the program. There were 795 jobs created in Windsor, 588 in Hamilton, 1,097 in Ottawa and 4,355 in the greater Toronto area. In addition, component 2 of Jobs Ontario Youth expanded existing programs in other cities across the province.
The majority of the participants were students, full-time and part-time, but many had left school and had been unable to find work. The program had access and equity goals which were well met. All youth had opportunities to access the program and to find work. Of the 4,311 employers who participated in the program, 46% were in the private sector, 26% were in the public sector and 28% were in not-for-profit organizations.
This government can be proud of its achievement in building this positive employment initiative for the youth of Ontario. I would like to thank the many employers and delivery agencies that made this program such a success, and I would like to congratulate the participants on a summer well spent.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Mr Robert Chiarelli (Ottawa West): If governments do not take bold new initiatives to reform the democratic process, the schism between the public and their governments will continue to widen perilously. As one small step, later today I will be introducing a private member's bill entitled the Citizens Assembly Project Act.
This bill proposes to establish a process for citizens assemblies to be created for the purpose of consulting, researching and preparing legislation in a policy area specified by cabinet on a project-by-project basis.
The concept of a constituent assembly is used to help make public policy and write legislation on a fast-track basis. This process would take traditional royal commissions and task forces well beyond the usual recommendations mode which more often than not adds to public cynicism and ends up collecting dust, having served their non-stated purpose of putting out a political fire-storm.
Government decision-making can no longer be made in one- or two-dimensional settings. Stakeholders and the broader public should all be involved at each stage of the decision-making process with a finite timetable.
The bill represents a small but bold experiment to involve the public more -- and the bureaucrats and politicians less -- in some aspects of public policy formulation. The bill is a unique experiment to help us break out of our institutional straitjacket and would help to address legitimate and mounting public cynicism with our political institutions.
1340
VICTIM ASSISTANCE
Mr Bill Murdoch (Grey-Owen Sound): The Owen Sound victims assistance program is the only one of its kind in my area and it is extremely valuable to the community.
Volunteers assist victims by giving them emotional support, by explaining courtroom procedures and legal terms, by acting as a go-between with the police and the crown attorney and by referring those needing help to local agencies for counselling and other support services. They are there when the victim needs them, and that in itself is the key to successful crisis intervention.
But this program, and others like it, cannot continue if it does not receive the financial assistance awarded to it in the federal legislation, Bill C-89. Under this legislation, the province was given the power to collect a victim surcharge from those found guilty under the Criminal Code and the Narcotic Control Act.
However, although the province has collected $830,000 since this legislation came into effect, the money ended up in general revenues, not in the hands of the victims, because the provincial government failed to establish a surcharge fund. Therefore, judges stopped levying these fines. The Attorney General has promised to move ahead in this area but so far nothing has been done. I would ask her to establish as quickly as possible a fund so that fines can be levied with some purpose and to bring in a victim surcharge under the Provincial Offences Act so that all victims in Ontario can get help.
These initiatives would allow programs such as the one in Owen Sound to operate independently without public money. Surely, this government can understand that especially in times of restraint these measures make excellent sense.
LEARN, EXPLORE AND PREPARE
Mr Stephen Owens (Scarborough Centre): I am honoured to introduce a group of very special and courageous women to the House today. These women are participants of a program in Scarborough in my riding, LEAP, which stands for Learn, Explore and Prepare. That is indeed what these women do.
LEAP teaches women who want to further their education or enter the workforce to learn new skills, explore their potential and prepare themselves for new opportunities.
I said that these women were courageous, and they certainly are. It takes a lot of courage to change one's life path, and these women should be recognized for their efforts. So I am delighted to introduce these women to you: Maria Andrade, Juliet Bassoo, Clarice Bennett, Jennifer Cheddie, Dorothy Cornish, Mary Emery, Lucille Frederick, Pam German, Bonnie Henry, Rita Jakobson, Lillian Kielly, Joan Manuel, Trixie Marcozzi, Chris Mattucci, Jean McCauley, Mary Robichaud, Zenia Selig and Frances Wagg.
The instructors who are accompanying these students today are Darlene Watman, Doborah Reixach, Andrea Reynolds and Sue Boyer.
I want you to know that their perseverance and their experience are an inspiration to us all.
BY-ELECTION IN ESSEX SOUTH
Mr Tim Murphy (St George-St David): I couldn't agree more with the member for St Andrew-St Patrick that the results are in, and they're in in Essex South. We're proud to say that the Liberal candidate there got more votes than the government's created with Jobs Ontario.
I'm pleased to be able to say that the newly elected member, Bruce Crozier, is here in the member's gallery today, and also his wife, Joan, and children, Nancy and David. He will be a fine member of this assembly and a great addition.
I think it's interesting, since I think the CBC and the Globe and Mail missed the by-election results, to give a bit of a sense of what happened. I want you to know that some 12,700-odd voters in Essex South voted for Bruce Crozier. It's unfortunate, but the NDP candidate lost his deposit and I'm sad to say that.
The interesting fact is that the results for the Conservative Party were halved. Less than 18% of the people in Essex South voted for Team Harris. That's unfortunate. Despite a large effort by the Conservative Party and numerous trips by the leader, Mike Harris, into the area, their support went down many per cent and came within a few hundred votes of losing their deposit as well.
But I don't want to be partisan. I do want to recognize how great a member we're going to have and I welcome him to the seat next to me.
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): Yesterday, all parties of this House paid tribute to the 14 young women who were victims of the Montreal massacre. We also pledged to continue the Ontario government's campaign to halt violence against women.
It is very disturbing then that last month, during the premier episode of the controversial cartoon show Beavis and Butthead, the Ontario Lottery Corp ads said they were putting our dollars to work during Wife Assault Prevention Month.
Beavis and Butthead are nasty teenagers who torment girls and hurt animals. The show has been blamed for the death of a little girl whose five-year-old brother set her bed on fire after watching Beavis and Butthead saying, "Cool, heh, heh, heh," whenever anything caught fire.
Much of the dialogue in Beavis and Butthead is demeaning towards women and girls. Here is an excerpt from the opening episode. The girls referred to are characters on the TV show Beverly Hills 90210: "That's not Donna; Donna's the slut. This is Kelly." "No way, dude. Donna's not a slut; she's a virgin. Kelly's the slut."
The sexism of Beavis and Butthead is part of a continuum of abuse that at its extreme is manifested in the acts of Marc Lépine, who singled out female students during his killing spree. Surely, then, the Ontario Lottery Corp could have shown more wisdom and sensitivity than to be an advertising sponsor of a show which depicts women in a degrading and insulting manner.
JOB CREATION
Mrs Karen Haslam (Perth): I'm pleased to spend my 90 seconds this week talking about another program that I am pleased to see working in my own riding. We're talking about putting Ontario back to work.
Since its election in 1990, Ontario's government has been fighting the recession by supporting and protecting jobs and services for people by dramatically expanding support for worker training and adjustment and by creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs. Our government has undertaken the largest and most ambitious capital investment and job creation program anywhere in North America. We're investing in putting Ontario back to work.
The NDP government's anti-recession fund spent more than $900 million for repairs and improvements for schools, community centres, bridges, roads and arenas across Ontario, and created more than 17,000 jobs.
Jobs Ontario Capital: In February 1993, Ontario's government launched a $6-billion capital investment program for public transit, roads, water treatment, sewers and telecommunications networks. Financed with municipalities and the private sector, it means 100,000 new jobs over the next 10 years. This is the largest and most ambitious capital investment and job creation program anywhere in North America.
Jobs Ontario Training: More than 31,000 jobs for unemployed people have been created so far under this three-year $1.1-billion program.
Jobs Ontario Youth: $45 million over the last two years, to create almost 20,000 summer jobs.
ANNUAL REPORT, PROVINCIAL AUDITOR
The Speaker (Hon David Warner): I beg to inform the House that I have today laid upon the table the annual report of the Provincial Auditor of Ontario, covering audits completed through 1993.
VISITOR
The Speaker (Hon David Warner): I invite all members to join me in welcoming to our chamber this afternoon, seated in the Speaker's gallery, the auditor, Mr Erik Peters. Welcome.
Mr Murray J. Elston (Bruce): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: While you have greeted Mr Peters, it is my opportunity now, on behalf of the Liberal Party, to welcome him officially to the Legislative Assembly, although we've seen him before in front of the Board of Internal Economy and other places as we've dealt with such interesting concepts as the social contract and other things. While we wish him well in his future endeavours, we want to say thank you for a first task completed and accomplished.
The reason I'm extending these hospitable remarks to the auditor is in anticipation that others will join Bruce Crozier on our side of the House so that we can move over to the other side, and so that he will know that the Liberals will be a very cooperative group of people when we administer the province.
The other reason I would like to take a few extra moments is because the Minister of Finance, who is supposed to be here and should be answering questions with respect to the auditor's report, has not yet attended. We understand Mr Rae was to be late, but I must enter at this point a bit of a complaint that we must have the ministers of the crown available for our leader to ask questions of. I would wonder if I could ask you to inquire of the government House leader if the Minister of Finance is going to come in today to face the most unpleasant music.
Hon Brian A. Charlton (Government House Leader): Mr Speaker, to the best of my knowledge the Minister of Finance will be here, yes.
1350
ESTIMATES
Hon Frances Lankin (Minister of Economic Development and Trade): I have a message from His Honour the Lieutenant Governor signed by his own hand.
The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Will the members rise, please.
The Lieutenant Governor transmits estimates of certain sums required for the services of the province for the year ending 31st March 1994 and recommends them to the Legislative Assembly.
Members may be seated.
STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES
JUDICIAL REVIEW
Hon Marion Boyd (Attorney General): I wish to advise the House that notice of an application for judicial review of the report of the judicial inquiry into the conduct of the Honourable Judge Walter Hryciuk was issued and served upon my ministry on December 2, 1993. In view of this application, it would be inappropriate to proceed to deal with the report in this Legislature at this time, as the report forms the basis of proceedings in this House.
It is my expectation that this matter will be dealt with expeditiously, and I will advise the House when this matter has been disposed of by the courts. As this matter is now before the courts, it would also be inappropriate for me to make further comment.
Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington South): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Earlier today, the Minister of Community and Social Services made a substantive announcement regarding social assistance recipients. I wonder why the minister has chosen not to advise the House of these developments.
The Speaker (Hon David Warner): The member will know he does not have a point of order. You may indeed have material for question period, and question period is the next order of business.
ATTENDANCE OF PREMIER AND MINISTER OF FINANCE
Mr Murray J. Elston (Bruce): On a point of order again, Mr Speaker: This is an important day. We all know, when there are statements to be made, how long it's going to take, and we understand that the Premier will be a little bit late, by 15 minutes. We were advised of that. But we were advised that the Treasurer, or the Finance minister, as he wishes now to be called, would be here on time, as would others.
I'm just asking why, if we are to order our business, they can't be here on time. This is not an unusual event. To create order and maintain order, it would be nice if they would meet their obligations to show up to face the music. I wonder if we might have, on unanimous consent, a recess for 15 minutes until those people can get in. I'm asking for unanimous consent.
The Speaker (Hon David Warner): First, the member raises a legitimate request asking for unanimous consent, which indeed I will do in a moment.
I understand the member's concern. The member will know that there is nothing in the rules which would assist me in compelling any member's attendance in the House. The two requirements of there being a quorum in the House and that there be cabinet ministers has been met. Beyond that, there is nothing more I can do as your Speaker.
I will place the question which the honourable member raised, asking for a short recess of 10 minutes. Is that agreed to? I heard at least one negative voice.
Hon Brian A. Charlton (Government House Leader): The normal procedure has been, when there's been a problem around the official opposition or the third-party leader's questions, to stand them down. The Minister of Finance is on his way and will be here within a matter of minutes. Here he is now.
ORAL QUESTIONS
ACCOUNTING PRACTICES
Mrs Lyn McLeod (Leader of the Opposition): We have managed to delay the beginning of question period until both the Treasurer and the Premier could be here so we can carry out our role of asking them to be held accountable for the findings of the auditor's report this morning.
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Order.
Mrs McLeod: My first question will be to the Minister of Finance.
Interjections.
The Speaker: In an effort to conduct an orderly question period, I ask both sides to come to order. I ask the table to restart the clock and the honourable Leader of the Opposition to place her question.
Mrs McLeod: My question is to the Minister of Finance. Minister, this year's auditor's report could not have been much clearer. The auditor says that the province's books are not telling the whole story of the province's debt and that the books have to be fixed. On page 189 of the report the auditor states very clearly, and I quote:
"Our general concern is that legislators and the public are not now being provided the financial information required to help them understand and assess the financial position and results of operations of the government."
In fact, when you follow the auditor's recommendations, the province's deficit for this year would not be shown as $9.6 billion; it would instead be over $11 billion, $1.8 billion higher than what you are reporting right now. Minister, you've had the auditor's recommendations on your bookkeeping for months. Will you now confirm, finally confirm, that the deficit is actually over $11 billion, $1.8 billion higher than you report?
Hon Floyd Laughren (Minister of Finance): Thank you. It's nice to be wanted. I really do believe --
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order.
Hon Mr Laughren: Why is the opposition so wrangy today, Mr Speaker?
I really believe that I speak on behalf of every one of my caucus when I --
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order.
Hon Mr Laughren: It's a serious question and I'm trying to give a serious answer, and the opposition is engaging in very loud and persistent heckling. I was just going to say that on behalf of my caucus, I welcome the leader of the official opposition back after a prolonged and unexplained absence, and I want her to know that we are glad to welcome her back in the assembly this afternoon.
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order.
Hon Mr Laughren: The opposition is behaving very strangely today. I don't understand it. With all of this heckling, Mr Speaker, I know you're going to tell me that I'm almost out of time and are not going to give me any more time to answer a serious question.
Interjection.
Hon Mr Laughren: No, I'm quite happy to answer the leader of the official opposition and tell her that when the Provincial Auditor was appointed to his job -- and I know he's here today and will measure my words carefully. When the Provincial Auditor was appointed to his position he indicated to us that he wished to have the traditional way in which the financial statements of this government were reported be changed to be in accordance with the public service accounting and auditing board. We agree with him and have committed ourselves to do that, completely, in the financial statements at the earliest opportunity.
The Speaker: Could the minister conclude his response please.
Hon Mr Laughren: I would just say to the leader of the official opposition that the way we've reported our books is exactly the way her government reported the books when they were in office.
Mrs McLeod: I cannot believe that on this day, when the auditor has brought in a report which clearly says to this government that it has been doing nothing less than misrepresenting the figures as it presents them to the public, the Treasurer would attempt to make light of our questions.
This is the government that has brought in a budget that for the first time in Ontario's history has caused the auditor to refuse to sign the statement of accounts. In the private sector, I would suggest, if the auditor refused to sign the books, the shareholders would demand the resignation of the management.
This is not just an occurrence of today. In the spring of 1992, I wrote to the Provincial Auditor and I asked him to respond to our concerns that the deficit projections of the government for that year were nothing but smoke and mirrors. The auditor's report clearly shares all of the concerns we identified that this province's debts are not being properly accounted for.
1400
Interjections.
The Speaker: I ask the House to come to order. Would the leader place her supplementary, please.
Mrs McLeod: Once again, I assure the Premier I will be happy at any time to change positions and be held accountable for what we have done and what we will do. The issue today is what this government has done and is being held accountable for in the auditor's report. I say again that the auditor has been urging this government for three years to change its accounting methods, and it still keeps hiding the facts.
Let me be specific. The auditor's report shows $1.8 billion in spending and debt that is being hidden from the taxpayers, including $500 million in delayed pension payments, $600 million in school capital expenditures, $500 million in the phantom sale of government buildings and $200 million of spending hidden under the new capital corporations. This is still happening in this budget, and I ask this minister how he justifies hiding these debts. Will you now change your books to tell the taxpayers of this province what the real deficit is?
Hon Mr Laughren: The leader of the official opposition chooses her words most unfortunately. There is absolutely nothing that is hidden in the way in which this government does business. Let me be perfectly clear about this. All that is in dispute is the accounting methods that are being used. What the Provincial Auditor has said is that he wishes this province to move to a different kind of accounting than has been done in the past by all governments. So let's not pretend that this government is hiding anything. All of the numbers are right there for anyone to see. Also, we have indicated to the Provincial Auditor, and it's in writing, that we agree with him to move to the new system of accounting. We've agreed to that.
I can tell you, Mr Speaker, there's never been a jurisdiction that I've ever heard of, when the auditor's report came out, in which there were not some changes suggested. I don't mind that from the Provincial Auditor. What I do mind is the leader of the official opposition, whose government went into the election in 1990 saying there was a balanced budget and ended up with a $3-billion deficit, so she need not preach to me about the way we keep our books.
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order.
Mrs McLeod: It's a nice try, but it won't work. The issue on the table today is the issue of the auditor's report on this government's financing and its reporting of its finances. Debt is debt is debt. We know it, the auditor knows it, the taxpayers know it and the only ones trying to pretend something different are you and the Premier.
Let me quote the auditor. Since you say I am choosing my words carefully, let me use the auditor's words. The auditor says that your preflows and your delayed pension payments are an attempt to manage the deficit. I wouldn't suggest "manage" in the sense of making realistic reductions in the deficit. Let me choose other words, "finesse the figures," because the auditor goes on to say that it is an attempt to manage the deficit. The auditor said --
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order.
Mrs McLeod: Just in case the Premier has not had a chance to read the words the auditor has put in writing, he says that this attempt to manage the deficit "raises doubts concerning the integrity of the accounting process." Those are the auditor's words. The auditor further says that your sale of government buildings is form over substance. The auditor says that the school board, hospital and university capital funding should be shown differently.
Do you agree with the auditor's recommendations? Do you confirm that your real deficit is in fact closer to $11 billion and will you report it accordingly?
Hon Mr Laughren: I guess I need to say this more than once. The Provincial Auditor did not refuse to sign the books and for the leader of the official opposition to keep repeating that is really unfair. It is really unfair, and I think she does herself a disservice by repeating something that is patently untrue.
Secondly, the Provincial Auditor gave a qualified approval for one item only and, as I recall, it was the deferral of pension payments. The flip side of deferral for members would be preflow, and I would remind the leader of the official opposition that if my memory serves me correct, her Treasurer of the day, when she was in government, preflowed I think it was an excess of $1 billion, paid it one year instead of the next year.
If she wants to attach the same kind of condemnation to her former Treasurer as she's attaching to me now, then I can live with that kind of condemnation, because I can tell the leader of the official opposition that the question of preflows and deferrals is exactly the way other governments have done it, exactly the same way.
We have said to the Provincial Auditor that we are prepared to change to the new system of accounting that he is recommending.
Mrs McLeod: I gather that refusal to answer the question is a confirmation of the accuracy of the figures that I've presented.
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order. The leader of the opposition with her second question.
CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
Mrs Lyn McLeod (Leader of the Opposition): My second question is to the Minister of Correctional Services because indeed there are other issues raised in the auditor's report which we want to address today.
The auditor's report contains a ringing indictment of the cost and the performance of Ontario's jails. It details institutions in which inmates being supervised by non-correctional staff, including a cook in one case, escaped custody. It details a system-wide record of procedures not being followed to ensure that keys are properly safeguarded and a system-wide failure to follow policies for monitoring the movements of inmates.
The auditor's report indicates that recommendations made some four or five years ago to improve compliance with security programs have still not been implemented. As a result of the auditor's report, memos were sent out asking that all superintendents receive a copy of the ministry's security compliance checklist and that they check whether or not their institutions are in compliance.
1410
Minister, how could a system of ensuring security measures be so lax that a memo had to be sent out ensuring that superintendents were aware of the system? How could the system be so poorly run that superintendents actually had to be asked to check if they were in compliance?
Hon David Christopherson (Minister of Correctional Services): First of all, let me say that the provincial institutions in the province of Ontario are secure institutions; they are safe institutions. The auditor's report itself states very clearly that incidents of any breaches of security are not inconsistent with findings of those other institutions across the nation, not just other provinces.
With regard to a couple of the specifics, one of the things that has happened in addition to the memo that the member refers to, and I don't think it's that unusual that memos would be sent out on important matters like security, but there is now in place an annual security review that takes place in each and every institution across the system, and I believe this will again have us in the forefront of ensuring that the kind of security measures that the public insists upon and needs to have in place are indeed there.
Mrs McLeod: Minister, the fact that we are no less secure than other provinces is hardly a recommendation when the auditor deals with escapes of inmates that result from supervision by non-correctional personnel. I can understand the minister would not have suggested that it was a problem of lack of resources in our correctional institutions.
The auditor's report indicates that Ontario spends 43% more per inmate than the national average; that we have 40% more staff per inmate than the national average; in fact that Ontario has almost one staff person per inmate. Clearly this is a problem of poor management and a waste of resources. We are spending more money. We still have a system in which there are security problems. How do you explain, Minister, that we have more staff than any other province and we still have a system with security problems?
Hon Mr Christopherson: Let me address very directly, since the honourable member raises it twice now, the issue of supervision by, as it is noted in the auditor's report, cooks. Let me say that it is not unusual at all for cooks to receive specialized training that has them qualified to supervise certain inmates who are indeed working in the kitchen. There is nothing unusual about that. Indeed, that is consistent with our policies.
Let me also say with regard to the staff ratios, the auditor points out very clearly that there's a real concern around the efficiency of older institutions. Indeed, some of the older institutions in this system are over 120 years old. The auditor's report says very clearly that when we look at the newer facilities, the newer institutions, not only are the ratios better than the average, but the efficiencies and cost per diems are lower than the average. It's the higher cost and loss of efficiency in the older institutions which I suggest skews the overall numbers in the report.
Mrs McLeod: We agree that the auditor found that the number of critical occurrences, such as escapes and homicides and suicides, in Ontario jails is comparable to those in other jurisdictions. We have no quarrel with that. But we find that the auditor indicates that no real effort has been made to determine whether the system is in any way achieving the goal of motivating offenders towards positive personal change.
So we see a real contrast here between the amount of resources in the system and what the system is providing. We have 40% more staff, we have 43% more staff per inmate and we don't appear to have a better system by any measure. We don't have better security and safety. We don't know if our jails are achieving any long-term positive change in the behaviour of inmates. There are shelves full of studies and reviews in your ministry, and there has been no implementation of the recommendations.
Minister, tell us today, quite simply and quite specifically, what steps you're prepared to take immediately to clean up this situation to ensure that the security procedures in Ontario's jails are enforced and followed.
Hon Mr Christopherson: Let me say first of all that I'm rather disappointed in the questions the honourable member's asking. There are indeed a number of very serious issues that the auditor raises in the report which we have addressed in large part and which I'm prepared to answer here. But I don't think the honourable member's really hitting on those points.
Let me answer her question, however, since she poses it. What are we doing about security? First of all, in the context that our institutions are secure institutions, they are safe institutions and they will stack up against any analysis, against any other institution from coast to coast to coast in the nation of Canada.
Lastly, when it comes to security, we have initiated an annual security review. There is a special security committee that has been formed that reviews all of the reports from all the institutions to determine not only what incidents have taken place, but whether or not as a result of those incidents, we should be looking at making corporate changes.
I would say very directly to the honourable member that security has been, is and always will continue to be a top priority for this ministry.
Mr Michael D. Harris (Nipissing): I'd like to go back to the Minister of Correctional Services and follow up questions that have been asked by the leader of the Liberal Party.
The minister has just finished saying that he is committed and says that our facilities are just as safe as any other province in Canada, and the auditor I think points that out. What we want to know is, why is it that our facilities cost so much more to operate than every other province to have that same degree of security?
Specifically, let me ask you a couple of things: On page 159, the auditor points out that between 1985 and 1988, a three-year period -- it's not a partisan thing. I don't think you were in government then, but maybe you want to defend it anyway. Over a three-year period there was a total increase of 190 inmates into the system, 190 more, and yet staff increased over those three years by 1,370. For each new inmate over that three-year period, we hired seven more staff. Why?
Hon Mr Christopherson: First, I would point back to the comment made by the honourable leader of the third party that indeed we weren't in government at that time, so obviously I wasn't the minister at the time. It was, of course, the Liberals who were in government at that time.
However, let me say this, in fairness, to the former ministers who were predecessors of mine: I think it is important, and I think the auditor does point to the fact, that one needs to look at not just the increase in the number of inmates or the fact of how many increases in individuals who are young offenders, but indeed that the federal legislation did require that there be a complete separation of the adult population and the young offender population.
I do think, in fairness to the previous government, that in large part the need to make that separation and the cost of the duplication and the cost to provide the proper security with separate and new staff would indeed account for a number of those increases.
Mr Harris: This report isn't brand new to you, Minister. What we're interested in here is solving problems. What the auditor is interested in is solving problems, not which party was in power. There's a problem. Why did it happen? How do we fix it?
Seven new staff for each inmate. Let's go back over a 10-year period, because in that period of time there would have been a whole host of ministers responsible but basically the same bureaucracy. The Provincial Auditor found that in the past 10 years the number of inmates in Ontario corrections institutions has increased by 28%. During that same time, operating costs, after adjusting for inflation, have increased by 83%, and the only thing we've heard from you is the implementation of the Young Offenders Act.
Are you telling us today that is the sole reason why costs, after indexing for inflation, went up 83% when the inmate population went up only 28%. Are you satisfied with that explanation? If not, what else is going on there and what are you doing to fix it?
1420
Hon Mr Christopherson: No, indeed; I don't think I suggested in my comments at all that this was the only reason. There are a number of reasons, and the auditor points to them, the largest being that the largest percentage of that cost is of course staffing and also the fact that the older institutions in our system -- and unlike other jurisdictions that have already done a modernization program, we have quite a number of institutions that are indeed 120 years old or greater -- are very inefficient. I think the numbers in the report talk about two and a half times, that the ratio is two and a half times as much. When you look at the newer facilities, the ratios, the efficiencies, the costs are better than the weighted average for the entire nation and all the provinces and Ontario.
There are a number of other reasons, such as the Askov decision, which added to the entire criminal justice system greatly, and of course an increase in treatment programs. Many members opposite have stood up and asked for more treatment, particularly in the areas of young offenders, and as much as dollars would allow, we have indeed attempted to do that.
Let me end by saying that we have a system that we can be very proud of and that, not only across Canada but across North America, people look to the Ontario correctional system for models to determine how best to do things. They do see us on the cutting edge. What are we doing about these issues? There's already been identified in our multi-year expenditure reduction program a rationalization of the older institutions in an attempt to identify where we can move from older institutions to either regional institutions --
The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Could the minister conclude his response, please.
Hon Mr Christopherson: -- or to modernize the older institutions. I believe we have the matters in hand.
Mr Harris: On behalf of the taxpayers of Ontario, let me ask you this: Have you or has anyone official in your ministry contacted the province of New Brunswick or Saskatchewan or Alberta or Manitoba or PEI or BC or Quebec or Nova Scotia or Newfoundland to find out how it is that they are able to provide, on a per capita basis, the correction facilities that the auditor says are equally as good as ours at far less cost than us? If you have not contacted them as to how they're able to do it so much more efficiently, why have you not?
Hon Mr Christopherson: There are obviously provincial and national conferences of heads of correctional systems that do indeed meet on a regular basis and share information and exchange new technologies and new ideas and new methods of providing such an important service to the public.
Let me point out again to the honourable member, though, that we are only one of I believe two jurisdictions that have the young offenders in the correctional system. Again, that requires more staff. It implies and includes a need for a greater intensity of staff and also to provide programs for young offenders.
Let me also say very clearly again that if you look at our newer facilities -- and it's in the report -- the newer facilities are not only as efficient as the system the member talks about; they are more efficient than the system that the member talks about. It's when you include the older, inefficient, quite frankly ancient buildings that are in our system that the numbers and the averages start to drop. I've already addressed how we're planning to address that.
The Speaker: New question.
Mr Harris: The auditor has pointed out we're last and worst of every province in the country and you want to defend that.
SCHOOL CURRICULUM
Mr Michael D. Harris (Nipissing): Let me go with my second question to the Minister of Education. In section 3.07 of the auditor's report today, the Provincial Auditor found that the development and the delivery of the curriculum in our schools was not cost-effective, that there was massive duplication of effort. You've had this report now in your ministry for at least several months. Given the very scarce resources that are available for education, could you tell us how much this duplication of effort is costing and what is your plan to end it?
Hon David S. Cooke (Minister of Education and Training): What I can say to the leader of the third party is that I certainly agree that not only the development of curriculum in the province but the whole principle of the need to share services can be extended from one end of this province to the other in the school system, and between the Catholic system and the public school system.
We have been extensively involved with the school boards to develop curriculum consortiums so that they work together. That's particularly obvious in northern Ontario, where they do work together to develop a curriculum, but that has to become the norm. I would extend it much further than just curriculum development. Services, shared personnel -- that has to become the name of the game. Millions of dollars can and need to be saved in our education system.
Mr Harris: Even more disturbing for our parents is the fact that the auditor found that there is not an adequate system in place for determining whether our schools are offering a curriculum which is of consistent quality. He confirmed the findings of previous tests that tell us that our students do not have the knowledge and do not have the skills they need.
Could you explain to me why it is that other provinces score consistently higher in math and science than we do in Ontario? For example, Alberta, as we found out, on a per-pupil basis, is spending far less than we are in Ontario. Our per-pupil cost is far in excess of what they're spending in Alberta and yet, when we finally do the tests, we find out they're first and we're last. How come?
Hon Mr Cooke: First of all, the leader doesn't have to yell the question; I can hear it. But the fact of the matter is that the testing and the evaluation that's going on in the education system in the province of Ontario today under this government is more extensive than it has ever been in the history of the province, because we're determined to make this system accountable to the people of the province.
You will say, "Don't point the fingers," but the fact of the matter is that much of what we're testing now in the province is the product of an education system that you had control over for many, many years. We're doing the best that we can in changing the system, by bringing in a common curriculum for grades 1 to 9, which we've brought in, by bringing in province-wide testing and national testing, by being involved in a national approach to education, to start having some consistency in curriculum across the country.
We're doing a lot in this province to change and improve the education system, which we've had control over for only three years and which you had control over for 42 years.
Mr Harris: Minister, let's deal with the reality we have today. We pushed and we pushed the former government and your government to get into testing, national testing that can be compared nationally and internationally. Let me acknowledge that you finally, when we fired the other Minister of Education, did reverse the policy of the last nine years and start testing.
Now, what I want to know is, what are you doing with the results? What we have discovered is that even in grade 6 -- when my party left office these kids were about two years old. You can criticize them, if you want, you can go back to George Drew, if you want, but the fact of the matter is that Ontario kids used to stack up better nationally and around the world than they do after the last 10 years. There is just absolutely no question about that.
You can deal with the rhetoric if you want. These kids were two years old when we were in government. Now that we've pushed you into the testing, to get back into the national testing, now that we've pushed you into that, now that you've discovered that, in spite of the fact that we spend far more money than Alberta, our kids are not doing as well, I want to know, what are you doing about it on behalf of taxpayers, on behalf of parents and on behalf of the students in this province?
Hon Mr Cooke: I think it's rather simplistic to just compare and say Alberta versus Ontario. You know as well as I do that we have a very, very diverse and different population that offers us some very different challenges in the education system.
But don't tell me that you pushed us into making the education system more accountable in the province of Ontario. For 42 years you resisted accountability. You fluffed it off to the local level and you did nothing to keep Ontario's education system modern, to meet the challenges of the 1970s and the 1980s. You may want to look back at the good old days, but the good old days were not so hot in this province under your government.
1430
Interjections.
The Speaker: Order.
Hon Mr Cooke: What we're trying to do is make the system more accountable, and we'll do it.
Interjections.
The Speaker: It's a good thing the minister wasn't provocative.
WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD
Mr Steven W. Mahoney (Mississauga West): My question is to the Minister of Labour. Chapter 3.21 of the auditor's report deals with the unfunded liability at the Workers' Compensation Board. The auditor points out that more than a year has elapsed since the WCB conducted an exercise to outline possible approaches to future funding. To quote:
"The absence of a defined board strategy for the unfunded liability and insufficient action to manage and control this liability would have a negative impact on the future of the workers' compensation system."
The auditor recommends, "We recommend that a strategy to deal with the unfunded liability be developed and implemented as quickly and effectively as possible."
Your vice-chair, Mr Brian King, says, "The board of directors hopes to develop and adopt a strategic plan by late 1993 or early 1994."
Minister, we can't get much later in 1993 than where we are right now. Will you assure this House that your board at the WCB and your vice-chair will indeed develop and adopt a strategy to deal with its unfunded liability as quickly as humanly possible?
Hon Bob Mackenzie (Minister of Labour): I can tell the honourable member that yes, that's one of the things we're working on, and we'll do it as quickly as we can.
Mr Mahoney: Well, at least he didn't pass it off as being arm's-length. It's nice to know that perhaps you're trying to do something.
I want to follow up on an additional question. The vice-chair goes on to say, "The board of directors" -- and this is somewhat ironic, considering what we were talking about yesterday about the rate increases -- "has set tighter targets on costs rather than increase assessment rates."
I recognize that for the year past, but yesterday of course we saw increases in excess of 25% for over 27,000 companies. We know that costs have gone up by 50%. We know that claims are down by 30%. I don't know what the board has been doing, Mr Minister. I don't know what you've been doing. We need some assurance that you're going to take the bull by the horns in this.
The auditor points out that the workers' compensation system is in serious jeopardy due to the lack of a strategy by the board. Minister, will you give us a target date? When are you going to come into this House with a plan and get this thing in order and clean up this mess at the Workers' Compensation Board?
Hon Mr Mackenzie: When the member across the way starts talking about those businesses that are facing increases as a result of a reclassification at the board, I wish he would deal with the logging industry, which is down 3%; the nickel mines, which are down 6%; primary smelting and refining industries, which are down 22%; hospitals, which are down 8%. I never hear of the 50,000 businesses that are seeing decreases in their charges for WCB.
When it comes to trying to come up with the answer to the unfunded liability, the government across the way started in 1984. That fell out of place a bit with the economic recession we've had over the last period of time, and it's one of the things we will be dealing with as quickly as we can.
TEACHERS' DISPUTE
Mr Ernie L. Eves (Parry Sound): I have a question for the Minister of Education. As the Minister of Education will know, the east Parry Sound secondary panel strike is now in its 20th instructional day in a semester system.
The minister will also know that last Friday, a day and a half of mediation broke off.
It was suggested to both parties by the Education Relations Commission that they adopt a dispute-settling mechanism similar to your legislation, sir, in the elementary strike. The board agreed. The teachers declined. Are you going to introduce legislation to terminate this dispute?
Hon David S. Cooke (Minister of Education and Training): In my view, and I've communicated this to the board and the teachers, there is no reason why the schools cannot be open tomorrow. The teachers should agree to the package that was presented in the legislation at the elementary level. That was communicated very clearly to the federation and I expect a response from it today.
Mr Eves: I agree with everything the minister just said, but the reality is that the Legislature's going to be adjourning in a few short days. The reality is the teachers did not accept that proposal last Friday when the talks broke off. The ERC is about as blunt and direct as I've ever seen it be in its press release of last Friday. Why will you not bring in back-to-work legislation?
The teachers were given that opportunity; they declined. Will you, sir, now assume your responsibility and put these students back in the classroom so we don't have to come back here in the middle of January to legislate them and other students back?
Hon Mr Cooke: First of all, I have not received a report from the Education Relations Commission, and the member knows the law, knows the process.
I have directly communicated, as has the Education Relations Commission, with the board and the OSSTF, and I'm hoping there will be a decision from the teachers that will accept the proposal that was in the legislation last week. I hope that decision will come today. I'm losing my patience, just as you are.
POLICE SERVICES
Mr Larry O'Connor (Durham-York): My question is to the Solicitor General. Mr Minister, are you aware that in this House I've been presenting petition after petition on the concern about the closure of the Beaverton OPP detachment, and are you aware that these officers patrol Highways 48 and 12 and that the closing of this could have a detrimental effect on my constituents?
Hon David Christopherson (Solicitor General): Let me first acknowledge and compliment the member for Durham-York for his tenacity on this issue and constantly talking to me on behalf of his constituents and their concerns.
I am of course aware of the OPP review of the operations at the Beaverton detachment and the review to determine whether savings can be achieved by having those services provided from other detachments. Let me say, however, that in doing that review, the OPP has consistently remained committed to ensuring that all of the communities we serve receive the kind of service and the kind of response time that is in their interests and that they deserve to have. I'm confident that the OPP will also do this in this regard and that the residents will be, as is OPP policy, an integral part of the review process, to ensure that their concerns are being addressed.
Mr O'Connor: Minister, I appreciate that. Part of the difficulty I have is that the OPP detachment there has been very involved in the community. They've got a community policing program that I think is second to none. They've been involved in many elements of safety in the community. They've been involved with the committee trying to develop a coordinated response for domestic assault situations. The community policing program I think is very integral and key to the community. Minister, would you ensure that this is going to remain a part of the community? There's a meeting tomorrow night on this very issue.
Hon Mr Christopherson: Let me say without hesitation that the commitment of the OPP to community policing, where we are now present across Ontario, is a priority, and that yes, he has the commitment that the type of involvement the OPP has in our communities in moving to a broader scope of community policing will indeed not only remain but will expand as we move into the new type of policing in Ontario that is necessary to meet the needs of fiscal constraint but also the expanding needs of our communities at the community level.
On the last issue, let me just say to the honourable member that I'm advised there will indeed be a senior OPP officer present at his town hall meeting this evening.
CHILDREN'S SERVICES
Mr Charles Beer (York North): My question is to the Minister of Community and Social Services with respect to the provision of children's services. The auditor in a number of instances in his report comments on this area -- and this happening on the morning when we learn that the Institute for the Prevention of Child Abuse has had its budget cut. I know the minister wants to ensure that children in this province are receiving the kinds of services they need.
1440
Minister, on page 40 the auditor deals specifically with the child and family intervention services program. He notes that the demand for services far exceeds the services available and that many agencies have extensive waiting lists. But he then goes on to note: "The ministry does not collect, consolidate, or monitor waiting list information, and agencies are not required to report this data. However, data maintained by 20 of the agencies we tested indicated that approximately 1,500 children were on their waiting lists."
Finally, the auditor says, "There is also no general prioritization to determine which children are most in need."
My question to the minister is simply this: Can you tell us that starting today the Ministry of Community and Social Services will collect, consolidate and monitor information, and can you tell us how you will do that and ensure that those kids most in need will in fact get those services?
Hon Tony Silipo (Minister of Community and Social Services): I think it's useful to have the observations of the auditor in a situation like this because, as the member will know, as he has also been in the position that I am, the issue of addressing a waiting list in any given program, and certainly in this one, is on the one hand a very sensitive issue and on the other hand an issue to which there probably, at the end of the day, is never a complete answer in terms of ever being able to say that one has met all of the needs out there for all of the young people who are out there.
Certainly we will look very carefully at the recommendations made by the auditor. In the ministry response that's outlined in the report on the same page the member read from there's an indication that, through the policy framework of children's services, we are looking at how to target resources in a better way. Some of that work, I can tell the member, is well under way, and certainly the issue of monitoring and looking at the question of waiting lists will be part of the work we will want to pursue. It is important, to the extent that we can, that we also give some sense out there, working with the agencies, that we in fact are aware of the extent of the needs that need to be met and are working with our agencies to try to cater and to focus the resources we have --
The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Could the minister conclude his response, please.
Hon Mr Silipo: -- in the most effective way possible.
Mr Beer: The question is important, because one of the comments the auditor made during the discussion of his report earlier today was that he was concerned about the lack of knowledge that he felt the ministry had in being able to make decisions.
Minister, this leads me to my second question, because again in the auditor's report mention is made on several occasions of the document Children First. For three years we have been waiting for this government to come forward with a comprehensive, integrated program for the coordination of children's services, and for three years nothing has happened.
When you look at the comments made by the auditor, when you look at articles that have been in the press and on television over the course of the last several months regarding the whole area of the provision of children's services, what we are crying out for and what we need is for this government to come forward with an integrated approach to children's services.
Minister, you would have the support, I know, both of the Liberal and Conservative caucuses in dealing --
The Speaker: Could the member conclude his question, please.
Mr Beer: -- with this issue and acting positively. Can you tell this House when you will be coming back with a comprehensive, integrated program for the provision of children's services?
Hon Mr Silipo: I don't think it's a question of picking a point in time and saying, "Now we've got the fully integrated plan." I think it's a question of continuing to work our way through a number of initiatives including, as the member knows, the policy framework, which we are now not just talking about but which we are using as a tool in working with our agencies locally to address many of the concerns and issues that were put before us through the Children First document.
I think that's a more effective way of ensuring that we are not simply talking about this issue but that in the local planning that's going on at the area level of the ministry and working with the agencies, in fact that planning is happening on a year-to-year basis.
The Speaker: Order, please. Could I ask all members if they would quietly yet quickly move by the front door. Please do not use the government lobby. Would you go down the main staircase and out of the building. We have a concern with respect to safety. Would all visitors in the galleries please move immediately.
The House recessed from 1446 to 1652.
Hon Brian A. Charlton (Government House Leader): Mr Speaker, I would suggest that perhaps we consider an additional 15-minute recess while members get back in for the resumption of the proceedings.
The Speaker: I realize it's a bit awkward. Is that agreeable? Agreed. We are recessed for 15 minutes.
The House recessed from 1652 to 1707.
Report continues in volume B.