Journal des débats 1994-mai-05 | Assemblée législative de l'Ontario

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Parkdale): I wish to inform the members of this House and the public of an important event that will take place tomorrow at 12 noon in the media studio. The residents near the Queen St Mental Health Centre will again voice their immense displeasure, at this press conference, with the flawed decision-making process in the Ministry of Health.

Ministry officials approved the building of a 20-bed security unit for the criminally insane. The decision to locate this unit on Queen Street shows a total lack of sensitivity towards our community's constant and well-documented wishes for this NDP government to stop adding additional social service projects in this part of the city. Local residents and even elected representatives of her own party were not informed and therefore not given an opportunity to provide input.

We're concerned that the Ministry of Health has become unaccountable to the very community it is to serve. We expect the minister to personally review this decision to locate this 20-bed facility for the criminally insane in the heart of our community in crisis and we hope she will explore with us alternative locations which are much more appropriate.

YOUNG OFFENDERS

Mr David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel): I rise in the House today to urge the Minister of Correctional Services and the Attorney General to join me in lobbying the federal Minister of Justice, Allan Rock, and solve the problem of young offenders escaping from open-custody correctional facilities.

In my riding Camp Dufferin is an open-custody correctional facility that treats young offenders. In the last year alone, 30 young offenders have escaped from Camp Dufferin. These escapes are causing concern and stress among local residents of Mulmur township.

I would like to make two suggestions that would at least partially solve the problem of escapes from open-custody facilities. I have written the federal Minister of Justice, Allan Rock, asking him to change the rules so that young offenders who have escaped must serve the remainder of their sentence in a locked facility. I believe this would deter many young offenders from escaping in the first place.

The second suggestion I have is that he allow more local decisions to be made as to whether a young offender should be serving his sentence in a young offender facility or adult custody.

When young offenders commit a crime close to their 18th birthday, they are still considered young offenders and therefore serve their sentences beyond the age of 18 in a young offender facility such as Camp Dufferin. I believe we have to give more control to the staff of these facilities so they can make decisions based on the welfare of other prisoners as well as the community at large. I'm asking the Minister of Correctional Services and the Attorney General to join me to protect the community surrounding facilities such as Camp Dufferin.

ONTARIO FARM WOMEN'S NETWORK

Mr Larry O'Connor (Durham-York): I am pleased to inform the House of an outstanding effort of the Ontario Farm Women's Network and to inform the members of the OFWN's Community Action Forum, being held at the University of Guelph tomorrow.

The OFWN is an organization of concerned men and women dedicated to confronting the very serious issue of domestic abuse in farm and rural areas. The OFWN recognizes the very unique characteristics of rural communities and the unique problems that face them and the women who live in those communities.

This month is Sexual Assault Prevention Month, which seeks to remind us all of the immense pain and suffering felt by all women escaping abusive domestic situations. But the OFWN reminds us all of the unique characteristic of domestic abuse situations in rural areas: "When an abused farm women leaves her home, she also leaves her job and her assets."

To help address and confront this very serious problem, the OFWN is sponsoring Friday's workshop, entitled Building Support for Community Action. Over 100 participants will be drawn from government, social service organizations and community groups from right across the province to build partnerships and to network to confront and to end domestic rural abuse.

I am pleased to have an opportunity to join my colleague from Guelph to attend this important workshop tomorrow and invite all members of the House to join me in congratulating and offering support to the OFWN's efforts to end violence against our women in the rural communities of Ontario.

PITCH-IN WEEK

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): I would like to take this opportunity to recognize a very special event that is taking place throughout Ontario, and indeed the world, this week. May 2 through May 8 has been declared Pitch-In Week. This is an international litter control and environmental enhancement campaign taking place in communities throughout Ontario, Canada and the rest of the world.

Throughout this week hundreds of thousands of people in Ontario will be volunteering their time and energy to enhance our beautiful province. They will join more than 30 million other volunteers worldwide in recognizing tomorrow, Friday, May 6, as Clean World Day.

In Ontario, the Pitch-In Week campaign has enjoyed a great deal of success so far. Whether it is communities signing up to keep roadways clean through the Adopt-A-Highway program or Boy Scouts and Girl Guides participating in litter control programs in urban and rural areas or members of local fish and game clubs enhancing the quality of wetlands throughout the province, each volunteer is making an extremely valuable and worthwhile contribution to cleaning up our environment and making this world a better place in which to live.

I would like to commend the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters, all of those community groups, school children, conservation organizations and other associations and individuals who are taking the time out to participate in the 1994 Pitch-In Week campaign.

HEALTH INSURANCE

Mr David Turnbull (York Mills): The NDP's latest attack on one of the basic principles of our medicare system, namely, portability, is unconscionable. The average cost of a one-day hospital stay in Ontario is approximately $400. An arbitrary NDP decision to pay no more than $100 a day for a hospital stay incurred by an Ontarian who needs emergency medical treatment while travelling outside Canada violates the Canada Health Act. This government is eroding our health care system and breaking the law.

The people of York Mills have repeatedly demanded that government apply common sense to all policy-making and spending decisions, particularly in the realm of health care. The Progressive Conservative Party has heard this plea and responded with the Common Sense Revolution. Our plan guarantees full funding for health care. Health care spending is an essential service far too important too cut.

1340

We will revolutionize the way government does business in Ontario and restore the health care system. A Tory government will cut provincial income tax by 30% over three years. Some of the income tax savings will be reinvested in our health care system through a fair share health care levy. The amount of the levy will depend on one's ability to pay. People making less than $50,000 a year will pay nothing. There will be no new user fees under the PC plan.

The PC plan meets the test of fairness and requirements under the Canada Health Act. A Tory government will protect --

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): The member's time has expired.

SMALL BUSINESS

Mr Jim Wiseman (Durham West): I rise today to draw the attention of this House and the general public to a travesty of justice and what I can only describe as a campaign to fool the public, the media and the elected officials of this country.

I refer to the ad campaigns by the major banks which are trying to convince people, and elected officials in particular, that they are good to small and medium-sized business and that they are increasing their loans to small and medium-sized business when the facts do not support their claim and the real-life experience of my constituents prove the opposite.

From 1989 to 1992 banks have decreased their loans to small businesses by $3.57 billion. These activities of the banks fly in the face of their ads that say they are good lenders to small and medium-sized business.

In my riding businesses have told me banks do not lend to small businesses and lines of credit are being withdrawn and loans are being called. This would not be unacceptable behaviour, except that it is happening to businesses that have not missed a payment and have in no way given the banks cause for alarm.

This is happening to businesses that have survived the recession and are just now beginning to prosper, only to have their economic legs pulled out from under them, leaving them no choice but to put employees on unemployment insurance and for the owners to go on welfare, thus slowing up the economic recovery.

It is time for this to stop. I call on all members of this House to join me in calling on the federal government to reform the Bank Act and put an end to this uncontrolled destruction of the economy.

NEWSPAPER CARTOON

Mr Robert Chiarelli (Ottawa West): Yesterday the Toronto Sun ran an editorial cartoon which sent a very disturbing message about Sexual Assault Prevention Month. The cartoon was an unflattering caricature of the Attorney General with a caption that implied that only attractive women are victims of sexual assault.

As the member for Sudbury so rightly pointed out yesterday, sexual assault is not about attractiveness. It is about anger and hate, it is about violence against women, regardless of their age, physical build or mental capacity.

What is perhaps more disturbing than the original cartoon is the newspaper's defence of it. It is hard to believe that a newspaper which prints a cartoon such as this and then defends it thinks we will believe that it takes the issue of sexual assault seriously.

A Statistics Canada survey conducted last fall showed that more than half of all Canadian women have been physically or sexually assaulted in their lifetimes. This is not a joke. The sexual assault of women is not something to be made light of. The victims of sexual assaults deserve better than a cartoon that mocks sincere efforts at raising awareness of violence against women.

We will also be lodging a complaint with the press council over this frightening and repulsive cartoon.

CHILDREN'S SERVICES

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Waterloo North): On Tuesday our leader, Mike Harris, announced a new and innovative plan for restoring hope, optimism and prosperity in this province. It is called the Common Sense Revolution.

One of the key components in this document is the very strong commitment by our party to protecting our children, especially those in need, those children who live in poverty. By supporting the children who face the greatest challenges, we will protect our single most important investment for the future.

Our targeted programs for children in need will be community-based and they will include a community nutrition program for school-aged children; a program entitled Learning and Earning and Parenting, to encourage young parents on welfare to stay in school; and homework assistance centres to help motivate students to improve their school work.

We will also introduce a badly needed mandatory mediation program to resolve many of the problems which families encounter during a separation.

Further, the aim of The Common Sense Revolution is to free our children from the legacy of deficits and debt which all previous governments have created. Our children should not have to pay for the reckless spending of our generation.

DOWNTOWN OSHAWA BOARD OF MANAGEMENT

Mr Drummond White (Durham Centre): It gives me great pleasure to inform the House about a dynamic group of business people in Oshawa who make up the Downtown Oshawa Board of Management and are using that organization to make sure that downtown Oshawa thrives just like the rest of Durham region. They're working hard not only to attract new business and organizations to the downtown but also to maintain existing jobs in the heart of Oshawa.

People like Kevin Campbell, the chair, and Brenda Snowdon, the administrator, of this organization have put in countless hours in the past few months to try to persuade the region of Durham not to move 200 jobs in social services out of downtown Oshawa. Along with them here today in the members' gallery is the mayor of Oshawa, Nancy Diamond, who supports their effort.

They have proposed creative, cost-saving solutions. They have circulated petitions and lobbied politicians at three levels of government, asking for their support in revitalizing Oshawa's downtown core. Downtown Oshawa businesses face severe setbacks. Rather than succumbing to resignation or defeat, the Downtown Oshawa Board of Management has shown resiliency, innovation and determination.

I would like to applaud the efforts of this group. They deserve encouragement for focusing on a significant problem. They deserve support as they build a community spirit in the downtown area.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): It is now time for oral questions. The member for Halton Centre.

ORAL QUESTIONS

Mrs Barbara Sullivan (Halton Centre): My question is to the Minister of Community and Social Services, but I don't see the minister in the House. Can I stand down this question for now and have the clock stopped so that we can proceed with our second question?

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): A second leadoff question.

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): Mr Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Natural Resources. I don't believe he's in the House, as are very few ministers. Could I have the opportunity to stand this question down?

The Speaker: I cannot be of assistance to the member. There is a quorum in the House and there are ministers present and it is now time for oral questions. I appreciate the members' difficulty.

Mr Steven W. Mahoney (Mississauga West): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Could we ask for unanimous consent to delay question period until the ministers we wish to address are here?

The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent to delay? No, there is not. A leadoff question, the member for Leeds-Grenville.

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): I'd like to make a point that the opposition parties are advised prior to question period who the ministers will be in terms of presence in the House on a given day. Our questions are prepared on the basis of that information provided by the government. When question period is called and those ministers are not present in the House, how can we proceed with question period?

The Speaker: I understand the honourable member's concern and I appreciate the discomfort that's created when lists indicate one thing and something else occurs, but I cannot be of assistance to the member. I'm not privy to those pieces of paper, nor should I be. All I can go on is that there is a quorum in the House and there are ministers present and this is question period. Two questions have been stood down.

Mr Murray J. Elston (Bruce): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: We took up two and a half minutes with that, waiting for the ministers to appear. Could you put the time back on, please?

The Speaker: I understand the member's concern. Indeed, if I understood what was provided by the member for Leeds-Grenville, there were certain expectations with respect to attendance of particular ministers. In fairness, we can start the clock over at 60. And now the member can place her first question.

1350

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

Mrs Barbara Sullivan (Halton Centre): My question is to the Minister of Community and Social Services. Mr Speaker, as you will recall, yesterday the leader of the official opposition, Lyn McLeod, spoke to the issue of the shocking level of youth unemployment in Ontario. Today I want to turn to another area where our children and youth have been seriously adversely affected by the actions of this government, and I believe this is a crisis issue.

Young people with mental health problems are very vulnerable and are among the most ignored in our society. Continued cutbacks in services for them make them even more seriously threatened.

At the end of July, Chedoke-McMaster Hospital will close its 10-bed treatment facility for teenagers with serious psychiatric problems. The B'nai Brith Cottage, as you know, Mr Speaker, and as the minister will know, has treated children from the Hamilton area for over 20 years. In an average year they treat 20 young people on an inpatient basis, and they treat additional numbers of people on an outpatient basis, for which there's a six- to nine-month waiting list. The hospital has no money to help these young people.

This government promised there would be no serious adverse effects due to social contract and expenditure control cuts, but I'm asking the Minister of Community and Social Services if, when these cuts were fashioned, there was any account taken of the very serious adverse effects of the social contract and expenditure control plan on our very vulnerable young people with serious mental health problems.

Hon Tony Silipo (Minister of Community and Social Services): The short answer is yes. Obviously, when we looked at the social contract proposals, we made a number of allowances for areas where we knew we were dealing with situations such as the one the member has described. Particularly in the approach we took in the social services sector, which was to apply an overall reduction to each of the agencies and to the sector as a whole, part of the reason for us taking that approach was because we recognized the particular nature of the sector.

In the instance the member is indicating, I don't have the details in front of me, but I believe it's a situation in which there is funding both from the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Community and Social Services. In those kinds of services, we went further and took some additional steps to ensure that the proportion of the reduction under the social contract was congruent with the proportion of funds that were flowing from each of the two ministries; that is, that we were not applying the health sector approach to situations like that, but that we were taking a prorated cut on the basis of the portion of funds that were coming from the Ministry of Health and from the Ministry of Community and Social Services.

Mrs Sullivan: The minister speaks of cuts from two ministries. In fact, they took a cut on the basis of three hits: the social contract and expenditure control in the Ministry of Health, the social contract and expenditure control from Comsoc, plus an additional hit through the child and family services agencies, which also had those same cuts applied to them.

It is impossible for this hospital to operate those beds. They have made an urgent appeal to your deputy minister to have the situation reviewed and funding restored so that these very vulnerable young people can receive the treatment they need. They're looking for any way, any way possible, to keep those beds open and to keep those children under treatment and receiving the services so they can become productive members of our society.

Their appeal was refused by your deputy minister, and now 10 more beds have disappeared and waiting lists are constantly growing. For the parents and children who can't find care and who will only find themselves and their children in more difficulty when that centre closes in June, I am asking you what relief they can expect from the new budget or from any other interventions and urgent action you're prepared to take.

Hon Mr Silipo: Specifically on the reference the member makes to the child and family services cut, which I'm assuming refers to the expenditure control cuts that were made and that affected some of the agencies, I can tell her, as I've indicated from the time that action was taken, that we have continued to monitor that particular situation against the expectations that we had of how the money could be found by agencies without affecting services, and clearly we have learned that there will be further impacts on services than we had anticipated. So I'm anticipating that there are some improvements we can make in that situation.

I don't know whether this will answer the specific question about this particular program and hospital that the member is addressing, but I certainly would be prepared to take a look at that particular instance to see whether there is anything further that needs to be done or can be done.

I can tell the member that I am meeting next week with the representatives of the provincial organizations of a variety of children's services agencies and others we serve, to outline to them what steps we believe we can take to assist in managing the reductions, in fact even in appeasing some of the problems that have been caused by the reductions, based on the information we have received through that in-depth survey that was just completed recently.

Mrs Sullivan: One of the young women who is a resident of the B'nai Brith centre said last night that she firmly is convinced that without the treatment she has received there she would either be in jail or she would be dead. The treatment provided at the B'nai Brith centre is so extraordinarily important to these young people, I can't emphasize to you how important this treatment is. They have been refused an appeal that will enable them to keep those beds open to enable the trained experts to provide the services those children so desperately need and that their families are crying out for.

We've been talking a lot in the House recently about increases in crime, and impacts on young people of inadequate services available to them. What do you have to say now to the young woman who says she would be dead or in jail without those services and to the other young people whose lives could perhaps lead in other very deleterious directions?

Hon Mr Silipo: Without in any way wanting to be seen to be diminishing the importance of the point the member is making, I think it's also important that we not dramatize in these kinds of situations. I'm sure that all of us could find examples of situations of people who are in real need, in any area of service that we as a province and as a government are involved in providing.

I think the issue is, how do we better use the dollars we have? We know we're in a situation in which we are not going to have piles of new money. The question we have been putting and the issue we have been putting and the point I want to make directly to the member opposite today, that I will be making directly to the agencies in the meeting I'm having with them next week, which I alluded to earlier, is that we have to come to grips with the situation we are facing and together do better planning.

We have ensured, and I can tell the member that we continue to ensure, that in individual situations people are served to the best of the capacities of the system across the province, and whenever there are situations such as the one the member has pointed out, we from the ministry -- and locally I know efforts also are under way -- try to deal with those issues. There can always be individual circumstances that are brought to the floor of this Legislature.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Could the minister conclude his response, please.

Hon Mr Silipo: We have to be careful not to generalize from that and say, "If you only did this, the problem would be resolved." There are bigger problems that have to be looked at in the whole context. We need to have our agencies working together to say, how can we better prioritize the dollars we have? How can we better utilize the dollars we have to ensure that the range of needs is being addressed?

1400

PROVINCIAL PARKS

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): I have a question for the Minister of Natural Resources. On this side of the House, we thought the "Keep It Wild" campaign related to parks; we were not aware that it related to a management style of the minister.

The minister did not announce in the House on Monday, as we would have hoped -- that he at least would have told the public he had closed Aaron, Carson Lake, Devil's Glen, Ferris, MacLeod, Selkirk, Foy and Sioux Narrows provincial parks.

You claim that by doing this you're going to save $275,000. You have acknowledged, however, that this will cost the province of Ontario's economy and the local economies $7 million in economic activity. We are concerned also with the other side of the equation, and that is the revenue you would have got from $7 million of economic activity.

You are laying off 40 people, you are not hiring summer students, you've closed 400 campsites, and you've kept 54,000 people, the number using those parks every year, from enjoying what we as Ontarians have taken to be very important. In the year following the centennial of our parks system, Minister, could you tell us why you closed them?

Hon Howard Hampton (Minister of Natural Resources): I'm very happy to answer the member's question. The reality is that we have 259 parks in the Ontario provincial parks system. Over the last year, we have worked to add a number of protected areas, ecologically sensitive areas, geologically important areas, to the list, and we feel very good about that.

But the reality is that we have a number of recreation parks in the system that do not earn or pay their own way, and in tough economic times such as we are in now, we have to make some difficult choices about whether we can operate all those parks. Some of these parks require substantial subsidies every year.

I would put it to the member this way: We have choices about curtailing health care costs, and the opposition says to us, "Don't curtail health care costs." We have choices about funding school systems, and the opposition says those should be funded. When that happens, we have to make some difficult choices about the things we can't fund. We have decided that some of those parks that do not pay their own way, and in fact require subsidies of $80,000 or $100,000 a year, should not operate this year.

I am not closing them; there's been no act of closure here. They simply will not operate this year. People can still go and visit them. People can still hike through them. People can still engage in other activities, but we will not have any operating staff in those locations.

Mrs Elinor Caplan (Oriole): They're not closed. They're just not open.

Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora): I'd really like to know what the difference is between closure and not operating the parks this year.

Minister, as you know, one of those parks, Sioux Narrows Provincial Park, is located in my riding of Kenora. We know this park contains 43 regular campsites and affords opportunities for thousands of visitors to the area each year. The economic and social benefits which flow to the local area from this park are very significant. Indeed, the township of Sioux Narrows and the Whitefish Bay First Nation have both written to you and copied me on letters indicating the park's economic, social and cultural importance to their local area.

Let me quote from the letter from the township of Sioux Narrows: "This park employs seven people during the season, some who have worked there for a number of years. What happens to these people now?"

Also, the Whitefish Bay First Nation has voiced their concerns in a letter dated April 28. They say to you, "This is very discouraging, considering the social and economic problems that our community is faced with."

Minister, what do you have to say to the local businesses and governments in my area, those who depend upon the tourists attracted to the Sioux Narrows area?

Hon Mr Hampton: I know the Sioux Narrows area well; I visit the area often. I can say to the member opposite that there are a number of private campgrounds in the area. Rushing River Provincial Park is located within 40 kilometres. Caliper Lake campground is located very close as well. We are not in any way lowering or reducing the tourism capacity of Sioux Narrows.

I want to say to the member as well that the park in Sioux Narrows requires revenue from the ministry's parks branch of $132,000 a year and produces revenue of only $37,000 a year. We get lectures every day from the Liberal Party, which could not balance the books of the province in good times, lectures every day about how we should make tough choices. We are not going to subsidize this park to the tune of $80,000 this year. That's a tough choice, but that is better than curtailing costs, health care, education and making the tougher choices there.

People who want to visit that park can visit it; people who want to hike through it can hike through it; people who want to bird-watch in it can do those kinds of activities. We simply will not have any operating staff this year, because we don't have the money to do it.

Mrs Joan M. Fawcett (Northumberland): I don't know whether the minister recognizes this, but this is your ministry's guide to Ferris Provincial Park, which, I might add, is still being advertised and is available in your information office. This park in my riding offers much as a tourist attraction to the Campbellford area. It offers plenty of opportunity to pursue outdoor activities such as camping, boating, fishing and exploring.

What is really upsetting to me as the provincial representative is that this park did not have to close. The town of Campbellford has made proposals to you in the past to reach a cooperative management plan agreement to not only keep the park open but to increase its use. It is shameful that your government has decided to close down this park which, I can tell you, was originally created through the donation of 161 acres of land by Kathleen Ferris in 1960. Many members of the community really feel that the wishes of the Ferris family in donating this land to the province are not being honoured.

Minister, why have you not looked at alternatives to closing Ferris park and all the provincial parks you have decided to axe, in an effort to keep these important natural places within the provincial park system and attract tourists to local communities which depend upon them for a large part of their economy?

Hon Mr Hampton: I get the impression that the Liberal research office is having a tough time. These parks are not being removed from the provincial parks system. They remain as part of the provincial parks system, they remain as protected areas. People who want to explore in these parks can still do so, people who want to hike in these parks can still do so. The difference is that we are not having any operating staff in these parks this year.

In this case, the member is asking the taxpayers of Ontario to subsidize a park in her riding that has an average occupancy in the summer of less than 15%. We would like to operate every park in the system, but given that we have a limited budget and given that we have some parks that have a very low occupancy rate, 15%, 20%, that require subsidies of $80,000 a year or $100,000 a year, we simply can't operate them all.

I want to assure Liberal research of something else: We have made the offers to local municipalities to work with them should they wish to open the parks for parts of the season. Earlier today, I spoke to two mayors and two reeves myself to extend that offer. If the member's municipalities want to operate this park in some fashion, we invite them to come forward with a proposal.

Mr Miclash: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I think the minister will want to correct his statement. He indicated that the townships were aware and had the opportunity. The town of Sioux Narrows did not --

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): The member does not have a point of order. Would the member please take his seat.

1410

REVIEW OF HOSPITAL STAFF

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): My question is for the Minister of Health. I don't know if she read a column by Lorrie Goldstein in the Toronto Sun this week, "Monster Freed to Roam Our Streets." If she had, it may have jogged her memory in respect to a letter I wrote her four months ago, on January 5, 1994.

I wrote to you asking for a performance review of the two top psychiatrists at the Brockville Psychiatric Hospital: chief psychiatrist Dr Ron Draper and forensic unit psychiatrist Dr Neil McFeely. The two doctors have been in charge when we've had two murders, one attempted murder and a number of other serious incidents involving forensic patients from the Brockville hospital.

In a decision released January 12, seven days after I wrote you, the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned a Ontario Criminal Code Review Board decision to grant an unconditional release to patient Daryl Jones. Jones had been a forensic patient since 1975 after being found not guilty by reason of insanity for the rape and attempted murder of an 18-year-old woman. In its decision to overturn Jones's release, the Court of Appeal ruled that the hospital had engaged in "a complete abdication of responsibility."

Minister, why have you not responded to my call four months ago for a staff performance review, and why have you not responded to the Ontario Court of Appeal decision?

Hon Ruth Grier (Minister of Health): I know the member will be pleased to know that there in fact has been a response to the situation at Brockville and to the recommendations from coroners' juries as a result of some of the incidents that have occurred. A forensic working group has been put together within the ministry to respond to the recommendations of one of the coroner's juries, and I asked Dr Stephen Hucker of Queen's University to do a report for me on the whole question of forensic services at Brockville Psychiatric Hospital. I received his recommendations and report earlier last month, and we are reviewing those recommendations.

Mr Runciman: That's a sad joke -- I could say a sick joke -- because these situations have been occurring year after year. I raised it with Elinor Caplan, the Liberal minister, I raised it with your predecessor, and still nothing meaningful is done.

The Hucker report is a whitewash, with all due respect. It does not deal with the Court of Appeal decision. It does not deal with the Jones release in any way, shape or form: no reference, Madam Minister, to that judgement or that decision. I want to say that people are tired of these lame excuses in respect to the release into the community of very dangerous individuals.

Less than two weeks before the court's judgement, Mr Jones, the individual in question, was charged with the second-degree murder of a 79-year-old widow in Brockville, Ruth Cohen, right in her home.

We heard today from the member for Parkdale that people are very much concerned about the Queen Street Mental Health Centre having a 20-bed forensic unit thrust upon them. They have every right to be concerned, given the track record of your ministry and the kinds of responses we get in this Legislature day after day when this issue is raised.

Minister, I ask you again: I've simply requested a performance review of two professionals in this facility who consistently have been involved with very controversial decisions which have resulted in tragic incidents in my community. When will you deal with that request?

Hon Mrs Grier: I hope the member isn't under the impression that we take this situation lightly, that we are not just as concerned as he and his constituents are.

He says it's been going on for years. I point out to him that what we have done is to begin to address some of the problems that have been identified: a lack of coordination between agencies, a lack of ability to respond to and to deal quickly with some of the incidents such as he had outlined. We take it very seriously. We have made changes, and we are continuing to work together to make sure that the kinds of incidents that are of concern to him, and of very real concern to me, don't continue to happen.

Mr Runciman: In all due respect, how can people take that kind of a response seriously?

We have the Ontario Court of Appeal saying there was a complete abdication of responsibility on the part of the staff at the hospital, a scathing indictment -- a complete abdication of responsibility.

You hire this Dr Hucker to go in there and review the situation and he doesn't even deal with it. He doesn't even make any reference to it whatsoever. How can we take you seriously in terms of you being concerned?

The federal government is now talking about firing a parole board official who may have been involved in some very controversial decisions. Here's a situation where we know -- the Ontario Court of Appeal says these people screwed up in a very serious way -- and you were not even prepared to carry out a competency review of these individuals, report to the community and report to the province at large.

Why don't you do the responsible thing? Have a competency review conducted, and if these people are incompetent and putting the public at risk, fire them.

Hon Mrs Grier: The member has been in this House long enough to know that I'm not going to respond in the House with respect to an individual case or an individual professional.

Mr Runciman: Baloney. You don't respond to anything. You had a letter four months ago and you haven't even acknowledged it.

Hon Mrs Grier: I think that for him to cause the sort of concern and raise the level of fear in his community, as he does, is most unfortunate.

Mr Runciman: On a public safety issue, you can't even -- give me a break. You're really serious? A letter four months ago, a public safety issue.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Order. The member for Leeds-Grenville, please come to order.

Hon Mrs Grier: We take extremely seriously what has happened. We brought in a very respected, competent person --

Mr Runciman: You can't even be taken seriously, Ruth, just like your friend.

The Speaker: Would the minister take her seat. Would the member for Leeds-Grenville please come to order.

PUBLIC HOUSING

Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): My question is to the Minister of Housing. Yesterday, I asked the minister about the latest social housing scandal, the police anti-corruption probe of Metro Toronto Housing Authority. The minister's replies to my questions were, at best, ignorant; at worst, evasive.

I asked what steps she would take to ensure responsible management and full accountability of the Metro Toronto Housing Authority. The minister's answers told us nothing. The minister is aggravating this scandal by hiding what she knows.

This morning the press reported that the minister has received a letter from an MTHA board member expressing concern about serious problems with the tendering process. Indeed, the minister has appointed Eloise Burke to investigate MTHA.

Minister, when did your office receive the letter from the board member, when did you first learn of the letter and when did you make the decision to appoint Eloise Burke?

Answer these questions carefully, because there are more coming.

Hon Evelyn Gigantes (Minister of Housing): The high and mighty tone of the member for Mississauga South really is beyond belief. If I thought for a moment that what the member for Mississauga South --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Would the minister take her seat, please. I'm sorry; I can't hear what the minister is saying.

Hon Ms Gigantes: If I thought for a moment that the member for Mississauga South was actually looking for an answer to a question, I'd be happy to try to respond, as I tried yesterday when she raised questions about MTHA in a setting of hyperbole and implied scandals and mismanagement and so on.

1420

There has been a police inquiry going on at MTHA. The police were called in by the manager of MTHA in the middle of last summer, and they were to investigate a very specific --

Interjections.

The Speaker: The member for Simcoe West is out of order, and I would ask his colleagues also to allow the minister the opportunity to reply to the question that was asked by the member for Mississauga South.

Hon Ms Gigantes: As I was saying before I was so rudely interrupted by the colleagues of the member for Mississauga South, the manager of MTHA notified the police last summer that she believed there was a matter they should investigate at MTHA. That investigation has been going on since then, and when it is complete, then obviously the information about that will be provided to the member for Mississauga South, as to all members of the public.

Mrs Marland: Well, this is really interesting. The minister says I have implied a scandal and in the next sentence she tells us there's been a police investigation since last summer. If the minister had stood in her place yesterday and given us some of that information, we wouldn't need to be pursuing it today. It's funny how she's done a real quick study overnight and has some answers today, and I'm glad that she's finally coming forward and telling this House what the people of this province are entitled to know.

The fact is that there are sources that are saying: "There is a cesspool of dirty deals and an elaborate kickback scheme that goes back many years. Board members say they've been kept in the dark and have been rubber-stampers. Apparently they rubber-stamped a $2-million contract renewal to contractors who had failed to complete substantial amounts of work required under their contracts. One employee said, 'Stuff like this has been going on at the MTHA for the longest time and still is, but the MTHA chooses to bury things and then move on.'"

Minister, I would like you now to tell this House what the terms of reference are for Eloise Burke's investigation of MTHA and when she will report her findings. I'm not asking for you to tell us when the police are going to report; I'm asking you to tell us what your personal appointment, Eloise Burke, is going to do and when and how.

Hon Ms Gigantes: I'd be pleased to attempt to answer a direct question without trying to address the hyperbole that goes with it. Eloise Burke was hired as a result of grave concerns that I had surrounding incidents that went along with the process of hiring an equity director at MTHA. Her terms of reference are addressed directly to a review of that hiring process, in the course of which she has been asked to look at the structure in relationship of members of the board to staff at MTHA.

Mrs Marland: It would be interesting to know what kind of relationship we're talking about between board members and staff, wouldn't it? I don't have to remind the minister, of course, that MTHA is a public agency funded by $250 million of taxpayers' money every year, and the public certainly has a right to know what is going on.

Yesterday I asked, Minister, for you to include the MTHA in the terms of reference for the public accounts committee review of two other scandals, involving Houselink and the Supportive Housing Coalition. The House leader for the third party repeated that request during a meeting of the House leaders last evening, but the government House leader refused our request.

You know, Madam Minister, as well as I do, that there's a balance of power of your members on that committee. You told us yesterday that if the public accounts committee wanted to give direction to the Provincial Auditor for a special audit, "the public accounts committee can do the same."

I would like you to know that the public accounts committee members do not work without your direction. So I would like to ask you again, will you once and for all come totally clean with the public of this province, the taxpayers of this province, as it regards MTHA and a quarter of a billion dollars and agree to include MTHA in the terms of reference of the public accounts committee review in order that you don't have to stand in the House and defend what you say I'm suggesting are scandals?

Hon Ms Gigantes: I utterly reject the allegations which are being made by the member for Mississauga South that there are scandals involved with non-profit housing. Those matters are going to be before the public accounts committee, and I hope she will busy herself with learning the facts of what has happened in the audits which were undertaken, initiated first by the Liberal government, one of them, and then continued by ours.

Mrs Marland: We wouldn't even be having it if we hadn't asked for it. You have known for 10 months and haven't told us. You've known since last summer and you've never told us anything.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Ms Gigantes: On the question of MTHA non-profit housing rent control, this member would like to paralyse MTHA for the moment. She wants to fold down non-profit housing, she wants to increase the shelter allowance, which is now at over $2.6 billion a year to private landlords, and she wants to get rid of rent control. What is her housing policy?

The Speaker: New question, the honourable member for Mississauga North.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe West): She can't ask herself a question.

The Speaker: The member for Simcoe West remains out of order.

Mr Jim Wilson: Well, it's perfectly correct. Her tone was intolerable.

Interjections.

Mrs Marland: Our housing policy is not to have scandals.

Interjections.

The Speaker: The member for Durham East. Would the member for Mississauga South please come to order.

The member for Mississauga North has been waiting patiently.

CONTAMINATED SOIL

Mr Steven Offer (Mississauga North): I have a question to the Minister of Environment and Energy, and it concerns another instance where your government has authorized the use of contaminated material as landfill cover, this time in the Ottawa area.

Soil contaminated by a 4,000-litre gasoline spill which occurred last year at the Caltex gas station in Orléans forced residents of a nearby house to relocate because of the noxious fumes and hazardous materials associated with the spill. I know the minister will be aware of this.

It has also now been made known that that soil, as contaminated, has now been shipped to a private landfill site in Gloucester to be used as daily cover. In fact, according to a press release, it becomes apparent that the reason this is taking place is because the ministry has received cut-rate prices to allow the disposal of this contaminated material in this fashion.

My question, Minister, is, why have you authorized the shipment of this untreated contaminated material for use as landfill cover when commercially available technologies could be used to restore the quality of the soil in a cost-effective and environmentally sound manner?

Hon Bud Wildman (Minister of Environment and Energy): If the member had consulted with his colleague from Carleton East he would know that he and I have been dealing with this issue for some time. His colleague has worked very hard on behalf of his constituent, who has suffered substantially as a result of the contamination, and has cooperated with me and my ministry staff to ensure that Mr MacIntyre and his family are properly protected and get the assistance they require in order to have their home replaced, the contamination removed and assistance provided to them to assist them in this serious problem and the transition. The local gasoline station owner apparently has avoided doing what is responsible to clean up the problem.

1430

Mr Offer: That's quite interesting, except the minister hasn't answered the question. We are well aware of all the information you have just given, but the question is about you and your ministry and the hypocrisy of your government's policy concerning the cleanup of contaminated soil.

On the one hand, you maintain that the soil is contaminated and represents a health and environmental risk to the local community, yet on the other hand, your ministry is authorizing the use of this gas-soaked soil without treatment as a cover at a privately owned landfill site in Gloucester.

There is available technology in the province that can be used to restore the quality of this soil in a cost-effective way. There are companies in the local area that are willing to do this work, but your ministry has precluded this by authorizing its shipment and use in a landfill site.

The question remains, Minister, why are you permitting material which you feel poses an environmental risk to citizens in the area to be used as landfill cover in that area?

Hon Mr Wildman: I can assure the member that the ministry is taking every opportunity to protect the public and to protect the environment.

MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES

Mrs Dianne Cunningham (London North): I have a question for the Minister of Municipal Affairs who is standing right there. Mr Minister, earlier today we learned, graciously and gratefully, that you've agreed to a meeting with the mayor of the city of London to discuss the regulation of the phased-in tax assessments, which you know have been somewhat controversial in the last couple of weeks. I was happy to see that.

There was one statement which I'm not sure would be the case and I'm going to ask you about it now. You were quoted in the London Free Press as saying that you would be prepared to meet with the top London officials but that it wouldn't change your plan. I just want to know if in fact that is your true position.

Hon Ed Philip (Minister of Municipal Affairs): What I said was that I thought all the people who were involved in arriving at the understanding in the London annexation, namely, the honourable member herself, the other MPPs from the London area, the mayor and deputy mayor and indeed the senior staff, should have a meeting on Monday and that I'd be prepared to look at the situation.

I was very disappointed, as I shared with the honourable member last week, at the decision by the council. Our provincial plan was to extend tax relief to all those ratepayers in the new parts of London who would otherwise see onerous property tax increases this year. The phase-in plan that we proposed would have made it possible for the council to have achieved its budgetary targets without the need to raise additional taxes simply by slowing down the decreases, a slowdown that would have meant less than seven cents on the dollar.

We were disappointed that the council acted contrary to the understanding that the arbitrator had recommended, which was clearly outlined in the legislation introduced by my colleague Mr Cooke in the House, which the mayor and council would have been clearly aware of.

Mrs Cunningham: If I could be allowed a couple of minutes, first of all, I understand that the minister is not pleased with the city of London's plan. My question was, are you prepared to go into open discussions? I think I heard that you are. I think that's what you were saying. I don't see you nodding your head. I see you're smiling.

The minister talked about the arbitrator, and I think it's extremely important, because I've discussed this with the arbitrator in the last week in the interests, I think, of everybody. I think his statement that he was very disappointed that the ongoing, open, consultative process did not take place that the former minister held, where all of us were in fact consulted on an ongoing basis -- that just didn't take place.

I can only speak for myself and I know you're getting impatient, but I have to say right now that in this Legislative Assembly we have to work very hard to work with the municipalities to make certain they're part of the solution, and I don't think any unilateral decision on anybody's part is in the best interests of families.

I'm going to ask the minister now: Will you state in this House that you will commit to an open discussion with the mayor of the city of London, because that's the key question here, with room for some, I would say, give and take so that you're not dug in on your position? Because if you are, Mr Minister, that's the exact opposite approach that was taken before, and I'm speaking personally as a member of the House who represents London.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Could the member please complete her question.

Mrs Cunningham: Will you clearly state that there is some room for compromise as a result of the discussions? That's very important.

Hon Mr Philip: We have had an open consultation process on this all along. There was open consultation by my predecessor, Mr Cooke, in arriving at the original decision. There was an understanding that was fairly clear in the legislation that there would not be undue hardship to the annexed areas. The mayor knew that. Councillor Joe Swan and Councillor Veale pointed out --

Interjections.

Hon Mr Philip: I'm sorry, Mr Speaker. I can't be heard over the member for York South.

The Speaker: Would the minister take his seat, please.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Would the minister please take his seat.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Minister.

Hon Mr Philip: I think the member for York South just appointed a new minister -- the member from York west.

I was surprised when the city chose not to live up to the commitment that was clearly made in the original understanding. I was surprised when they took that stand in an arbitrary way. On February 18, my staff met with their senior staff and told them that was unacceptable, that we would move on the regulation. The regulation will be moved on, but we are willing to look at ways in which we can work with the municipality to phase in the way in which that regulation will be implemented.

WORLD NORDIC GAMES

Mr Len Wood (Cochrane North): My question is to the Minister of Culture, Tourism and Recreation, and if she could, the member for Port Arthur would like to ask this question, but it is on a matter of concern to all northern members and indeed all Ontarians.

Minister, in 1990, the city of Thunder Bay made a successful bid to host the World Nordic Games in 1995. My colleague the member for Port Arthur has worked very hard in her community to help support this bid, and I understand that the province has been instrumental in providing necessary funds for the games to be a success. Yet I heard a disturbing report on CBC Radio this past Monday morning that the games are in danger of being lost if the federal government does not come through with certain funds by June.

Minister, I know you must be aware of the tourism and economic development potential from these games, in addition to their value as a sporting event. What have you as the Minister of Culture, Tourism and Recreation been doing to ensure their success?

Hon Anne Swarbrick (Minister of Culture, Tourism and Recreation): I also want to begin by strongly commending the member for Port Arthur for the tremendous work that she and her staff have done both to assist in the organizing efforts for the world Nordic ski championships as well as in ensuring that our government has been fully aware of the importance that they mean to the economic development of the Thunder Bay region.

The government of Ontario, under the past government, wisely agreed to commit $5 million to support the bid for Canada to host these Nordic world ski championships. Our government, in spite of the economic difficulties, has not only honoured that commitment of $5 million, we've added a further $3 million in anti-recession funding to develop the infrastructure needed, we've added a further almost $250,000 to pave a parking lot that was required, and we've also added further cultural support for the cultural activities that were recently required to host the World Cup games this year in preparation for the games next year. That adds up to $8.5 million this government has put into support.

1440

The federal government, on the other hand, was asked initially for the same $5 million. They have consistently refused to come forward with more than $2 million. Hence, there's no surprise that we end up with a $3-million crisis facing the Thunder Bay community.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Could the minister conclude her response, please.

Hon Ms Swarbrick: I will with this one thing: It makes me wonder if the MPP for Fort William, who's the leader of the Liberal Party, is not able to help her constituents --

The Speaker: No. Would the minister please take her seat. The question has been replied to. Is there a supplementary?

Mr Wood: Minister, I'm still concerned and worried about the threat of losing the games. Broadcasts in the international media would provide exposure not only for Thunder Bay but for the whole country of Canada. Are you continuing in your efforts to work with the federal government?

Hon Ms Swarbrick: Absolutely. It does make me wonder very strongly when the MPP for Fort William, who's leader of the Liberal Party in Ontario, can't help her very own constituents in her own riding to get the vital $3 million in economic development support that her region needs. Is this indicative of what the people of Ontario could expect if, heaven forbid, the leader of the Liberal Party were ever to become the Premier of this province of Ontario?

The Speaker: Could the minister conclude her response, please.

Hon Ms Swarbrick: I have been working long and hard with the municipality of Thunder Bay, with its mayor, with the chair and the board of the Nordic world ski championships --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Ms Swarbrick: -- in an attempt to get that funding from the federal government. I met recently with the Minister of Canadian Heritage. Along with the mayor and along with the chair of the world Nordics, I believe we were finally successful in getting the attention of the federal heritage minister on this important issue. The problem now is that the federal heritage minister also requires --

The Speaker: Would the minister please conclude her response.

Hon Ms Swarbrick: -- further assistance from the federal minister of tourism as well as the federal minister responsible for human resources --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Would the minister take her seat.

SMALL BUSINESS

Mr Steven W. Mahoney (Mississauga West): My question is to the Premier. The Premier talks a great deal these days about his government's job-creating programs. He spends more time outside the House --

Interjections.

Mr Mahoney: By the way, there is another shoe to fall on this; just bear with me. He spends more time outside the House travelling around the province reannouncing job programs. But the reality is that in Bob Rae's Ontario, small businesses are being punished for creating jobs.

I have an example of Mr Craig Cope, who runs a small decorating business in Don Mills called Baldwin Decorating. In 1993, he estimated his payroll at $10,000. The recession has been very tough on his business, but during the year, through his efforts, business picked up a little bit and he was able to hire a new employee. He actually created a job, and in his letter he says, "I must add that I literally took someone off welfare who received $1,600 a month in family benefits and gave them a job."

But in your Ontario, Premier Rae, he was penalized. Mr Cope was fined $145 by the Workers' Compensation Board for underestimating his payroll.

Later today, I'm sure we'll hear your Treasurer boasting about how his budget will create jobs. I'm sure Mr Cope will find a certain irony in those words. Premier, why is your government punishing small business for creating jobs?

Hon Bob Rae (Premier): The member's question is I think going to be part of a broader discussion that no doubt will happen when the Minister of Finance delivers his budget in a few minutes, and no doubt the individual business to which you're referring and many others will be deeply interested in the news that's contained in the Minister of Finance's budget.

I look forward to hearing from the honourable member and hearing some very clear indications of strong support from him for some of the approaches we're taking. I'm sure that even for a brief miracle moment there will be a point at which the spirit of partisanship will depart from the soul of the member from Mississauga, and he will appreciate and get to his feet and he will be on his feet in the next question period praising this government for the steps it has taken.

Obviously I don't have access to a file which would allow me to comment on any individual case with respect to the workers' compensation situation, and you would perhaps appreciate that, but no doubt the member will provide me with all the data and we will make inquiries -- the Minister of Labour will -- and we'll try to answer the question in some considerable detail, but I have a feeling that you may have taken some facts out of context.

Mr Mahoney: I'd be delighted to share this letter, and it's not an isolated case, I can tell you. This is a letter from a small business person who created a job and has been penalized for doing that by your Workers' Compensation Board.

I find it somewhat passing strange that Bob Rae would lecture me or anyone else on partisanship in this place or anywhere else, since he's considered the past master of blind partisan attitudes around this place.

I have another example from the Juno Group, a company that did the opposite, that actually overestimated its payroll for purposes of WCB. A letter from that company says: "Would you please explain to me why we are being charged interest when we overestimated the payroll? We overpaid the required premiums and we received eventually a credit for the overpayment. Traditionally, estimates have been overestimated in order to avoid interest and penalties for underestimating."

Mr Paul R. Johnson (Prince Edward-Lennox-South Hastings): It happened to me when I was in business. It's not new.

Mr Mahoney: Does that make it right? He says here, "You indicated to me that an employer is now going to be charged interest whether they overestimate or underestimate the payroll."

These small businesses want some answers. They don't want to listen to your flippant retort about some idea that might or might not appear in the budget. They want some answers. We've got a company that overestimated --

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Would the member place a question, please.

Mr Mahoney: -- and a company that underestimated. One was penalized, one was charged interest.

Premier, my question: Can you explain to the Juno Group and to Mr Cope how you can make the Workers' Compensation Board more user-friendly for small business and how you will remove the red tape and the unfair penalties and/or interest charges levied by the Workers' Compensation Board?

Hon Mr Rae: First of all, we will have a chance to discuss workers' compensation, I hope, during the summer months in committee when the --

Mr Mahoney: So they can wait.

Hon Mr Rae: No, I'm not suggesting anything. Those individual cases can be referred directly to the board and we can get some policy responses and some clear --

Mr Mahoney: Hundreds, maybe thousands of them.

Hon Mr Rae: We'll deal with them. I would have thought the honourable member today might have made reference to the fact that the Conference Board of Canada today announced -- on May 5 -- that consumer confidence is higher today in the province of Ontario than at any time in the last five years. I would have thought that the honourable member, knowing his generosity, would have been quoting: "Ontario to Lead Growth, Toronto-Dominion Bank Says."

All the indicators speak to recovery, not to the kind of doom and gloom and nasty negativism that we constantly see from the Liberal Party opposite.

1450

CLOSING OF CAMPGROUNDS

Mr Noble Villeneuve (S-D-G & East Grenville): I have a question for the Minister of Labour. Can he explain why a number of parks closed in previous years by the St Lawrence Parks Commission, presently growing weeds, look like they're going to be staying empty again this summer? This is prime waterfront property, and the reason they're staying empty is because of the Successor Rights (Crown Transfers) Act. That directly relates to Bill 40. What can we do in this House to open these parks, to accommodate tourists and to bring jobs?

Hon Bob Mackenzie (Minister of Labour): Surely the member across the way knows that the purpose of the successor rights legislation in Bill 40 was to make sure that workers did not lose the benefits they'd gained, where their company closed or was taken over by another outfit. Surely you don't disagree with that.

Mr Villeneuve: The local labour council in Cornwall agrees that they should waive this particular section. Surely that's got to be a pretty good message for you and for the government. They're looking to waive. These are prime waterfront properties that bring tourists to my area. Minister, will you please look at this and have these parks opened, into the hands of private people who are prepared to do it? It will cost you nothing. It will bring in revenue. It will create jobs. What can we do to make this happen?

Hon Mr Mackenzie: Where there is a legitimate problem, and we're trying to come up with answers in terms of some of the abandoned railways as well, we are willing to take a look at it. You don't start that out, though, by deciding you're going to destroy the Labour Relations Act in the province of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): The time for oral questions has expired. The honourable member for Kenora.

CORRECTION

Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora): I wish to correct the record on something I said earlier on in question period. I have documentation in front of me which will correct the record. It's in a letter to the Minister of Natural Resources dated April 27, and it reads:

"The council of the township of Sioux Narrows was very shocked to hear that discussions are being held regarding the closure of Sioux Narrows" --

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): I understood that the member for Kenora -- no. The member knows that if he's correcting his own record, not someone else's, but where he's correcting his record --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Is this based on something you had said earlier?

Mr Miclash: Yes, Mr Speaker. I go back to something I said in documentation here. I just wish to correct and make clear the statement I made regarding the park closure. I think this document will do it, if you will allow me to read the first paragraph. It's in a letter dated April 27 to the Minister of Natural Resources, and it states:

"The council of the township of Sioux Narrows was very shocked to hear that discussions are being held regarding closure of the Sioux Narrows Provincial Park. We are on record stating that if the park is to be closed, the township would like the first right of refusal," and to date the township has received no official notice that the closure is being considered.

That is to correct the record on something I said to the minister earlier in question period.

PETITIONS

EMERGENCY SERVICES

Mrs Irene Mathyssen (Middlesex): I have a petition from Middlesex constituents who utilize the emergency services at Four Counties General Hospital in Newbury. These are approximately 16,000 of my constituents who depend on Four Counties.

The petition reads, "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario," and calls upon the Ministry of Health and the Ontario Medical Association to resolve the issue of emergency medical coverage in rural emergency departments and ensure that rural residents have the adequate emergency care to which they are entitled.

I have signed my name to this petition.

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Parkdale): I have a petition addressed to the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

"Whereas the NDP government is hell-bent on establishing a 20-bed forensic facility for the criminally insane at the Queen Street Mental Health Centre; and

"Whereas the nearby community is already home to the highest number of ex-psychiatric patients and social service organizations and hundreds of licensed and unlicensed rooming houses in all of Canada; and

"Whereas there are other parts of Ontario where the criminally insane could be assessed and treated; and

"Whereas no one was consulted, not the local residents and business community, leaders of community organizations, education and child care providers, and not even the NDP member of Parliament;

"We, the undersigned residents and business owners of our community, urge the NDP government of Ontario to immediately stop all plans to accommodate the criminally insane in an expanded Queen Street Mental Health Centre until a public consultation process is completed."

I'm signing my name to this petition.

COLLINGWOOD GENERAL AND MARINE HOSPITAL

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe West): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas continued government funding cutbacks will force the Collingwood General and Marine Hospital to close eight more beds and these cutbacks are having a continued negative impact on employment in the Collingwood area;

"Whereas the government is failing to adhere to their own 'Principles of Restructuring' which states that restructuring of the hospital sector must be linked to equitable funding, appropriate and accessible community-based health services, and that restructuring initiatives must address the impact of these changes on hospital staff, the local economy and the health care needs of the community;

"Whereas the government refuses to give the green light to redevelop the Collingwood General and Marine Hospital, even though the provincial government announced funding for the project in 1987, and even though the General and Marine cannot achieve additional operating efficiencies unless the hospital is redeveloped;

"Therefore, we demand that the provincial government immediately approve the redevelopment of the General and Marine Hospital and that the hospital be given some financial breathing space to assess the impact of these bed closures on the labour and health care needs of the Collingwood community."

This is part of a 6,000-name petition, and I've signed my name also.

SEXUAL ORIENTATION

Mr Will Ferguson (Kitchener): I have a petition on behalf of the good people of Kitchener, Waterloo and Cambridge. The petition reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas traditional family values that recognize marriage as a sacred union between a man and a woman are under attack by Liberal MPP Tim Murphy in his private member's Bill 45; and

"Whereas this bill would recognize same-sex couples and extend to them all the same rights as heterosexual couples; and

"Whereas this bill has not been fully examined for financial and societal implications;

"We, the undersigned, petition the province of Ontario and the Ontario Legislature to stop this bill and to consider its impact on families in Ontario."

FIREARMS SAFETY

Ms Sharon Murdock (Sudbury): I have approximately 200 signatures here from the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters:

"Whereas we want you to know that we are strenuously objecting to your decision on the firearms acquisition certificate course and examination; and

"Whereas you should have followed the OFAH advice and grandfathered" -- although it should be "grandparented" -- "those of us who have already taken safety courses and/or hunted for years; and

"Whereas we should not have to take the time or pay the cost of another course or examination and we should not have to learn about classes of firearms that we have no desire to own;

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

"Change your plans, grandfather responsible firearms owners and hunters and only require future first-time gun purchasers to take the new federal firearms safety course or examination."

As required by the table and the House, I affix my signature thereto.

LAPAROSCOPY

Mrs Elinor Caplan (Oriole): I have a petition signed by approximately 100 citizens of the province of Ontario:

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

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

"Whereas OHIP fee structures encourage hysterectomies over operative laparoscopies;

"Whereas women must wait up to eight months for operative laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis, often enduring severe pain and endangering their health;

"Whereas up to one in 10 women are affected with endometriosis;

"Whereas the society of obstetricians and gynaecologists have found restricted expertise, limited training courses in Canada, lack of recognition for laparoscopic surgeons by OHIP, lack of funding and limits on emergency room time for women who seek treatment for endometriosis;

"Whereas operative laparoscopy can save a woman's organs and is less surgically invasive to a woman, and the US is at least five years ahead of Canada in this;

"Wherefore, the undersigned, your petitioners humbly pray and call upon Parliament to act in the public interest to encourage a task force to address the above issues and find solutions in regard to the detrimental effects of government cutbacks in health care and, as in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray."

I add support to this petition in their request for a task force and submit this to the Legislative Assembly.

DANGEROUS OFFENDERS

Mr Chris Hodgson (Victoria-Haliburton): I have a petition signed by dozens of residents in our area and surrounding areas:

"To the Parliament of Ontario:

"Whereas we, the citizens of Ontario, agree that clear dealings between the present justice system and the public establish a positive relationship for all concerned;

"Whereas one building block for such a relationship is a fair and accurate way of dealing with habitual child sex offenders;

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

"We believe that one way of dealing with convicted habitual child sex offenders upon release is that his/her photo and address be made available to the public for a minimum of seven years in whatever area of the province he/she takes residence."

1500

FIREARMS SAFETY

Ms Margaret H. Harrington (Niagara Falls): I have a petition from the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters, some of them from the Niagara region, in fact Niagara South, the communities of Stevensville, Fort Erie, Crystal Beach and Ridgeway. What they say is:

"We, the undersigned, petition Premier Bob Rae, Solicitor General David Christopherson and the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"Change your plans, grandfather responsible firearms owners and hunters and only require future first-time gun purchasers to take the new federal firearms safety course or examination."

I believe that about 200 people from the riding of Niagara South have signed this.

SALE OF AMMUNITION

Mr Tim Murphy (St George-St David): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas it is imperative that we make our streets safe for law-abiding citizens;

"Whereas any person in Ontario can freely purchase ammunition, even though they do not hold a valid permit to own a firearm;

"Whereas crimes of violence where firearms are used have risen at an alarming rate; and

"Whereas we must do everything within our power to prevent illegal firearms from being used for criminal purposes;

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

"To immediately pass Liberal Bob Chiarelli's private member's bill, Bill 151, to prohibit the sale of ammunition to any person who does not hold a valid firearms acquisition certificate or Ontario Outdoors Card."

It's signed by a number of residents of the city of Toronto, and I affix my signature in support.

SEXUAL ORIENTATION

Mr Ted Arnott (Wellington): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads as follows:

"Whereas traditional family values that recognize marriage as a union between a man and a woman are under attack by Liberal MPP Tim Murphy in his private member's Bill 45; and

"Whereas this bill would recognize same-sex couples and extend to them all the same rights as heterosexual couples; and

"Whereas the bill was carried with the support of an NDP and Liberal majority but with no PC support in the second reading debate on June 24, 1993; and

"Whereas this bill is currently with the legislative committee on the administration of justice and is being readied for quick passage in the Legislature; and

"Whereas this bill has not been fully examined for financial and societal implications;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly to stop this bill and future bills which would grant same-sex couples the right to marry, and to consider its impact on families in Ontario."

I totally endorse this petition and have signed it.

MINISTRY RELOCATION

Mr Drummond White (Durham Centre): I have here a petition from the citizens of Oshawa, particularly from the Downtown Business Management, to the Legislature of the province of Ontario and to my friend the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

"Whereas the original municipality of Durham has decided to move the offices of its department of social services from Bond Street West in the city of Oshawa to 850 King Street West, also in the city of Oshawa; and

"Whereas the undersigned believe this decision is not in the financial best interests of the regional municipality of Durham and is certainly not in the best interests of the service of the clientele; and

"Whereas the regional municipality of Durham is acting contrary to the intent of its own new official plan;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of the province of Ontario and the Minister of Municipal Affairs for the province of Ontario to recommend to the Lieutenant Governor in Council to issue a commission under section 178 of the Municipal Act, chapter M.45, RSO 1990, to inquire into the decision of the regional municipality of Durham."

I'd like to point out in the members' gallery a councillor from the city of Oshawa, Irv Harrel, and to note that many hardworking business people have already signed this petition and that I will affix my signature thereto.

GAMBLING

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): This is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the New Democratic Party government has traditionally stated a commitment to family life and quality of life for all citizens of Ontario; and

"Whereas families are made more emotionally and economically vulnerable by the operation of various gaming and gambling ventures; and

"Whereas the New Democratic Party government has stated a historical concern for the poor in society, who are particularly at risk each time the practice of gambling is expanded; and

"Whereas the New Democratic Party has in the past vociferously opposed the raising of moneys for the state through gambling; and

"Whereas the citizens of Ontario have not been consulted regarding the introduction of legalized gambling casinos despite the fact that such a decision is a significant change of government policy and was never part of the mandate given to the government by the people of Ontario;

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

"That the government immediately cease all moves to establish gambling casinos by regulation and that appropriate legislation be introduced into the assembly along with a process which includes significant opportunities for public consultation and full public hearings as a means of allowing the citizens of Ontario to express themselves on this new and questionable initiative."

I affix my signature.

HAEMODIALYSIS

Mr Chris Stockwell (Etobicoke West): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas several patients from the town of New Tecumseth are forced to travel great distances under treacherous road conditions to receive necessary haemodialysis treatments in Orillia or Toronto;

"Whereas the government has done nothing to discourage a patchwork dialysis treatment system whereby some patients receive haemodialysis in-home and others travel long distances for treatment;

"Whereas there are currently two dialysis machines serving only two people in New Tecumseth and one patient is forced to pay for her own nurse; and

"Whereas the government continues to insist they are studying the problem, even though they have known about it for two years; and

"Whereas the Legislature passed Simcoe West MPP Jim Wilson's private member's resolution which called for the establishment of dialysis satellites in New Tecumseth and Collingwood;

"We demand the government establish a dialysis satellite immediately in the town of New Tecumseth."

I will affix my name to this as well.

FIREARMS SAFETY

Mr Daniel Waters (Muskoka-Georgian Bay): I too have a petition today, from a number of my neighbours, friends and relatives, actually, that goes:

"Whereas we want you to know that we are strenuously objecting to your decision on the firearms acquisition certificate course and examination; and

"Whereas you should have followed the OFAH advice and grandfathered those of us who have already taken safety courses or hunted for years; and

"Whereas we should not have to take the time or pay the cost of another course or examination and we should not have to learn about classes of firearms that we do not desire to own;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Premier of the province, Bob Rae, the Solicitor General, David Christopherson, and the Legislative Assembly as follows:

"Change your plans, grandfather responsible firearms owners and hunters and only require future first-time gun purchasers to take their federal firearms safety course or examination."

I support this and therefore affix my signature.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): The time allotted for the presentation of petitions has expired.

Hon Brian A. Charlton (Government House Leader): I seek the consent of the House to suspend the proceedings until 4 pm.

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous consent to suspend proceedings until 4 o'clock? Agreed.

There will be a bell at five minutes to 4 to summon the members to the House. This House stands in recess until 4 o'clock.

The House recessed from 1508 to 1600.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

1994 ONTARIO BUDGET / BUDGET DE L'ONTARIO DE 1994

Hon Brian A. Charlton (Government House Leader): Government notice of motion number 26.

Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees (Ms Deborah Deller): Government notice of motion number 26, Mr Laughren.

Hon Floyd Laughren (Minister of Finance): Mr Speaker, I move, seconded by Mr Rae, that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Is there any member who has not received a copy?

Hon Mr Laughren: I rise to present the 1994 budget of the province of Ontario.

This budget marks another step in the government's plan to invest in jobs and preserve important services while bringing the deficit down.

This budget cuts taxes to encourage companies to hire new workers.

This budget expands our commitment to jobs. It moves forward with major highway and transit investments, it trains workers in new skills and it creates employment for our young people.

This budget reduces overall program spending for the second year in a row, while at the same time preserving our funding commitment to hospitals, schools, colleges, universities and municipalities.

This budget reduces the deficit for the second year in a row and keeps us on target to balance our operating budget by 1998.

And this budget contains no new taxes and no tax increases.

The government's plan is working. Jobs are being created. We are cutting taxes to create even more. Public services are being preserved and spending is under control. The deficit is down more than 30% from two years ago.

Le plan du gouvernement est efficace. Des emplois sont créés. Nous réduisons les impôts afin de créer encore plus d'emplois.

The plan reflects our confidence in Ontario, its people and its economic future.

Ontario's economy is getting stronger. Growth in 1993 was the best in four years, hitting 5.3% in the last quarter. Economic growth in Ontario is expected to lead the industrialized world between now and 1997. Last year close to 80,000 new jobs were created, and over the next three years there will be 350,000 more.

Ontario is getting a vote of confidence from business investors. Investment in machinery and equipment is expected to increase by over 10% to more than $21 billion this year.

Major investment plans have been announced across the province: $4 billion by the auto industry, $160 million by TransCanada PipeLines in North Bay and Kapuskasing, $76 million by Domtar in Cornwall, $41 million by Bombardier in Thunder Bay, $40 million by St Joseph Printing in Concord and $30 million by Dimona Aircraft in London.

Consumer confidence is growing too. At the end of 1993, confidence was at its highest level in more than four years. Home sales are up 30% this year and auto sales are up 22%.

And hot off the press, the Conference Board this morning released a report that shows that business confidence and consumer confidence are both at their highest level in the last five years. Ontario is on the move.

The economic upswing is being sustained by the underlying strength of this economy: Ontario's people and their education, their skills and their hard work.

The economic indicators are encouraging. But this government knows that statistics do not ease the pain and the frustration of people who want to work but cannot find a job.

That is why we are expanding our commitment to jobs and building new partnerships with employers and workers to create new opportunities.

In each of the last three years, through investment in infrastructure and training, this government and its partners have created and sustained an average of 145,000 jobs and this year we'll do even more, about 166,000 jobs.

The economy has been growing, but employment has been lagging. Small and medium-sized businesses, which are the biggest generator of jobs in the economy, have told us that payroll taxes can stand in the way of new hiring.

To address this concern, this budget cuts payroll taxes to provide a permanent incentive to companies to take on new workers.

Effective May 1, businesses that expand their payroll will not pay any additional employer health tax on their increased payroll for the first 12 months. That means businesses hiring additional new workers will not pay any payroll tax on those workers for their first year on the job.

This jobs incentive will provide employers with an extra competitive edge when they hire in Ontario. The message to employers is clear: The time to hire is now.

With this measure in place, Ontario's payroll taxes and employer-paid health benefits on new employees will be 29% lower than in Quebec and 49% lower than the average in the United States.

This jobs incentive is a $200-million investment this year and it will mean 12,000 new jobs in Ontario.

This government is supporting businesses that are creating jobs in the new economy. Many of Ontario's new high-quality jobs will come from companies that invest in research and development. When firms develop new products and services and successfully market them around the world, economic activity in Ontario increases and so does the number of jobs.

1610

To encourage and support companies that invest in research and development, I am introducing an innovation tax credit. This tax credit will be refundable, to ensure that small and medium-sized firms, including startup companies, will benefit. It will provide $35 million in assistance each year. It will reduce the after-tax cost of R&D for these firms by 10%.

The government is increasing access to capital for small and medium-sized businesses. We will introduce legislation to remove barriers that discourage loan and trust companies and labour-sponsored investment funds from lending money to, and investing in, new businesses. We will also change the rules for co-ops to improve their capacity to obtain capital from their members and from non-members as well. We will work with financial institutions to develop a way to collect and publish information on the loans they provide, so we can determine which types of businesses are having difficulty getting access to capital. We hope that this information will help us to work in partnership with business and financial institutions to improve financing that creates jobs, and we call on the federal government and federally regulated banks to follow our lead.

We are building new partnerships within Ontario's leading sectors. Through the sector partnership fund, we are bringing together business, labour, customers and suppliers to develop new initiatives like the Food Technology Centre in Guelph and the Ontario Centre for Environmental Technology Advancement in Toronto. The Minister of Economic Development and Trade will provide more details.

We are expanding the green homes and green industries initiatives, which provide home owners and businesses with expert advice and assistance on how to reduce waste and save water and energy. These initiatives create new customers for Ontario firms that manufacture green products. Over 11,000 jobs will be generated over three years. The Minister of Environment and Energy will provide details on this new green initiative.

Our Jobs Ontario investment in highways, schools, hospitals, and water and sewer facilities have played an important role in creating jobs over the last three years. The new capital corporations are doing the business of government differently. They are forming partnerships with private firms to accelerate the pace and cut the cost of building infrastructure that Ontario will need as the economy moves into the next century.

Through the Ontario Transportation Capital Corp, the $1-billion Highway 407 will be completed by 1999. That's 16 years ahead of schedule. The 407, across the top of Metropolitan Toronto, will be one of the first all-electronic toll highways in the world. More than 20,000 jobs will be created over the next five years.

When construction is finished, a significant transportation bottleneck for our exporters and manufacturers will be eased, enhancing Ontario as a top spot for investment in the auto industry and other important sectors.

In Metro Toronto, construction will begin this year on new transit lines -- the first new subways to be built in 16 years. Ontario is committed to making four Metro lines and the Mississauga Transitway become a reality, creating 50,000 jobs in this province.

Through the newly created Ontario Clean Water Agency, the province is improving the way we build municipal water and sewer facilities. Our $350-million investment through Jobs Ontario Capital, coupled with our commitment of $405 million from our municipal partners, will fund more than 190 projects across the province, supporting 13,000 jobs over the next two years.

Through Jobs Ontario Capital, we are also joining with our municipal partners and the federal government in the national infrastructure program. This three-way partnership will create 37,000 jobs over the next two years.

We are continuing to support jobs in the housing industry as well through Jobs Ontario Homes. By the end of this year, we will be supporting 112,000 affordable non-profit homes, twice as many as in 1990. It's a record to be proud of.

We are assisting more people to own their own homes.

The government will establish a $50-million housing loan guarantee fund to help lower-income families buy homes through community-based initiatives. The province will guarantee second mortgages provided by private investors. This measure will assist individuals and families who can carry monthly mortgage payments but who do not have access to conventional financing. The Minister of Housing will provide further details.

This budget introduces legislation to extend the Ontario home ownership savings plan, as I promised in December. This program has helped more than 180,000 Ontarians buy their first home, and it will continue to help create jobs in the home-building industry.

The new economy, with its changing technologies and new types of work, requires renewed cooperation among labour, business and government to ensure that workers have the skills for the jobs that exist today and the jobs that will be created tomorrow.

The government will invest over $1 billion in training, adjustment and work experience this year. More than 370,000 Ontarians will benefit, and that's up 50% since 1990-91.

At a time when youth unemployment remains unacceptably high, this budget provides funds to assist nearly 90,000 young people to get valuable on-the-job experience and training this year. Over 23,000 of them will get jobs this summer through Jobs Ontario Summer Employment. Our investment in summer employment and training for young people this year is 40% higher than in 1990-91.

We are also creating jobs in partnership with communities through Jobs Ontario Community Action. Our investment of $65 million has resulted in commitments of double that amount from community economic development partners. We will invest a further $90 million this year.

Our plan includes a commitment to overhauling social programs to help unemployed people get back into the workforce. Over the past two years, this government has pioneered a model program that places the long-term unemployed and people on social assistance in private sector jobs that have a future, not short-term, make-work jobs.

Jobs Ontario Training has created 46,000 job opportunities in private companies. People who get jobs and training through this program receive a steady paycheque. The average wage is $21,000. That means those workers can provide for themselves and for their families, and the cost to taxpayers is much less than welfare. Jobs Ontario Training will save taxpayers at least $190 million in social assistance costs.

Helping low-income parents to participate in the workforce also means providing more of them with access to affordable child care. We have increased the number of subsidized child care spaces by 47% since 1990, bringing the total to more than 68,000 spaces this year.

This government is committed to ending welfare as we know it and replacing it with a program that helps people get jobs. This year we intend to move forward with Job Link, a key element of our reform strategy. This innovative program will build on the success of Jobs Ontario Training, and will increase the number of job placements and training opportunities available to social assistance recipients. It will provide job-search skills that help people find work.

The Minister of Community and Social Services will provide details of our plans. We are looking to the federal government to support these measures by providing Ontario's fair share from the special fund for innovations in provincial social assistance programs.

We know that government has to become more efficient, more innovative and more adaptable. By providing important services to workers and employers, governments support economic expansion. But those services must be provided at an affordable cost.

This government is turning around two huge organizations whose problems we inherited from previous governments: Ontario Hydro and the Workers' Compensation Board.

With the government's support, Ontario Hydro is going through one of the largest corporate restructurings in Canada's history so we can keep the cost of electricity under control. This year, rates are frozen and, for the rest of this decade, increases will be no higher than the rate of inflation.

1620

We are also tackling the growth in the unfunded liability of the Workers' Compensation Board, another legacy of past governments. Our reforms will reduce the Workers' Compensation Board's projected unfunded liability by $18 billion over the next 20 years, while providing decent pensions for older injured workers. We are establishing a royal commission to help put the WCB on a secure footing for the future. Our reforms will provide security and justice for workers while holding the line on employers' costs, and that's good for the Ontario economy.

At the same time, this government is providing a competitive corporate tax system to attract new investment and create jobs. Ontario's corporate income tax rate for manufacturers is more than 4 percentage points below the US average.

To respond to concerns that new businesses have to spend too much time on government red tape, we are moving to implement the recommendations of a business advisory committee on ways to reduce the paperwork burden. By September 1, we will introduce one-stop registration for new businesses at locations across Ontario. Beginning in 1995, we will make it possible for businesses to use a single form to remit retail sales tax and employer health tax. By early 1996, we will include corporate income tax instalments in the single remittance process. These measures mean that Ontario's entrepreneurs can spend less time on paperwork and more time creating jobs.

Overall, this budget takes action to help put more Ontarians back to work. We are cutting taxes to create jobs. We are helping businesses that invest in research and development. We are building the highways and subways this province needs. We are supporting training for Ontario's workers. We are helping people get back to work. We are forging a new Ontario Hydro and a revitalized workers' compensation system. And we are keeping our corporate tax system competitive. These are essential parts of this government's plan.

An equally important part of our plan is ensuring that Ontario has affordable services that work. Ontarians do not want their government to slash services. They want services that work better and cost less.

La population de l'Ontario ne veut pas que son gouvernement élimine les services. Elle veut des services qui fonctionnent mieux et qui coûtent moins cher.

Members will appreciate the fact now why I need a French college in my riding.

The social contract is helping to protect those services. With our public sector partners, we successfully realized savings of almost $2 billion last year. As a result, we avoided up to 40,000 layoffs of public sector employees.

A full and complete accounting of social contract savings is attached in budget paper C.

But the social contract is about much more than short-term savings. It is also about finding ways to provide services more effectively for the longer term. That process has begun in hospitals, in schools, in local government and throughout the public sector.

The social contract is providing a three-year window in which efficiencies can be implemented. When it ends, the $2 billion in annual savings cannot be built back into public sector budgets. We will work with our public sector partners to ensure that the necessary efficiencies are achieved.

Ontarians want to know that they can count on getting quality health care for themselves and their families. We are ensuring that medicare is preserved by making it affordable. During the 1980s, health care costs grew at an average rate of 11 per cent per year. Over the last three years, we have been able to provide quality health care services with no overall increase in spending.

One of the things we are doing to keep medicare affordable is introducing new health cards so that services go only to those who are entitled to them.

By controlling costs, we are able to allocate money where it is really needed, to areas like long-term care, cardiac care and cancer treatment.

Long-term care in communities is being expanded so that seniors and people with disabilities can live in their own homes as long as possible. This increased support means that through the home care program, for example, an extra 200,000 people are able to live independently. We are continuing to put additional resources into these programs, bringing community-based health care spending to almost $1 billion. That is an increase of over 50% from 1990-91.

Hospitals have cut waiting time for cardiac care by two-thirds since 1989 by establishing a network to match people who need care with available beds and services.

We have launched a $15-million cancer treatment and prevention strategy, which will virtually eliminate waiting lists for bone marrow transplants and increase availability of radiation machines and technicians.

In Windsor and in dozens of other centres across Ontario, services are being carefully planned for the community, bringing together hospitals and community-based services for greater efficiency and better service. Ontario's health care system is meeting the challenges, providing excellent care to all Ontarians on an equal basis.

Ontarians want to know as well that their children are getting a good education. This government has provided leadership in setting standards for our students and school systems, and in testing their progress against those standards. We have kept our funding commitments for Ontario's schools, and we are working with school boards so that more of the taxpayer's education dollar is spent in the classroom.

We are encouraging school boards to become less top-heavy. So far, 50 of the 172 school boards have decided to reduce the number of trustees.

Many boards have used provincial funding assistance to streamline operations, share facilities and reduce duplication in such areas as administration, purchasing, busing, libraries and computer networks.

The government is moving to provide greater fairness in the funding of our schools. We will introduce legislation so that non-residential assessment currently shared in a community will be divided more equitably among school boards. The new basis of sharing will be the number of pupils served by each board. This change will take effect in 1996 and will be phased in to allow school boards to plan their budgets.

The Royal Commission on Learning is consulting with Ontarians on the key issues facing our schools: how they are governed, what should be taught and who is accountable for educating our children. The royal commission's report this fall will pave the way for significant reforms to Ontario's education system.

Just as Ontarians want us to make public services more affordable, they also want government to be less wasteful and more efficient, and that's exactly what we are doing.

We are implementing a host of commonsense measures that cut costs in government. Some save millions, others save thousands, but they all add up to better value for tax dollars.

We are working with our employees and their representatives to identify savings. Through this joint process, for example, we are saving $500,000 in travel costs by making greater use of teleconference calls. And we are saving $2.2 million by replacing courier services with electronic mail and fax networks and using a new mail-coding system.

We are eliminating a million pieces of paper a year by improving internal accounting processes.

We have saved $42 million a year by cutting the number of ministries from 28 down to 20.

We have reduced the size of the Ontario public service by more than 4,500 positions, with almost no layoffs, and we expect to achieve our target of 5,000 this year.

In total, we have reduced the government's overhead costs by 16%, or $1.2 billion, in the last three years.

1630

We are saving $350 million by managing social assistance better, cracking down on fraud and making sure benefits go to those in need.

This session, the government will ask members for speedy passage of legislation to make government work even better. We will introduce a bill that will change statutes and regulations to cut red tape, reduce costs to taxpayers and improve services to the public. And as more efficiencies are identified, we will bring forward changes each year.

The steps we have taken to control spending, to cut waste and duplication, and to find new ways to provide services more efficiently have allowed us to reduce the deficit and to keep it going down.

We are reducing government spending. Last year the cost of government programs fell -- for the first time since 1942. And this year our program spending will decline again.

Even after adjusting for differences in inflation, the growth in program spending under this government has been far lower than under both of our predecessors.

A year ago we said that with the support and commitment of Ontarians, we would bring the 1993-94 deficit below $10 billion. Today I can tell Ontarians that with your help, we have done exactly that. Last year's deficit came in at $9.4 billion. That's two tenths of 1% from what we projected in our 1993 budget.

This year, our deficit will be even lower, at $8.5 billion. That is a cut of more than 30% from two years ago.

Our revenue projection for this year, which is based on cautious assumptions, is still far from buoyant. In part, this reflects the fact that Ontarians are not getting their fair share from the federal government -- for social assistance, for training or for new immigrants.

We had hoped that the new federal government would restore Ontario's fair share of funding. But instead it has continued to shortchange this province, as did its predecessor.

Premier Rae has said clearly that we welcome the prospect of improvements in the efficiency and delivery of social programs and in the fiscal and practical arrangements between the two levels of government, but any such reform must reinforce, not undermine, Canada's record as a compassionate society. Reform must come about through genuine joint decision-making.

We have said repeatedly that reform must not be achieved by offloading costs to the provinces, and there must be an immediate end to discriminatory treatment against Ontario citizens.

The record in this area to date is far from encouraging. Ontario taxpayers are indeed getting shortchanged by Ottawa. Let me cite two examples.

In eight provinces, the federal government provides 50% of the cost of social assistance under the Canada assistance plan. But in Ontario, which was hit hardest by the recession, the federal government pays only 29%. This means, for example, that Quebec gets $3,300 for every social assistance recipient. Ontario gets $1,800 only. That one measure to deny Ontario its fair share will cost this province $1.7 billion this year.

It is the same story for training. Ontarians make up 38% of Canada's labour force, but we receive only 27% of available federal funds for training and adjustment.

Ontario had no choice but to cut our tobacco taxes when the federal government and Quebec made their deal to reduce taxes. That measure cost us another half-billion dollars in lost revenues.

Despite revenue shortfalls, we are preserving services in hospitals, in schools, in towns and cities across this province, and we are doing so without raising taxes.

We are bringing the deficit down in a balanced and responsible way. To reduce the deficit even more this year would slow the recovery and job creation and undermine the services Ontarians value.

This budget introduces measures to harmonize Ontario corporate income taxes with the federal Income Tax Act. All of the revenues from these new measures are being redirected to the job-creating tax cuts in this budget.

The measures we introduced a year ago put Ontario's finances on a course that will lead to a balanced operating budget in 1998. With the measures in this budget, we will stay on track to meet that target. By continuing to hold program spending growth below the rate of inflation, Ontario will achieve a balanced operating budget in 1998.

In summary, this is a budget that looks to the future with confidence. Under the courageous and compassionate leadership of Premier Bob Rae, this province is charting a strong and confident course. You can see that we are in as buoyant a mood as the economy is.

Jobs are being created -- 350,000 of them in the next three years. This government is expanding its commitment to jobs. We are cutting taxes to encourage employers to hire new workers. We are moving forward with major highway and transit investments and innovative job programs. We are supporting firms that are investing in Ontario and creating new markets around the world.

This government is providing affordable services that work. Vital public services, like education and medicare, are being preserved and improved.

This government is getting better value for tax dollars. Spending is under control and the deficit is down. We are on track to balance the operating budget in 1998.

There are no new taxes, and no tax increases.

The government's plan is working. We are building a stronger Ontario for today and tomorrow.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Merci, Monsieur le Président.

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Leader of the Opposition): I am pleased to move the adjournment of this debate.

The Speaker: Mrs McLeod moves the adjournment of the debate. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Hon Mr Charlton: Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the House for unanimous consent to return to introduction of bills.

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous consent to revert to introduction of bills? Agreed.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

ONTARIO LOAN ACT, 1994 / LOI DE 1994 SUR LES EMPRUNTS DE L'ONTARIO

On motion by Mr Laughren, the following bill was given first reading:

Bill 159, An Act to authorize borrowing on the credit of the Consolidated Revenue Fund / Projet de loi 159, Loi autorisant des emprunts garantis par le Trésor.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Hon Brian A. Charlton (Government House Leader): I'd take a few minutes to make a statement on next week's business.

Pursuant to standing order 55, I wish to indicate the business of the House for the coming week.

On Monday, May 9, and Tuesday, May 10, we will continue consideration of government notice of motion number 26, the budget debate, standing in the name of Mr Laughren.

On Wednesday, May 11, we will consider government notice of motion number 27, standing in the name of Mr Rae.

On Thursday, May 12, during private members' public business, we will consider ballot item number 55, second reading of Bill 158, standing in the name of Mr Martin, and ballot item number 56, second reading of Bill 141, standing in the name of Mr Mahoney.

On Thursday, May 12, in the afternoon, we will debate third reading of Bill 120, residents' rights, and third reading of Bill 113, the Liquor Control Act. We will then consider committee of the whole on Bill 138, the Retail Sales Tax Act, and Bill 110, regarding the employer health tax.

Mr Speaker, I move the adjournment of the House.

The Speaker (Hon David Warner): Mr Charlton moves adjournment of the House. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

This House stands adjourned until 1:30 of the clock Monday next.

The House adjourned at 1642.

5 mai 1994