Question Period Rewind - April 2 1990

Hi everyone, welcome to Question Period Rewind. I'm Donna Skellyy, the speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. Get ready to travel back to 1990. The Hubble Space Telescope launched into orbit and at home, technology was starting to evolve. Everyone was excited to try the first Microsoft Office released for Windows, bundling Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. We also saw Adobe release a new signature product, Photoshop. Now, let's see what the house was up to. And answers by the opposition. Lady of the opposition, I'd like to ask a question. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. >> Mr. Speaker, uh Mr. Speaker, it was it's been reported in the media and I want to ask the premier how he feels about it that a member of the staff of the Minister of Financial Institutions phoned a uh shareholder of an insurance company uh Kingsway Insurance Company asking the uh shareholder to put pressure on the president of that company not to send you a letter with respect to uh the insurance bill which is before the house today. Can you explain how a member of the Liberal government staff would possibly have got it into his mind that that's something he ought to do? >> Premier, I I believe the Minister of Financial Institutions has dealt with this matter and I'm sure he'd be happy to to tell you how he did so. >> Uh Mr. Speaker, if I might, uh the honorable gentleman makes an assertion that is first of all uh not proper in the sense that there was pressure applied. The contact was made by the member of my staff who in fact was not putting pressure on anybody to do anything but inquiring as to uh what had been done with the company in the direction given to the particular gentleman. There was no pressure being applied by my staff member. But just in case there was anything uh misconstrued about the call, I've advised my staff member that such action should not be taken uh in the future that in fact uh he has received a reprimand with respect to the call although I am satisfied that he was not either applying pressure intending to apply a pressure or in fact did apply a pressure in this particular case. >> Supplementary Mr. Speaker, the minister can't have it both ways. You can't say to your staff member, you didn't do anything wrong. I agree with you, but whatever you did, don't do it again. Uh, that doesn't make any sense. That doesn't make that doesn't make any sense. That doesn't make any sense, >> Mr. Speaker. I want to ask this minister and this government have claimed all along how independent they are of the insurance industry. If we ever needed if we ever needed proof, Mr. speaker that this government is in bed with the insurance industry. They're phoning shareholders of individual companies asking them to take steps with respect to what's going on on an on an individual letter. On an individual letter. I want to ask the minister I want to ask the minister, are you prepared to have your staff member come before a committee of this house and answer questions with respect to the activities of him in relationship to that insurance company? >> Uh Mr. Speaker, in relation to what the honorable gentleman first started out, he had indicated my staff person had asked the gentleman not to send a letter. That in fact is not the case. The letter had been sent on to the premier uh premier's office and had demanded a two-day turnaround in terms of reply. The staff member had spoken rightly to the sender of the letter and said, "Listen, people are away. give us some time to exact to uh in an appreciation of time to do correspondence uh not to uh not to require a two-day turnaround and uh then he said about trying to understand the basis upon which this letter had been sent. The letter was already sent. There's no question about that. There was no indication that he wanted people to take action or not to take action but merely to find out what was happening. And I'll tell you one thing, the fact that this particular president of this particular insurance company is complaining about it doesn't bear out the fact that there is some cozy relationship, but bears out the fact that we are inquiring into what is going on to the business. And in fact, this particular president takes offense at us trying to understand what the pressures are inside the insurance industry. They are concerned about the fact that we are trying to take action on behalf of the consumers of this province. And this is just a way in which that particular president wishes to respond to us wanting to know about the insurance industry and wanting to know what it takes to protect the consumers of the province rather than the version that you have been trying to create here in the question. >> Mr. Speaker, I I let me say to the minister, if you have you have a story to tell, your staff member has a story to tell. Mr. Star has a story to tell. I would think that his shareholder in the United States has a story to tell. All I'm asking you is you say you're right. Mr. Star says he's right. He was on one end of the phone. Your staff person was on the other end of the phone. What I'm suggesting, Mr. Speaker, is that it would be fair and reasonable for this government to agree to refer this entire matter to a legislative committee. If not, what have you got to hide? Why are you hiding the kinds of activities that you're that is going on in terms of the contact between your members of your staff and individual shareholders of the insurance industry? What have you got to hide anyway? >> Uh Mr. Speaker, there is nothing to hide with respect to what was going on. And in fact, I've taken the steps to indicate to my staff person that I understood what he was attempting to do and understanding where the pressure for a two-day turnaround in a letter to the premier's office was coming from. I tell all of my staff people to be thoroughly thoroughly advised of the facts and come up with the truth of the case to make the inquiries that they need to. I told the person in this case, Mr. Speaker, that although I understood the matter was being handled properly in his view that perhaps he had overstepped his bounds to leave the impression. I don't believe he tried for one moment to put pressure on anybody. But if he left the impression that in fact there was pressure that in fact he should not do it again. and I have told him and reprimanded him to make sure that he understands how serious this is in terms of having a call made from the minister's office. But I can tell the honorable gentleman that since I have dealt with this and that I've taken the steps to deal with it that I think the matter is satisfactory come to an end. And I think that Mr. Speaker that will ensure that the sensitive dealing with issues about pressure being put on anybody will be handled better by that particular staff member. But just let me say one other thing, Mr. Speaker, and that is this that we will always attempt to get the clear factual basis upon which pressure is being applied on the ministry and on the minister's office. We will continue to make thorough investigations on behalf of the consumers. When you people call us about inappropriate activity by those companies, >> my office will continue to make the inquiries to ensure that we're protecting consumers. We will not be >> put off by the uh requests of the honorable new question. Member for Lake Shore. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions for the premier. On wetness day, the premier will be hosting the inauguration of Ontario's Niagara Escarpment as a UNESCO biosphere reserve. This, Mr. Speaker, gives international recognition to what the Canadian Commission for UNESCO has described as Canada's first largescale environmental land use plan. A plan, let us remind ourselves, that was supported by all three parties in this house. I and I know the premier are very proud of this designation by UNESCO and welcome it. And I would like the premier to tell the house what plans he has to transfer administration of this environmental land use plan and the Niagara Escortment Commission to the Ministry of the Environment. >> Premier. >> Well, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the honorable member's suggestion on how to administer that particular plan and uh some may feel it's better administered in one area as opposed to the other. Uh I'm not sure that that is the main issue. The main issue I believe is is the substance of that great plan which as my honorable friend has said uh has uh it was not conceived by this government. uh it was added to substantially by all members of this house and I look at a number across the floor that added a lot to it and I highly respect that. Uh it had his genesis many many years ago. Uh I would unless there's maybe some compelling reason to uh to change it to the Ministry of the Environment. I'm certainly open to suggestions in that regard. Uh but I think my honorable friend would be the first to admit that it's achieved this international uh recognition now the way it's done. And then if better way to do it, I'm always open to it. It's not a major matter, frankly, of major public policy to me one way or the other. Uh but I'm always open to new suggestions. >> Supplementary. >> Mr. Speaker, this morning the member for York South and I visited an area of the Niagara Scarpment in the Halton Hills area. We saw, Mr. Speaker, gravel pits. We saw proposed gravel pits. We saw land being prepared in anticipation of gravel pits and we saw worked out gravel pits which are proposed to be used for the garbage from metropolitan Toronto. All Mr. Speaker on the face of this internationally recognized environmentally significant piece of Ontario. >> Question. >> The legislation that inaugurated the Niagara Scarpan Plan says very clearly, Mr. premier that the purpose of the act is to provide for the maintenance of the Niagara escarpment as a continuous natural environment. How can you possibly justify accepting designation as a biosphere and yet saying that you're quite happy with the substance of the plan and at the same time allowing garbage pits to be created to be expanded to be inaugurated on the very brink of the escarment? Premier >> speaker, >> it speaks there's the I think my honorable friend I I appreciate her advice on this matter and as you know these things are in the hands of the escarpan commission but my honorable friend I said recognizes stands up and exemplifies the schizophrenia of her party on one hand she would like to take credit for this international award and believes that she was instrumental in that on the other hand is so critical why wouldn't you stand up and celebrate on this happy get out of the pits stand up and be celebrate. >> Mr. Speaker, I think the premier is hit on the knob of the issue. We all celebrate this designation. Citizens groups along the escarpment celebrate it and they wonder why. As they celebrate, they are forced time and again to fight to protect the escarpment. The Escarpment Commission doesn't have the resources to do the job it would like to do. And citizens groups spend their time, their energies, and their money to try and prevent this government >> from putting garbage dumps and quaries in the escarment. I'm prepared to celebrate. When will the premier give us real cause for celebration, protection of the escarment, Mr. Speaker? That's what we want. >> Mr. Speaker, I've been I've been debating whether to invite the honorable member to this great ceremony. Oh, I have I've been debating whether I should resin the invitation of the honorable member, Mr. Speaker, and I want her to come and take credit for this as she always does and she can make her little speech. Uh but look at what's happening. Uh Mr. Speaker, I think she should celebrate, enjoy. I think that she should she should uh not be so negative of the situation. The United Nations has recognized that this process is working extremely well. It's highly democratic. We have very able people making the decisions with respect to the escarpment and compare it to the other things in the world. Now, my honorable friend will always criticize. I'm used to that. That is in her nature. It's tough for her to summon up any charity for these matters. But let me say since I've invited you, come and celebrate. >> New question. >> Leader of the third party. >> Fantastic. It's for you. >> My question is for um the premier. The premier is well aware of the fact that uh one of the I didn't receive an invitation. If I had received an invitation, I might have accepted and I might have joined the two of you in the pits that particular day. I know that you'll be making little speeches, Mr. Premier, along with the critic for environment. And I didn't start this, Mr. Speaker. I want you to know that >> he's just an innocent victim. >> My uh my question for the premier is on a very serious subject and that relates to perhaps one of the most difficult challenges that your government has to face. Uh that being the housing crisis that I believe we have here in Ontario. As the premier is well aware, back in 1987, during a particular activity in which he was involved in the fall of that year, he made a number of promises and commitments to the people of this province relative to a certain target number for rental housing units that he was proposing to have completed as part of his totally completed agenda, which he talked about rather recently. I wonder of those 102,000 promised units if the premier could share with this house how many have been completed to date. >> Premier. >> Mr. Speaker, the honorable minister will be able to assist uh the honorable member with respect to the specifics, but may I say before I refer the question, recognizing that he has very few invitations these days, he's very welcome to attend on Wednesday next. >> Minister of Housing, >> Mr. Speaker, uh going back to uh going back to 1985 when this government uh first assumed responsibility uh up to the present, there are approximately 55,000 units completed. Uh as the honorable member would be aware of the fact, there are another roughly 30,000 that are in various stages of completion. uh and I would expect by about uh 1993 maybe a little earlier we would have the we'd be up around about the 90,000 figure >> supplementary >> the uh minister will be aware that the promise that was made was to complete the 102,000 units by the end of 1989. We have now passed the end of the year 1989 by some three months. And the figure that I have, Mr. Minister, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, is considerably lower than the figure that you have shared. And it might be of further interest to some of your colleagues to be advised that fully half of the units that you have constructed to date have been with the assistance of the federal government. Now, I'd like to ask the minister, since you have fallen far short of your target, which was the 102,000 units by the end of 1989, what plans do you have in place to catch up with this absolutely dramatic shortfall in meeting the very numbers in terms of objectives that you yourself as a government set? >> Minister, >> well, Mr. Speaker, I would uh I would say that 90,000 compared to the approximate 100,000 is not a significant shortfall. Uh but the honorable member is well aware of the fact that uh that we do have about 5,000 units a year a year which we cost share with the federal government and that number has been declining every single year since we formed the government. uh at the same time the number of units which this province unilaterally uh produces has been climbing every single year since we formed the government and I think that's a pretty good trade-off. >> Last supplementary >> again I want to advise the minister that the uh the numbers that I have received through our research is considerably lower than the numbers that he is suggesting. would he in fact agree to share with this house the numbers that he has relative to rental completions so that we can work from the same agenda and ask questions with respect to this matter in in an area where perhaps we can reach some agreement but again I want to say to the minister that there were 102,000 units which were promised it's my understanding that the numbers that you have actually completed are closer to 20,000 not 55 5,000 as you have suggested. >> Will the minister agree to table with this house information relative to the number of housing units started and completed and where you are relative to your promise of 102,000 units. >> Uh Mr. Speaker, I'd be quite happy to share with my honorable colleague the uh source of the numbers that uh that I used. And in response uh partial response to his uh his previous question, I should point out to him that I have been in consultation with the the nonprofit housing association of the province and the uh co-op uh association uh looking for ways to extend this program uh even further. Uh the honorable member will be aware of the fact that our cost sharing mechanism with the federal government uh also includes um rent supplement programs uh whereby we work out an arrangement with the um uh private sector uh to assume responsibility for some of their units which they build. So there that's built into the figure as well and that may be part of the reason for the difference. >> New question member for Leeds Grrenville. Speaker, I have another question for the Minister of Financial Institutions related to the conduct of his executive assistant and his efforts to uh pressure and I think that is the appropriate word uh Mr. Star and the shareholders of his company to not make the certain letter public and I think that's where the pressure was exerted certainly not to make uh or to hold back the letter and get a two and a half day turnaround on the letter. Uh I inferred from the minister's non-answers earlier that uh he found out about this matter simply through press reports and uh uh he he says true. I would uh like him to stand up and confirm that on the record that indeed he just found out about this through press reports. And if that is the case, what does this say about his staff, the conduct of his staff and his own competence? >> Minister. >> Sure. >> Uh Mr. Speaker, I found out that there was a concern being expressed uh to my staff member by Mr. Star uh last Friday and we had talked about the things that he had spoken both to Mr. Star and the um company uh in the states that has a substantial interest in the Kingsway Insurance Company uh prior to the weekend. So I didn't find out about it uh just through the press. >> Supplementary. >> Well, I would think, Mr. Speaker, that the minister should find that totally unacceptable conduct. It's an abuse of power by uh the government and uh there's obviously an ethical vacuum in the minister's office. We're talking about his own executive assistant applying pressure to shareholders of an insurance company to a really an effort in damage control and again as it's been said earlier it reflects the very close ties of this government with the insurance industry in respect of bill 68 >> supplementary. >> Mr. Speaker, I want the minister to to respond to this. Will he tell us uh tell the house how his executive assistant would think that his conduct was acceptable conduct as a senior aid to this minister? >> Minister, >> uh Mr. Speaker, the uh my executive assistant uh has told me and I have inquired with him the exact nature of the discussion and I'm satisfied that it was not his intention to even be seen to be applying pressure and that uh his way of uh contacting people I have indicated to him may have been inappropriate in as much as it left an impression. I'm satisfied that there was no intention for him on his part to exert pressure and I have told him that uh when he exercises his judgment again and that is in fact what I meant by the reprimand that in fact he leave no impression that in discussing anything with anyone who calls him or who he calls about issues which are current uh that he leave the impression that there is pressure being exerted by my office. I have advised him that I have taken the steps necessary uh to ensure in my mind that uh his conduct will not be repeated and in fact uh it is in my view uh now completely concluded >> supplementary. >> Well the minister to stand in this house and suggest that this gentleman was not applying pressure he must have been born yesterday or he thinks other members of this legislature were born yesterday. the quotes from the uh an individual in the premier's office. It's not the way we do things. It's not the way we do things in Liberal government. That's a good one. He's also saying this is a very serious matter. And the minister here this afternoon is trying to just shrug this off. This is not a serious matter. Well, indeed, members on this side of the house think it is and it also reflects very seriously on you, your competence and the operations of your office. Mr. Minister supplementary >> and I want to share the view of the opposition leader in calling upon you calling upon your colleagues in government to give this matter a full public hearing before a committee of this legislature. Why are you not prepared to do that? >> Minister capital punishment who doesn't do what you think >> Mr. Speaker um >> that I understand >> if I might continue Mr. Speaker to reply to the honorable gentleman. uh there is in my view uh nothing in the sense of uh being hidden. There is nothing to hide. I have I have told the members of the legislature that the call in fact was made but that there was not an intention to apply pressure that in fact uh we were looking Mr. speaker to find out exactly what was happening inside that organization and in fact that doesn't bear out your contention uh member from Leeds Granville or the contention of the member from York South uh that there is such a cozy relationship in fact what we are trying to do as an organization as a government find out exactly what is happening inside the insurance uh companies so that we can determine uh how to best protect the consumers of the province. We will continue Mr. speaker to communicate with people who we think can provide us with assistance in coming up with the best package of insurance for for the consumers. I have told my executive assistant however in this case that it has left an impression with Mr. Star who is the president of Kingsway that there was some pressure being exerted and I told him that I did not find that acceptable behavior. That's where the reprimand comes in and that he had had better not leave any impression whatsoever. if he must start every phone call by saying I am not putting any pressure on people or whatever then he's to do it but there that there will be no pressure exerted through his telephone calls and that that should not occur again that I am now satisfied that that puts an end to this issue that in fact it puts an end to any uh concern that they ought to have about my executive assistant whose morals and ethics in fact I have quite a high regard for in the sense that he is a very honorable individual. But I will tell you that the people over there are trying to create a misimpression of this individual's integrity and I'm concerned that they wish to do that in this particular forum. >> Question. The member for Windsor Riverside. >> Speaker, I have a question for the provincial treasurer. It's concerning the massive shift of taxation from your level of government to municipalities that has been occurring since you've been the treasur of this province. In 1984, your government covered or the provincial government covered 47.8% of the cost of education in this province. After the announcement on Friday, your government will be covering 40.8% of the cost of education at the elementary and secondary level uh in this province. How can you as treasurer possibly justify this massive shift to property taxes, an unfair, regressive tax uh when it was your government, your party that promised that you'd be raising the rate of grants to 60% for education in this province? >> Mr. Speaker, the honorable member who's fair-minded member indeed would uh want to add to the knowledge of the members who might uh not be aware of it that the increase for school boards this year was just about 8%. It really means that uh it is uh in absolute dollars one of the largest additional uh funds for education purposes uh that I've had the honor to announce to the legislature. The fact that the school boards have an independent responsibility uh to fund education as they see fit uh it means that they go forward with uh decisions relating to school costs at the local level. And the fact that that increase is more rapid than the increase of of our expenditure even though our transfers are at 8% is not in my control. >> Supplementary. >> Mr. Speaker, there are things that are under your control and the arguments you use are absolute nonsense. They're not the kinds of arguments you used when you were in opposition and used to say that the other party should be bringing in a 60% rate of grant for uh secondary and elementary. The 8.7% that your minister announced on Friday, all of it, but 2.5% was for new initiatives that you initiated, not the school boards that you initiated. And that means that there's going to be another transfer of costs where educational property taxes will be going up 14 and 15% across this province. On one hand, you criticize the Maloney government for shifting responsibilities on you. And you do it exactly the same way, except the only response that the school boards have in this province is to rate propy taxes, which hurt lowincome families as you know the most. No, what I would like to ask the minister is are you going to again in the next uh provincial election promise a 60% rate of grant and is that promise going to be as good as the ones you've made in the last two elections? >> Mr. Speaker, I think the honorable member was accusing me of uh speaking nonsense since I used to say the the same things that he is saying at the present time. That surely it's uh it's nonsense to suggest it's nonsense to suggest that uh a per capita funding rate of over $6,000 per student per student funding rate is inadequate when it is as high as any you would find any place in the world. that our funding for education uh from both levels, municipal and at the provincial level uh really gives us as much money in the school the public and separate school system as you'll find in any jurisdiction. And I think that the school boards and the uh ministry of education should be quite proud of this. The honorable member knows that when we took office just uh five years ago, the support for capital, for example, was about $74 million a year. This year, the honorable minister of education has announced $300 million. So, I would suggest the honorable member if there's any nonsense in this debate, it is not on the side of the government. >> Your question, the member for Wellington. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Health. Minister, Dr. James Murray, chairman of the board of trustees of St. Joseph's Hospital in G is distressed and angered by your ministry's decision to change direction of his 1987 plans for hospital redevelopment in G. Dr. Murray is concerned not only about the delay that will result but about the additional capital cost of this new project. Minister, will you guarantee that this new hospital complex can be built with the same capital commitment of 58.6 6 million from your ministry and within the time frame projected for the 1987 plan. >> Minister, >> thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I'm very aware of the issue that the member raises and want to uh assure him that the member from GE has in fact uh been an excellent advocate on behalf of meeting the needs of the community. I want to say to him as well that the ministry will keep its financial commitment to meet the health needs of the city of G and that we believe uh that by working together uh we can do that within the financial commitment that has been made. >> Supplementary >> supplementary the citizens in of G and Wellington will not be deceived again the delay is in the words of Dr. James Murray intolerable to the trustees of St. Joseph's Hospital without an immediate assurance from you that the physical infrastructure of that facility will be brought up to the required safety standards. Assurance on a more realistic capital cost allocation for the ministry is also needed. Will the minister now provide the house with those asurances? >> Minister, >> thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I can say to the member opposite that our capital planning framework in fact addresses the very concerns that the member raises uh as a priority. Infrastructure renewal, health and occupational safety issues, the convenience of both the staff and the patients is a priority. I would say to him as well that we are committed to seeing the development of an acute care facility for the city of G. We will be establishing two committees which will expedite the necessary planning. One group will deal with the planning and hospital services, the other with the operation and the uh with the governance and the organization of a health system uh for the city of G. We're committed as well to the development of a state-of-the-art uh uh long-term care system within the province and see this as an opportunity for the city of G in fact to be a model hospital center and a model community when it develops a an appropriate network and system of services within its community. >> Thank you. New question, the member for Brenford. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question too is for the Minister of Health. Uh the minister certainly aware of the far-reaching work that's gone on with the health professions legislation review. Draft legislation was proposed last year and you've been consulting with a number of groups. I too have had groups from our community and across the province uh mentioned to me their their concerns about some of this legislation and some of them anxious for it to get on with. uh the Ontario dental hygienist, Ontario Naturopathic Association, my colleague from Canora mentioned to me that uh he recently met with health care professionals and volunteers in Dryen. What they'd like to know, Minister, is when will you complete the legislation and introduce it into the House. >> Minister, >> thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the member for both his question and his interest in this very important package of legislation. As he knows, the Health Profession legislative review began some seven years ago. uh I hope uh this spring in fact to be tableabling a package a framework for the self-regulation and the self-governance of some 24 professions in the province of Ontario. I have met with all of those uh professions which are uh included in the legislation and I must say to the member that there is a remarkable consensus that the time is appropriate for this package to be tabled in the legislature for discussion and I hope that that will occur this spring. >> Supplementary. >> Thank you, Minister. I do I do have a supplementary, Mr. Speaker. the uh some of the one of the recommendations was dealt with deregulation of some professions and uh there seems to be an ongoing concern that if this recommendation is approved uh how will this affect uh the average citizen will they still be able to to meet with the deregulated professions. Uh this is an example of ongoing concerns which might uh continue uh despite the introduction and I'd like to ask the minister about that and whether or not uh once the legislation is tabled whether citizens will continue at the opportunity of input. >> Minister. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As in any package of new legislation and proposal for a new framework, there are always questions and concerns. Over the past seven years since this discussion began, most of the discussions in fact have been between the professions. I would commit myself today to the honorable member uh that we would seek full public hearings uh after second reading to ensure that all of those uh concerns can be addressed. I would say specifically that I met recently with some clergymen who expressed the concerns that the honorable member uh addressed and I would say to him as I said to them that there was no intention to uh uh in any way impact on the important work of the clergymen of this province and that during the uh uh hearing process I think that amendments can be forthcoming which will address all of their concerns. >> Your question the member for Hamilton Mountain. >> Thank you Mr. Speaker. In the absence of the Minister of Energy, I'd like to address my question to the premier. >> Ontario Hydro has been uh touting its demand management and energy efficiency programs as the most aggressive on the continent. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, in a response to a question which I raised on December the 20th, the premier himself said, and I quote, uh I am told that this is the most ambitious conservation program by any utility in North America. Perhaps, Mr. Speaker, the premier could tell us when Ontario Hydro or any other crown agency for that matter boasts in that way, who over there does any checking to ensure that that kind of boast is in fact valid and worth repeating on the part of the government. >> Premier, Mr. Speaker, it's all there for the public to see. I'm sure my honorable friend with his very large research budget would want to look into the matter reviewed before committees here and uh you may have some information to to uh to bring to bear on this subject. There's no no secrets about this. It's all there for everyone to see. >> Complimentary. >> Well, it it may be all there for everyone to see, Mr. speaker, but it's obviously the premier and his staff and the and the the staff of the Minister of Energy haven't done very much checking or they wouldn't bother to repeat this kind of incorrect information. Hydro not only does not have the best energy efficiency program of any utility on the continent, but they're not even close to the best small utility, Mr. Speaker in Maine, Central Maine Power, a utility less than a tenth the size of Ontario Hydro in 1990 is spending more than twice what Ontario Hydro has budgeted for energy efficiency. When are you and the Minister of Energy and the bureaucrats over there going to get on top of Ontario Hydro to ensure that in fact what you've said will happen in this review in fact happens that all of the facts and all of the alternatives are clearly looked at. >> Premier I think that my friend, I'm just going by memory. I think part of the demand supply option study is to squeeze 4,000 megawws out of current uh uses. Uh it's a very aggressive program. My honorable friend uh uh equates results to spending. That's one of the structural problems with the NDP. They don't understand how the real world works. But he's got every right to to say that. But if you have any information to bring to bear or any constructive suggestions, I'll certainly pass them along. New question, the member for Dermy's. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have a question to the Minister of Corrections, but while I have 15 seconds, I'd like to congratulate the Minister of Energy, who is not here, but also the Minister of Labor and the Premier for the aversion of what could have been a very serious uh hydro strike. And as the uh as critic as critic of the Minister of Energy, I've been very critical of this administration. But it doesn't embarrass me from time to time to throw out a few little laurels. >> A question >> to the Minister of Corrections. I want to indicate to you, sir, >> I want to indicate to you that, as you well know, in the facilities of both the Dawn Jail, Metro East, Metro West, and in my own region of Durham, in the Whitby jail, there has been extensive overcrowding of inmates, which has put a great deal of mental pressure on not only the correctional staff, but on those inmates in those institutions when overcrowding occurs. We have seen recently what's happened in Europe in terms of the intense frustrations that can result from overcrowding. I realize this cannot be resolved on an immediate basis, but Mr. Minister, would you again share with us some of your thoughts about the progress you're making on trying to alleviate the over serious overcrowding situations that are taking place in our correctional institutions? >> Minister, >> thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh I appreciate the question from uh my flamboyant generous critic who uh was one of the few to offer congratulatory comments to others would appreciate that in terms of uh the population pressures that we have in our particular uh in our particular ministry. It's well known. We've talked about this, debated it. Uh you'll recall some of the announcements that I made in late October uh related to our intentions and more recently some specific announcements on adding beds particularly in the Metro Toronto area that we believe will go a long way to help relieve some of the overcapacity pressures that we have. Uh there are a whole series of approaches that we have in terms of uh transferring people on remand for example or intermittence on the weekend where we receive abnormal numbers from uh the police forces that uh uh bring some of these uh persons that are charged into our care. uh more particularly uh you mentioned that I have been touring these facilities and I have I have visited well over 60% of the institutions at this point and I think it's important to note that it is not a universal pressure across the province. Uh it is a particular concern here and we are taking a number of measures to address those >> tele. Well Mr. Mr. Minister, I'd appreciate if you could inform us whether you've had the opportunity of visiting the Whitby jail. Myself and my colleague from Ashawa had the opportunity of three weeks ago visiting the institution for almost a full day. I can assure you that in terms of presentday institutions in regards to rehabilitation, the place is extremely archaic. It's antiquated. Now there are some funds as we were told that will be spent in terms of making the facilities a little more pleasant if that's possible for the correctional officers but I had the opportunity of reviewing in great detail some of the problems in counting the Whitby jail and Mr. Minister, I'm going to be pursuing this with you over the next few months. Investigate the possibilities of selling that institution, which is now located on a prime piece of real estate land in the town of Whitby. And with the funds garnered, you could build a new up-to-date institution down the road on property owned by the uh by the government of Ontario, some 100 acres at the Whitby Psychiatric Hospital. And with the new institution, we could be striving for something called rehabilitation to ensure that we do not have repetitiveness in terms of inmates that are coming in constantly and causing the overcrowded conditions in amongst other places of Whitby J. >> Yes, Mr. Speaker, I I would welcome at any time particular proposals that the member from Durham East has or perhaps members of his constituency or any other that uh that can make a contribution to the continual upgrading. Uh I know that the member indeed does appreciate that over 50% of our institutions are very very old institutions. He well knows as well that we've made major capital allocations to this particular area and it doesn't take much to eat up tens tens of millions of of of dollars for for expansion or renovations. I'd like to point out to him that uh uh that in the Whitby jail we have made some staff additions and I believe he knows uh about about this. Uh we are also uh uh refurbishing the administrative portion where staff are far too crowded in their operations and what that will mean is that there will be an addition of some program space for the inmates Mr. Speaker in that institution which will help to provide a little bit more elbow room uh in the institution. Yet at this particular point, uh I do not have a date for some additional expansion space for more beds, although it is part of our longer rage plan. >> Thank you. New question, the member for Elgen. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. >> My question is to uh the Minister of Education. Minister, since 1985, $265,000 have been spent on roof repairs, boiler breakdowns, leaking pipes at St. Joseph High School in Elgen uh in the Elgen writing. This school was built a large portion of it large uh before the turn of the century. There are many problems being faced with this building. Overcrowding being one of them. With these problems and the fact that St. Joe's is the only Roman Catholic high school in my writing, the Ministry of Education granted $200,000 for site acquisition for this new Roman Catholic school in 1989. Taxpayers are now awaiting capital allocations from the ministry to build. My question, Mr. Minister, is >> when and what response can the Elen County Roman Catholic School Board expect from the ministry regarding capital funding for uh 1990 and 91? >> Minister, >> thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh the honorable member makes a very good point as many other members including the member from Sarnia had made representations on behalf of school boards with older facilities. Facilities that didn't seem to get much attention from a previous administration. But this government over the last few years has been dedicating very considerable additional dollars uh not just to build new facilities in growth areas but to improve or replace facilities such as the one the honorable member uh uh has has raised. Uh I can assure her that the fact that an initial allocation for a new site was approved by my predecessor, the member from Wentworth North in recent times is a very encouraging sign. Uh we are looking at uh the most recent capital request from school boards and I can assure the honorable member that later in this spring I I hope to be in a position to announce some additional capital allocations for uh for school boards across the province. >> Supplementary. I heard uh the minister said that you hope sometime later this spring. Well uh the school board is now trying to find space for the new pupils that they are gathering as a result of uh looking forward to a new high school being built. They are having to uh rent church basement uh finding new spaces. Uh when will the allocations be ready? How much later this spring? >> Minister. >> And it is a good question. It is a good question because uh the member I wanted said Mr. Speaker has has made very vigorous representations on behalf of both her school boards and I commend her for that. I believe there was a meeting involving her office and mine on on these matters uh a few weeks ago and uh I expect that uh later uh hopefully later this month uh that I will be in a better position to uh to uh speak to the capital pressures which are very considerable. I think it has to be observed that as our allocations have increased three and four times what they were four and 5 years ago, the requests out there from school boards have have also uh increased by by the same factor. And uh I have heard what she said. I will do the very best I can, but I have to tell her and her community that there is a tremendous demand for what is unfortunately a limited supply of public dollars. >> New question. The member for Alma. >> Mr. Speaker, if the minister takes as long to make up his mind as to when he's going to answer as he does to answer, it's no wonder we're having to wait. Um, I wonder uh if I could ask a question of the minister of the minister of agriculture and food regarding the grape acreage reduction program. Could the in the name of fairness, could the minister explain why the provincial government is not prepared to accept the uh approach of the federal government? The federal government has agreed to review the entitlement of the group of grape growers uh who have been denied uh eligibility for the program on the basis of uh arbitrary retroactive dates. Um uh the federal government is prepared to accept an indep independent tribunal to make the final decision. It's such an equitable approach. Why isn't the provincial government prepared to take the same approach? >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, I'm happy to have the opportunity to inform the member that he's misinformed on this and that the federal government has agreed that we use the offices of the ombbudsman of Ontario, the offices that any Ontarian can go to address what they may perceive as being a grievance against the government and the federal government agrees with our department that uh going to the ombbudsman to take a look at this particular grievance would be the correct course of action. >> Supplementary. >> Mr. Speaker, >> you're asking the supplementary. The >> problem is that the grape growers of Niagara, the grape growers of Niagara have been shafted again and again and again, and now the screw is finally being put to them by the provincial minister of agriculture, Mr. Ramsay. The fact is that he's wrong about what the federal government is prepared to do. The fact is that the provincial government is refusing to live up to its obligations under the grape acreage reduction program. This provincial government, notwithstanding that the great growers who've worked long and hard in their fields, notwithstanding that they're prepared to go to alternative dispute resolution, this government saying no. Now, perhaps a minister of agriculture should consult with the attorney general and understand that this government's displaying a commitment to alternative dispute resolution that the minister denies to those grape growers in Nagra Peninsula who are being forced off their farms. Why won't he permit them to use alternative dispute resolution? Why is he forcing them into litigation? >> Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform the member that this government doesn't shrink in its responsibilities, especially towards tender fruit and grape. And I'd like to inform the member that uh we have entered in, as the member knows, into a tripartite agreement. And $39 million has been spent to grain to great producers in the Niagara area. >> 39 million >> 17.5 million came from our ministry. >> Right. Listen up, Peter. Listen up. >> $31 million, Mr. Speaker, has gone to growers as part of our acreage reduction program. I think the grape growers uh have been well served down there. They have a dispute on how the program was for and I think that the ombbudsman's office would be the appropriate place to take that dispute to. >> Thank you. New question, the member for Carlton. >> Yes. Uh Mr. Speaker, I have a question of the premier. Mr. Premier. Uh, as you may know, uh, there are some, uh, problems with the high-tech industry in the Ottawa Carlton area, and representing the city of Canada, I have a a very very, uh, high interest in that that whole area. What are you doing to address the problem uh, where there are uh, some layoffs occurring in the area. Uh, the uh, the stock prices for high-tech companies is falling. What is your government doing to address the problem? >> Premier. Well, >> Mr. Speaker, I I I know if my honorable friend thinks through his question, he'll realize that no government controlled stock prices. And I can't expect that he honestly would believe that a government should be involved in manipulating stock prices for any company, let alone high-tech. I let me just take you back though a moment. I I think if my honorable friend was fair in analyzing the things that this government has done, there is no government in this country that has given more support in the high technology areas. This has been a fundamental part of our agenda. The premier's council, the centers of excellent, the technology funds were herald indeed uh plagiarized by other governments in this country to try to get the industry moving. Uh I could give my friend endless details of that if he would so choose. U but I think that if my honorable friend is truly interested in this subject as he appears to be then he would want to study the actions of the government so she he could explain them uh and he would be very proud of what's happened. >> Supplementary. Uh I think the uh the premier does me a disservice to to uh to indicate uh that in some ways I was uh thinking that he should uh he should manipulate the stock market. Of course I meant by that as as everybody else knows is that the stock market falls when profits fall within that industry and is a general indication of an ailment. Denzel Doyle uh who is a consultant in the area and a former president of Digital Canada said that the main problem is a difficulty in financing new businesses. What we need is some hard good hard-nosed money in the Ottawa area in that you're uh competing in the new global economy. Of the 12 recommendations, six recommendations went to the financing of new businesses, high-tech businesses. When are you going to take some action on those particular recommendations? >> Premier Speaker, again, I I I don't want to be unkind to my friend, but where's he been in the last three years? I mean, he's not familiar. We today have the most attractive rates. I've read them and we've implemented them. You're not familiar with this, but let me just take a moment, Mr. Speaker, to help out my friend. Look at the the the CCA that's been brought in by the treasur. Look at the R&D super allowance that's been brought in in the last budget. I say to my friend, he may I I know he doesn't know this or he wouldn't ask me this question because he wouldn't want to display his lack of knowledge about a very important area in his own constituency, but we have the most attractive rates for new manufacturing investment in this country today and and better than a lot of our competitors in uh in in other states. This is because of direct initiatives of this treasur that have gone on following the reports of the um of the um uh of the premier's council. So I think my friend would want to do his uh research, look at the the recommendations of the premier's council and see how they have indeed uh been important in formulating government policy. I think that uh this these are subjects I've spoken on many times. My honorable friend knows of our deficit in the high technology areas. We're importing roughly 8 billion in high technology goods today. You can make a simple argument. We're exporting yesterday's technology and importing tomorrow's. We have a structural problem in this country. uh we our our initiative of $1 billion dollars through the uh uh through the premier's council is probably the most important shot in the arm that this country has had in this particular area. >> What I think you might want to do because I know you're very very close to the federal conservatives and the federal government. I know you support all of their policies. You would want to look what they have done and where their the promises made there as opposed to the performance delivered because I think I think Mr. Doyle understands even better than my honorable friend. >> Thank you. >> No doubt. >> Thank you member for London South. >> My question is for the minister of citizenship. I would like to inquire of the minister regarding a particular problem that I often see in my constituency office and I'm sure other people see in their offices too. Several people who come to my office are recent immigrants from other countries. They have brought with them to our country training in their own trades and professions. They have the the certificates and degrees that prove their abilities and their expertise in these areas. They come to our province which needs these abilities and these expertise but find that their degrees or or certificates are in no way recognized. This puts them in a very difficult position not only of not able being able to contribute but not being able to properly support their families. What is the ministry hoping to do about this? >> Minister. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to thank the honorable member for her genuine interest uh on the subject of accessibility to professions and trades in the province of Ontario on the part of foreign trained individuals. The uh problem I believe is magnified when we appreciate that studies have been done in the United States and in the UK that indicate that up to 6 to 8% of a country's GMP might be lost due to discriminatory employment practices. As a result, this government uh saw early on the priority of tearing down the barriers to ensure access to people regardless of racial, cultural backgrounds or where they studied. What is important here is that uh the task force report which I tabled late in 1989 had 104 recommendations and the government is currently focused on implementation determining the most effective way of implementing some or all of these recommendations so that people who are foreign trained and who have the ability and who are qualified can have easy access like every other Ontarian. supplementary. >> U Mr. Speaker, for many of the people that I see who are supporting families and trying to plan their lives, it's a matter of time to know how to plan the weeks and months ahead. This is now the beginning of April. Is there any hope that any of these people will find a more uh rich and readier climate by the fall of this year? >> Minister, >> with respect to the uh specifics, Mr. Speaker, u the uh Ministry of Citizenship is currently coordinating a nine uh member interministerial uh working group which is focused on how best to implement some or all of these recommendations, most of which pertain to the provincial government. In addition, uh we've sent out over 700 letters to specific stakeholders to make sure that we get their input on the best ways of implementing these recommendations. Further, I hope to be visiting a number of cities across Ontario in order to uh discuss once again with the various stakeholders the best ways to implement the themes and the initiatives that were proposed by the task force to the government. So in the end analysis uh let me say to the honorable member that uh by the fall hopefully we will have a an effective working paper or plan that will discuss how this can be implemented not only by the government but also by the professions and trades and other people who can help make this work. >> Thank you. New question the member for Hamilton East. >> Have a question for the solicitor general. On November 8th, 1988, Mr. G. Mertens was fatally injured at the Campbell Red Lake Mine. The minister tell this house why an inquest was just recently ordered after a further death in this mine on February 6th. Minister. >> Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in response to the uh particular question, I cannot uh uh be uh specific in dealing with the particular matter and for that I will certainly undertake to provide further uh information. But in dealing with the whole question of inquest in general, I would like to to indicate that it is under the coroners act the responsibility of coroners to call inquest when uh uh they want to investigate uh uh matters around the death of an individual to deal with the the who, what, when, where, where of any one particular incident. But in dealing with the the actual calling of an inquest, uh they want to make certain that any potential investigation has been completed. When an investigation has been fully completed, that is when the coroner uh in the usual case makes uh their decision uh dealing with the particular question which the member has brought forward and being specific as to one particular inquest. Certainly I will undertake to uh uh get specific information on that. But in dealing generally with the whole calling of of inquest that is a matter for the local coroner to determine they make that determination in dealing with the actual uh questions surrounding as to whether it is uh uh necessary in dealing with the who what uh when where of any one particular incident and the investigation has been fully completed. >> Supplementary. Well, surely the responsible minister is aware that the law calls for an inquest in all mining fatalities. And is this minister prepared to order an inquest into individual industrial fatalities as well and ensure whether it's workers or m in mining or in industry that they don't have to wait over 17 months as occurred in this case for an inquest that might very well have provided answers that it was would have prevented the death of Mr. Barnhard just in February of this year. are in the same mind. >> Yes, sir. >> Oh, thank you very much. And uh let it let us be perfectly clear that I'm current aware of the provisions under the coroners act. I'm also aware and the member will also be aware that uh yes, in some instances uh the calling of an inquest is an automatic type of a call, but the actual holding of the inquest is not under the coroner's act. That can only take place after a full investigation has been completed. I would expect that in this case that is in fact the situation and uh as such an inquest has been properly and accordingly called. >> New question the member for Le Grrenville. >> Uh Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Tourism and it has to do with the decision by the St. Lawrence Parks Commission to close a number of camping grounds along the St. Lawrence system. I'm sure he's aware that the commission announced this decision as a fedmple. There's no effort to uh talk to municipalities along the region to discuss the possibility of closure and other ways and means of perhaps uh um making the commission's operations more efficient. In fact, the municipalities and the people who have utilized these uh campgrounds for a number of years have been told this is what's going to happen. I'm wondering if the minister has has been made aware of this, if he if he uh supports the decision by the St. Lawrence Parks Commission or if he's prepared to review it and see if indeed we cannot uh have those parks open this year and carry on with some sort of uh uh public discussion to see if there are not other answers out there available. >> Minister, >> thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Uh the member is quite correct in saying that St. Lawrence Parks Commission did in fact make a decision to uh reduce the operation of certain number of campgrounds along the St. Lawrence this year. I would first of all tell the member and he's well aware of this fact, the St. Lawrence Parks Commission is made up of representation of communities from across eastern Ontario and as such those people on that commission are wellversed in the concerns and the needs of the area. He would also be aware, Mr. Speaker, that the uh St. Lawrence Parks Commission has been the subject of uh the subject, Mr. Speaker, of a number of studies by committees from this legislature. Uh I think that the member would be aware of the recommendations of those committees that it be a cost-effective operation and the fact is that the parks in question have not been drawing large numbers of visitors during the past two or three seasons in an attempt to make the operation of the St. Lawrence Park Commission more cost effective and the member is always concerned about the way in which government dollars are being spent and I compliment him for that. The decision has been made to try and find ways to make uh the operation of campgrounds more effective along the the St. Lawrence. This ends a question period.