Question Period Rewind - April 4 1990

Welcome to Question Period Rewind. I'm Donna Skellyy, the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. The year is 1990. It might chug your memory because it's when Nelson Mandela was released after 27 years in prison. On the radio, you were probably listening to Nothing Compares to You by Chenado Connor. Now, let's take a listen to what the House was talking about. Oral questions. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. President, the question is >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. >> Minister of Natural Resources, Mr. speaker concerning the uh the statement by the minister who apparently made outside a cabinet meeting to a reporter uh that quote I don't think there's any question in my mind that we're going to be proceeding with logging uh which is the quote attributed to the minister the large headline in case she hasn't seen it logging in and tomogamy forest will go ahead minister says uh Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the minister uh why it would be that the government has apparently decided to proceed with uh with logging in to tmogamy when she knows perfectly well that there has been no uh settlement reached, no agreement reached with uh the native community with the Ti Aama Nishnabi when she knows full well that their appeal is now before the Supreme Court of Canada that leave to appeal has been granted by the Supreme Court of Canada. Why would you be taking this kind of action without any degree of protection for the rights of uh the native people whose rights are supposed to be important to the government of Ontario and to the people of Ontario? >> Minister, >> thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. >> Um I would of course recognize the fact that there has been logging going on in the Tomogamy area for some 100 years now. I indicated to the media this morning that I have been as minister of natural resources recognizing that the crown timber licenses in the tmogamy area expired the end of March have been involved in a process over recent months of the seeing that the ministry is preparing new timber management plans to be able to continue the logging operations in the tmogamy area. I think all members of this house as of the public are aware that those timber management plans are in the development stage and that they do propose continuation of logging in the tmogamy area. Those plans have been fully reviewed reviewed by the tomogamy advisory council after extension of public consultation. I also indicated to the media that it would be my intention when the review of those plans is complete to bring them before cabinet for consideration. But as Minister of Natural Resources, my responsibility is to prepare the plans that would continue logging in that in the Tmogamy area. >> Supplementary. >> Mr. Mr. Speaker, uh it's it's the plans which have been put forward by the ministry allow for extensive clear cutting in the tmogamy area, which is directly contrary to the commitment that we had from the premier and from the minister. They permit extensive clear cutting in so-called sensitive areas. In areas that are whose whose land is so sensitive that there will never be regeneration only like it will come back. No trees will come back in those areas. You're permitting clear cutting in those areas. I want to ask the minister, how can you justify proceeding on this kind of a basis without a serious environmental assessment of what you've done and without any kind of agreement with the Tammy Algama and Nishnabi ban? >> Minister, >> thank you very much. Mr. Speaker, becomes quite apparent that the honorable member, although he expresses considerable concern about the area, has not examined in detail the timber management plans which are being presented and which have been out for public consultation. I want to assure the honorable member that not only has there been extensive public consultation on those plans, but they have had a second review by the Tomogamy Advisory Council and the Tomogamy Advisory Council in order to assure the independence of that review employed two independent forestry consultants who have also reviewed the plans. I also want to assure the honorable member that there is a full recognition of the commitment that the premier made which reflects the belief in the ministry of natural resources that there must be full recognition of environmental uh values including the protection of sensitive pine growth areas. You will find if you look at the timber management plan that there is no clear cutting of white pine stands where that is predominantly white pine that there is only shelterwood cutting in those areas. I would remind the honorable member that in addition to that there is some 30% of the pine protected in a 100,000 areas of of parkland and skyline reserve and that in fact the total number of timber management plans which have been prepared for presentation to cabinet involves harvesting only some 2% of the tamogamy area forest >> last supplementary speaker uh the minister knows full well that the plans that she has talked about have uh I'm sure she would recognize even been changed since they were out for public consultation. So if she says I haven't seen the final plans, she's quite right. I haven't seen the final plans. However, we have had a look at the plans which the ministry uh put out for public consultation. Those plans those plans allow of significant clearcuts far more than is wise in terms of the future of the forest. They provide insignificant recognition of old growth. They provide inadequate protection of skyline reserve and I can say to the minister that there are independent foresters who have studied the plans who feel precisely as we do in terms of the protection in those three particular areas. But I want to come back to my central point to the minister. How can you in all conscience permit logging on this scale when there has yet to be an agreement with the band who claimed the land in question? >> Minister Mr. Speaker, it's unfortunate that an issue of this degree of complexity um cannot be responded to in the fullness of which it deserves because the honorable member continues to raise questions about the judgment of the plans that are being brought forward by the Ministry of Natural Resources in spite of the fact that we have done our utmost to ensure that there is not only full public consultation but independent review by a local advisory committee supported by two independent forestry consultants assisting in that review. I would be prepared to uh look at each of the concerns that has been raised and see how those concerns are addressed in the timber management plans. But the other question which the honorable member has referred to in each of his of his questions is the is the issue of how we can proceed with plans for harvesting when there is in fact a concern on the part of the teogma ban and a land claim issue before the courts. And we are of course very cognizant of that and sensitive to the concerns of the teogma ban. We I would remind that the the honorable member and all members of this house that we are working in all forest management with what is a renewable resource and managed well continues to be a renewable resource affording sustainable development and we have encouraged and will continue to encourage the teogma band to participate fully in planning for the management of that resource including becoming involved with us in co-management through the Tomogamy Advisory Council. >> Your question member for Windsor Riverside Mr. Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the premier and the absence of the minister of health, I'd like to ask a or minister of housing. I'd like to ask a question to the deputy premier. And again, the question is about another set of buildings owned by NHD Development Incorporated or the Saber family. Um the two uh projects in question are 65 units on Red Cedar Way in North York, which is facing a 25.47% increase in their rent this year. uh already approved by your rent review system and 62 units at Flex Garden Way in North York where they're going to get a 25.72% increase in their rent already approved by your rent review system. the tenants in these uh townhouse units. The tenants in these townhouse units brought in an engineer to look at some of the work that is being done in these buildings um under the capital uh uh works uh section of your rent review legislation. What I'm asking you uh Mr. minister is how can you allow a rent review system that rewards landlords that have neglected their buildings for 17 years and then come in with massive capital projects to bring them up to grade with the tenants as a result facing these 25% increase in the rents which are unaffordable for many of the tenants in these buildings. >> Deputy Green Mr. Speaker, I'll bring the honorable member's comments to the attention of the Minister of Housing. Oh, good. Well, >> perhaps uh perhaps you will bring them, but it's your government and your cabinet that's got to come to to grips with this major problem. >> Um perhaps he'd like to uh bring this uh aspect to the minister's attention. Some of the tenants in these buildings owned again by the Sabra family uh owe $1,300 to $1,500 in back rent. The position that the company is taking and the reason they owe this back rent is because it takes time to get through your rent review system. The position of the company is they either pay up immediately or they're evicted. Is that an appropriate way in your view for landlords to deal with their tenants uh in this province? >> Deputy Premier. >> Mr. Speaker, the honorable member asked me if I would like to bring that to the attention of the Minister of Housing. I'm not sure it would give me any great pleasure, but I will. >> Last supplementary >> final supplementary is uh on the the rent review system. in this province is allowing landlords to take advantage of tenants in a massive way. The last statistics Canada figures showed that over 30% 31% of the tenants in this community in Toronto were already paying over 30% of their monthly rent or their monthly income on rent. Now, these your rent review legislation is increasing that problem considerably. At the same time, your government has destroyed or ended the co-op and nonprofit uh housing program in this province. Where are people like this supposed to live if they're not going to get protection for their rents with your rent review legislation? >> Deputy Premier, Mr. Speaker, the honorable member has taken part in the discussions of recent budgets and well knows that uh the financing that's been put before the house has provided more than 30,000 new and property financed spaces on a rent geared to income basis and for a limited dividend. that uh we have in this government since we took office 5 years ago allocated a larger increase in funding to housing than to any other single responsibility that rests at the respon under the responsibility of the of this government. The honorable member knows that even recent initiatives including uh housing initiatives to the east of Toronto at Seatin and elsewhere have been uh not only significant in their cost uh but clearly designed to alleviate housing uh problems that he describes and frankly in the last 5 years the situation has improved marketkedly and I think the honorable members fears are somewhat exaggerated. >> New question the member for Perry Sound. >> Mr. Speaker, I have a question of the Minister of Health. The Minister will undoubtedly be aware of the announcement made by Toronto General Hospital that to balance its budget for this fiscal year. It sees the necessity of closing an additional 96 beds in addition to the 154 they've already had to close to balance their budget. I was just wondering uh Madame Minister how this can be possible in light of what you and the treasurer pronounced as a grandiose announcement of 8.7% increase in hospital funding on November 29th of last year. >> Minister. >> Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Each year at this time, hospitals begin to develop their budget plans. There has been an allocation, as the member knows, of over $500 million, half a billion dollars for the hospitals in this province. I know that there have been some concerns expressed in light of the Wilson budget that that would have an impact on hospitals and I'm pleased to tell the member opposite that the commitment made by this government stands and that at as hospitals develop their plans they will see that hospital services will be maintained in this province. supplementary. >> Speaker, that response is almost sick. on on November on November 29th of last year, it was pointed out by several members of this legislature and the Ontario Hospital Association the hospitals required if they are going to finance not only for inflation to provide a minimum level of care, a minimum level of care, madam minister, in this province, if they're going to cover provincial government self-imposed costs such as pay equity, employers health tax, increased workers compensation payments. They needed an absolute minimum increase of 11%. You gave them 8.7%. You've had over 4 months to contemplate that. Madam Minister, what steps are you taking to make sure that this absolute minimum level, which the Ontario Hospital Association says it needs to maintain minimum standards of healthcare in this province, will be achieved. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I met with the Ontario Hospital Association just last week and we discussed the fact that hospital funding formulas are in a state of transition and that in fact they're always at the best of times very complex. There are a number of components of the hospital funding formula. One is the overall base increase. Then there is the component for growth which acknowledges increased acuity in the hospital. A third component is the hospital incentive fund which encourages hospital to shift and realign services from that which can be provided on an inpatient basis to that on an outpatient basis. Another is the transitional formula funding for equity which I'm pleased to inform the member opposite is increasing this year from some $25 million last year. It's up 60% to $40 million this year. I can say that uh with all of these different components, we also include additional resources for life support and as the hospitals develop their budget plans, I know that they will work in cooperation with the ministry area team so that we can ensure that appropriate service levels are available to the people of this province. >> Glass supplementary. >> Mr. Speaker, the hospitals have been trying to get their act together for the last four months, which is more than I can say for the minister. In this submission that the OA made to the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs in January of this year, Mr. Speaker, the Ontario Hospital Association has pointed out again to this government that it needs at the very least an extra $138 million this year to maintain hospital levels at existing hospital services, pardon me, at existing levels. $138 million by the OA's submission, Madame Minister, is 3% of combined hospital payrolls or the equivalent of 3,900 full-time employees at hospitals. It's also the equivalent of 6,634 acute care patients that won't get care in this province this year if you don't react to what they've been telling you for over four months. >> The time has come and gone. This is not an April Fool's joke. April 1st, you should have had your act together. When are you going to get it together? >> Minister, >> thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As always, the member is wrong. I can tell him that in light of the Wilson budget, there was some delay in the letter of transmitt. I explained that Ontario Hospital Association, they were very understanding. There was a lot of concern because of the cut in the federal transfer payment, but our commitment stands firm and in fact we're hoping to have the letter of transmitt out to the hospitals this week as they begin their planning of budgetary cycle. >> New question, the member for SNIA. >> My question as well, Mr. Speaker, is to the Minister of Health. Sadly, Madame Minister, when one cuts through all of the rhetoric that you just exchanged with uh with my colleague What has happened is that you are shrinking the hospital system and you are cutting back beds. The fact of the matter is that as a result of imposed costs which you have passed on to hospitals, not dissimilar to what we talked about in this house yesterday as it relates to children's services with with the employer health levy and with pay equity. There are very substantial additional costs which hospitals have absolutely no control over whatsoever. You made the decision. You passed on those costs. Could you tell us what the total amount is for the employer health levy to hospitals as well as pay equity? And do you intend to fund those two additional responsibilities that you have imposed on the hospital system? >> Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite knows, the treasurer announced an allocation for the hospitals which is very very significant. Some $500 million, half a billion dollars. I want to assure him that no hospital budget will be cut. Every hospital will receive an increase and the uh uh the funding formula as I explained to his colleague is a little complex. We're working on the kind of transitional funding formula that will restore equity and fairness and ensure that all hospitals are fairly and appropriately funded in this province. >> Supplementary throw around figures like 500 and a billion dollars that's totally meaningless to people who can't find a bed in a hospital. The reality is that you have closed down 2,000 hospital beds in this province. You made a promise for a 4,400 hospital bed increase. I said to you back in 1988 at the time that you introduced some of these plans that that pay equity alone over a four to five year period was going to cost the hospitals in this province I'm glad you've got a note and I hope it's got the answer were going to cost this province and the hospitals some $115 million. I stand before you now and tell you that my original estimates were below what I anticipate they're going to be. Where is that 115 million and more going to come from so that we can maintain the kind of hospital system and the kind of health system we had before 1985. >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, the leader of the third party couldn't be more incorrect in his assumptions. I would say to him that the ministry has not yet reviewed any of the budgetary plans which are being developed by the hospital. uh he mentioned his colleague mentioned the Toronto hospital and in fact there are uh encouraging signs that hospitals services in alternative ways. We heard from the hospital for example that inpatient admissions are reduced and that there have been an increase in outpatient and ambulatory care. As more hospitals develop and strengthen ambulatory services to reflect the ministry's priorities, I think we can expect to see some realignment of resources from inpatient to outpatient care. What we're interested in is the delivery of appropriate services to the people of this province and to take advantage of new technologies that allow those services to be provided in alternative ways, whether that is in the hospital, in a community setting, in an ambulatory center or in fact at home. last supplementary. >> Well, Madame Minister, you know, it's uh interesting when you're in opposition and you raise these questions. I guess it's an easy charge to make that we're always wrong and that our facts are out of place or we haven't researched the question adequately. Let me tell you what the Ontario hospital >> they aren't our facts. They're the OA. You disagree with the OA. >> Speak over the interjections of the attorney general who has an opinion on every ministry in the entire government. You have a lot of opinions and maybe you should keep some of them to yourself. I want to give you the opinion of the Ontario >> the opinion of the Ontario Hospital Association as it relates to this question. Now tell them they're wrong too because they say the inpatient hospital system is being deliberately downsized. The pressure will continue on hospitals to close beds and to reduce inpatient services. That's not me saying that. That's a direct quote as a result of the meeting that you had a week ago when you would not meet the commitments to fund some of the programs that you've shafted the hospitals with. What are you going to do about it? >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, we I had a very positive meeting with the Ontario Hospital Association who are working very closely with us on the developing of a new funding formula. I would say to him as well that we believe very strongly that in the adjustments of the new funding formula that the Ontario Hospital Association and all of the hospitals will work closely with the area teams to ensure that in fact we take advantages of new technologies that allow us to provide services on an outpatient and an ambulatory basis. And we're seeing huge increases in those kinds of services across the province. then that's very appropriate. If the people of this province need to have services that are provided on an inpatient basis, those will be provided. But if those services can be provided on an outpatient, an ambulatory or a community independent health facility, for example, we can we can take advantage of that uh through the new through the new act as well. Mr. Speaker, there are opportunities to provide services at home. And I will restate that the commitment of this government stands firm and that there will be over one half a billion half a million 1 half billion dollars $500 million available to the hospitals of this province in this fiscal year bringing the total over $6.5 billion in funding for the hospitals of this province. >> Your question the deputy nickel belt would like that. >> Thank you Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the treasurer concerning some of his recent meanderings on the collection of the goods and services tax. This morning in the Globe Mail, the treasures quoted as saying the province is willing to assist the federal government by collecting the portion of the GST that would be levied at the point of retail sale where the provincial tax is already imposed. Mr. Nixon said in the Financial Post on March 27th, Mr. Nixon said, "Ontario will not help the federal government collect its proposed goods and services tax." Provincial Treasurer Robert Nixon said in the Toronto Star on January the 9th, the Treasurer said, and I quote, "The Ontario government is willing to help collect some, but not all of the federal goods and services tax." Isn't it awful? >> In the London Free Press on January the 8th, 1990, Ontario still doesn't support the controversial goods and services tax, but is willing to collect it from retailers for the federal government provincial treasurer Robert Nixon says. Could the treasurer tell us which one of those positions he's leaning towards today? >> Mr. Speaker, they're all correct. And if the honorable member understood, they all say the same thing. >> Supplementary. >> This is a real labyrinth of verbiage. >> Mr. Speaker, I I can only uh I can only ask the the treasur then once again that he agrees with that both of these statements are correct. Ontario will not help the federal government collect its proposed goods and services tax and the province is willing to assist the federal government by collecting the portion of the GST that would be levied at the point of sales. So the treasur is saying in one hand he's not going to help them collect it and the other hand he's saying he is going to collect it. Would the president please tell us what he does intend to do? And given all these conflicting statements the treasur makes, tell us why the public in Ontario should believe that you have no intention of expanding the retail sales tax base in the province of Ontario. treasure >> because I said so. I guess it's a but uh I I'll I'll tell you uh I'll tell you the uh answer is perfectly legitimate and logical because we said we'd be glad to collect it at the point of sale as we collect our own and pass it on. that we have no intention of going out into the broader base of collecting services like uh dry cleaning and haircuts. We're not going to do that. We're not interested in applying the value added intricacies that Mr. Wilson is so fond of, but we would be prepared to collect it at the point of sale. So, well, just a minute. So, the federal government said federal government said thanks a lot, but no thanks. Therefore, we are not collecting the tax. What could be clearer or more elementary? >> Do a question. The member for Burlington South. Mr. Speaker, I can hardly wait for an election when we get another version. I uh my question is for the Minister of Colleges and Universities. Uh, Minister, colleges and universities were allocated an 8% uh increase in transfer pay payments, I believe, back in November, but that was barely enough to cover the recent 6% wage settlement for our community college workers and your new 2% employer health tax. Nothing, quite frankly, is being left over to pay for pay equity, for inflation, for new equipment, instructional supplies, building maintenance, and other operating costs. Based on this transfer payment, colleges are forced to uh making difficult choices. They can either cut programs and jeopardize the quality and access to post-secary education or they can run deficits. Minister, what are you prepared to do to address this situation of program cuts? >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, the honorable member's question uh covers a number of issues. Let me say that uh in the question of this government's support of the post-secondary sector, I think it is uh it is both true and fair to observe that uh in the period of time that it has been our responsibility to administer the the affairs of the province of Ontario, we have been I think very generous with both the colleges and the universities. To be sure, uh there is always more demand than there is supply of of of public dollars. But in the transfer announcements of last November, I indicated an 8% increase to both colleges and universities to say nothing of our support in areas like student assistance. And on the capital account, and I recognize that there continues to be uh uh more demand and more pressure, we will respond as best we can. But I think when one looks at what this administration has done as compared to what a previous administration did or didn't do particularly on things like capital and on operating I am not at all embarrassed by our record visa v the record of the honorable members party >> supplementary um the the most generous thing from your government has been announcements. It's not been the actual funding. Yesterday's announcement of $4 million was not covered by any major newspaper in this province because they recognized it for what it was. A four $4 million emergency band-aid to community college. $4 million. That's all that was given. Your premier yesterday in the House said he was committed to technical education, but based on his level of commitment in Ontario, Humber College is cutting $3 million worth of programs, particularly technical education courses. Fanshaw College is anticipating a $3.5 million deficit. Mohawk nearly a million. They have cut a major program and 41 staff positions. Niagara College nearly a million dollar deficit. It is obvious from your answer, Minister, that your government is committed to political announcements, but it is not committed to financing the best educational outcomes for secondary school students in this post-secary students in this province. My question is simply this. In order to ensure that our graduates remain competitive throughout the decade of the '90s, that they are globally competitive, will your government provide target funding to ensure program protection for these vital technical education programs that are so vital to Ontario's future? Will you provide target funding to protect these programs? >> Let me make two points. Firstly, the government of Ontario in both its post-secondary and its secondary funding supports has uh has encouraged a number of uh very creative and important new initiatives in the area for example of the honorable member's interest of technical education. And I wouldn't want to hold out yesterday's announcement as as the alpha and the omega of our commitment because clearly we've done a lot more than just the uh the fund that I mentioned yesterday. We are, as the honorable member from Burlington might want to know, uh, embarking upon a very substantial renewal of technological studies at the secondary area where our commitment is, I expect, in excess of some $60 million on the capital account alone. Now, I want to make one other point, Mr. Speaker, and if my friend from Burlington would stop barracking long enough to let me make this point, I would appreciate that parliamentary courtesy. But I know he would want me to observe that under our system of management of the college sector, a sector where over the past five years, our operating grants have increased by over $240 million at a time when enrollments have been generally very stable. I would also point out that we expect that boards of governors and management teams whether they're at Humber or at Cambrian or elsewhere are going to manage and that is going to mean making decisions making adjustments and unlike the Tories who would have the colleges and the rest of the world sit forever in a comfortable pew of the status quo. We as liberals are much more dynamic. We we anticipate and we encourage change and reform and we expect good managers at the colleges and elsewhere to do their duty and to ensure that those institutions change to meet emerging needs. >> Your question, >> the member for Hamilton Center. >> There you go. >> Order, please. The member for Hamilton Center. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Revenue. Mr. Minister, Bill 105 dealing with amendments to the Ontario Home Ownership Savings Plan Act 1988 is before the House for second reading. The amendments which I support respond to some of the difficulties the firsttime purchaser has experienced in utilizing the plan. I have been recently informed of a firsttime home buyer in my writing who did not take advantage of the OHOSP and was therefore unable to apply for land transfer tax rebate. The purchase home was in the range $75 to $135,000 and the buyer and his family clearly represent the typical firsttime home purchaser in need of a f of financial assistance as envisaged by the act. Could the minister clarify the rules rules and specifically the timing which apply to the purchase of an OA oas the actual purchase of a home and the application for land transfer tax rebate for that firsttime purchaser. >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the honorable member for the question. I'm sure uh many members are interested in the Ontario homeownership savings plan. I think honorable members should know that this plan has already assisted over 24,000 Ontario residents. There are over 79,000 Ontario uh home ownership plans uh and accounts open so far and there have been proposed amendments as my honorable colleague has mentioned in bill 105 which is before the house. Uh it's very clear uh Mr. speaker that people with an annual income of less than $40,000 and couples with a combined income of $80,000 and less can qualify and can open up an account. All they have to do is visit their bank or the local trust company office after you purchase your home. Uh Mr. Speaker, the plan holders notify the institution and the necessary paperwork is done and the money is released. Also, uh this allows the uh people who have opened the plan, Mr. Speaker, to then receive a rebate on the land transfer tax. A very generous program indeed. >> Supplementary. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh that information is helpful to me and I'm sure to potential firsttime home buyers. As I understand it, then you purchase the OHOSP. before that before the closing of the purchase the uh the person must make application for the land transfer tax rebate as I understand it. It seems to me then that communication is important to the success of the plan and access to the land tax rebate and I'm just I'm wondering what your communication plan is in the ministry to communicate the information and the procedures to the players and who those players are. >> Minister, >> of course. Uh Mr. Speaker, the matter uh obtains tremendous uh publicity during budget time when uh matters are announced uh by the treasur as was the case. Uh we also have um a very extensive communications plan with the banks and the institutions that we work with. We have also made available information to MPPP's constituency offices. And given the concern that the honorable member has about our communications plan, I will review the plan that we have and to to decide whether or not it meets the uh needs of the Ontario population. >> Your question, the deputy, the Hamilton West. >> Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Community Social Services. I want to take him back to the provincial municipal social services review. I want to first say that um I think the the preparation of this plan and the recommendations that it has in it are going to be a considerable disappointment to those who prepared this document the transitions document uh and the social service consumers who wanted a much simpler much more straightforward uh system of administration finance and also of delivery in the in the province. The report proposes Mr. Minister uh uh a number of uh number of uh of recommendations but there are riddled through them so many indecisive points of indecision. Uh there are so many elements of consultation that still have to be pursued. There is a continued move in the direction of of municipal devolution and community- based uh uh service organizations as the providers of services. that the fundamental question of this document that the social assistance review committee prepared has to be asked all over again. What's to prevent under this scheme that's proposed? What's to prevent the same old problem of inconsistent delivery across the province of social services which the province has suffered from so much in the past and which was the point of this document to try to relieve that problem. >> Minister, >> thank you very much uh Mr. Speaker. Um I would want to uh underline again that the report is now out and will be consulted uh on extensively with the association of municipalities as well as with other groups and I would urge my honorable friend to perhaps uh hold on uh on judgment in terms of uh the recommendations and the kind of administrative structure that that may flow. I think that uh it it's important to underline uh that the group that came together from both the municipal and the provincial sectors uh tried very hard to come up with something that they felt would uh simplify the system and would be one which would be more responsible in a in a fiscal way uh and in terms of who's delivering the particular services. They were aware of the social assistance review report and certainly for us as a government. Uh there are a number of documents here uh that become very important and critical as we look at implementing the recommendations of this report and I can say to my honorable friend that we are going to look very very carefully at this report and at the recommendations that come in uh from our partners in the social services field before uh enacting uh specific changes. We certainly don't intend to make it more complex. >> Supplementary. >> Mr. Speaker, as I look at what other provinces have done over the course of the last two decades in terms of the administration and funding of social services, they've almost universally from New Finland to Quebec to British Columbia adopted uh responsibility of the provincial government both for funding and delivery of services. Whether they were right or wrong, at least they made a decision. They bit the bullet and they have an integrated system. and then you know where the buck stops. As I look at this report, I really can't yet get a sense as to where the buck stops. Mr. Minister, where's the buck going to stop if one follows the model that is proposed in this particular document? >> Minister, >> thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I think again I would want to underline that uh whatever the experience in other provinces or other jurisdictions uh it has been the experience in Ontario to go forward in social services with a partnership and that partnership has involved the province uh has involved the municipalities and has involved uh the various community-based agencies. My sense is uh that one in in the province itself that there's a feeling that we want to continue with those partners but we want to make it more accountable and indeed want to be able to see where the buck does stop. I think that that's an integral part of the task that they had and as we go forward with the uh uh discussions around the report uh certainly at the end of the day we want to come up with something that is more accountable and the province and particularly this ministry uh clearly uh has the major overall uh uh responsibility in terms of the development of social services but we want to do that in conjunction with our partners. >> New question the member for Leeds Grrenville. >> Thank you Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations, and I'm sure he's aware that the uh governmentr run liquor stores are are contemplating severe cuts, something in the order of $13 million, and rumors are circulating throughout the province that uh some of these cuts could impact on store hours in a variety of municipalities across the province. I'm wondering if the minister would give his uh views in in respect to this particular proposal. Does he agree with the governmentr run monopoly restricting access for consumers? >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, let me let me assure my friend from Leeds Grenville that uh he would not like a system where uh the political view of what store hours uh is the view that should prevail. What the Liquor Control Board of Ontario has been and will continue to do is to organize the merchandising of uh wine and spirits and beer right around the province under its monopoly in a way that responds to consumers preferences. So for example, if a store is located uh in a shopping complex that is open from 9:00 in the morning till 9:00 in the evening, then uh the policy of the liquor board is to keep the store open during those hours. But if there are other areas where there is no business after 6:00, then it's foolish both in a business sense uh uh and in any other sense to keep the store open. Now what my friend from Leeds Granville should understand is that there has been a significant decrease over the past 10 years in absolute in levels of absolute consumption of alcohol. And what the board is doing right now is simply responding to that decrease uh consistent with its obligation to market in an effective way uh consistent with consumer needs. >> Supplementary. >> Well, Mr. Speaker, responding to consumer preferences. I don't think that reducing store hours is adequately responding to consumer preferences. When we talk about decreases in in sales, I think we have to look at the fact that this government in less than 5 years in office has increased booze taxes by around 40%. So that's having quite an impact on consumer preferences. I want to talk about tourism, Mr. Speaker. And we talk about the impact. We had an announcement where US travel has declined by 5.2%. This is having an impact in that area as well. Have you had a look at Have you assessed that? And talking about consumer access, I think there's an obligation upon you as a minister responsible when you're talking about a government-run monopoly to ensure that all of these areas who could be impacted very negatively do not have this kind of access restricted. Are you prepared to take a position on that? I don't hear it from you today. Are these store hours going to be reduced? And if they are, are you supporting that initiative? >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, my friend from Leeds Grenville uh obviously doesn't have any position at all on anything for goodness sakes. He uh he stands up often in this house and complains about a variety of things associated with alcohol and then criticizes us for raising taxes and complains about the fact that consumption is down. Right on. >> I want to tell them not to be so naive as to be the victim of rumors about the reduction of store hours. It simply is not the case. It simply uh uh is silly for him to suggest that there's some overall strategy to uh reduce access. I invite him uh to go to uh one or two of our stores anywhere in the province and see that our stores have kept up whilst he has not kept up. New question. The member for Oxford. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. >> My question is for the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations. >> Last fall, Mr. Minister, you visited Oxford >> to see for yourself the amazing potential of the province of Ontario Land Registry Information System, otherwise known as Polaris, the working model of which is up and running in Oxford. At that time you were new to the portfolio of consumer and commercial relations and to the concept of Polaris. >> But during your visit, Mr. Minister, I believe it's safe to say that you were impressed with the potential of this 100% Ontario homegrown technology. >> With that in mind, Mr. Minister, what have you done about encouraging the development of this technology in full? And how long will it be before the people of this province will be able to access the information in Polaris online? >> Mr. Speaker, >> now there's a member from Oxford who has kept up uh >> with the times and he doesn't even have to visit one of our liquor stores in order to do that. Whereas that may not be the case uh with my friend uh who asked the previous question. It's a very good question. My friend from Oxford has let the cat out of the bag. We did uh I did and uh he was my tour guide have a marvelous tour of the advanced technologies that are now operating in the county uh of Woodstock and of course we're talking about the Polaris technologies information-based technologies. Mr. Speaker, you see the Tories don't want to listen to this >> and it's unfortunate they've got their heads buried in the sand. But in any event, my friend from Oxford uh gave me a delightful tour. I want to tell him this. Uh we are now in the very final stages of negotiations with the uh two consortia uh that submitted proposals to join in a strategic alliance with the government uh for the development not only of uh the Polaris system but a broader uh data utility that will revolutionize the registration system in this province. Uh and I should have, Mr. Speaker, if all goes well, an announcement to be made on that uh within a month or so. >> Supplementary. >> Well, I appreciate that, Mr. Minister, but uh our technology been functioning in Oxford for some time and I think you can understand the interest of the people, particularly people like Liz Otawway in the county office, and they want to know exactly when we're going to have the technology in place. When do you anticipate a provincewide system will be in operation? Furthermore, will the municipalities be guaranteed access to this system or will it be strictly a provincial government matter? >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, there's a uh there's a very long answer uh in fact to the questions raised by my friend from Oxford. Let me just try and summarize uh very briefly. First of all, uh some of those technologies are already being implemented uh by the ministry in the absence of having reached a strategic alliance with a private sector partner. So for example in North York we're almost we're we've almost completed the work of uh of going from a paperbased registration system to a databased uh digitally based uh electronic system. Once we've reached an agreement with a private sector partner we think that we will speed up almost by a factor of 100% the implementation of Polaris around the province. Although it would be difficult to say Mr. speaker with any certainty when a provincewide system will be in place. Uh but if all goes well, uh we'll be moving rapidly into that technology in the very near future. >> New question, the member for Well and Thorough. >> Speaker, a question to the attorney general, please. The Niagara Falls Provincial Courthouse, as the attorney general knows, was shut down by virtue of an order from the Ministry of Labor under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. That courthouse, although a satellite courthouse in the most technical sense, uh had uh courtrooms in it which held criminal matters and trials, remands, first appearances, please, 5 days a week. Indeed, the docket for first appearances this Thursday, tomorrow is some six pages long, approximately 100 accused persons. They are being expected to uh attend at the St. Catherine's Courthouse. Members of the bar are particularly concerned. Members of the public should be concerned about possible losses of jurisdiction. The people in uh the community, members of the bar and persons involved in the court system in one way or another uh would would very much want to know what the attorney general's plans are with respect to the Niagara Falls Provincial Courthouse. >> Attorney General, Mr. >> Speaker, I don't think the honorable member's constituents need concern themselves about loss of jurisdiction. There are in the Niagara area three uh courouses that form a triangle in Wellan, St. Cathine's, and Niagara Falls that are hardly more than 20 mi apart. And the work order instituted against the Niagara Falls courthouse uh by the Department of Labor um uh has precluded the uh court from being used with respect to in custody uh defenses uh offenses. The um work is proceeding. I understand the Ministry of Government Services people who are in charge of the work met with the owners of the building yesterday. The work is proceeding and we hope that the cases can be conducted in this municipallyowned facility as soon as possible. >> Supplementary the incident of the shutdown of that courthouse raises once again the need in Niagara South for improved courthouse facilities. Now, the minister or the attorney general knows that the city of Wellland has gone to great lengths to prepare a proposal with respect to the old county courthouse to make it a a courthouse facility that could accommodate all of the offices, all of the court buildings as compared to being scattered throughout the city. The minister or his staff have seen those plans. Surely the city of Wellland uh would in fairness should be told by the attorney general whether the attorney general is going to accept that proposal or whether indeed the attorney general is looking alternatives to the to alternatives to the renovation of the district courthouse or the possibility of new facilities and the city would uh and again in fairness and should be told uh what the attorney general's plans are with respect to that facility, whether it's going to accept the renovated building or whether it's going to look for other land and and where that land is going to Attorney General. >> Well, Mr. Speaker, the honorable member of course represents his constituents in Well and Well, and there are people in Wellland who think that a courthouse should be expanded or a new one created there and the satellite court in Niagara Falls closed down to so that the Wellland project can be fed. Uh this government is very and the honorable member signifies that that is his view. U I'm not sure that that's the right view. I think it's important that the people of Niagara Falls should, if at all possible, and it is possible, have courtroom facilities in their community. Even if in that fashion we cannot advance fully the views of the people of the city of Wellland who would like all the court facilities in their community so that they can be taken out of Niagara Falls. The view of this government is that both Wellland and Niagara Falls are substantial important communities and that there is a public obligation to provide court facilities in both communities that we're doing. When the report repairs that the Ministry of Government Services have undertaken or completed in this rental building owned by the city in Niagara Falls, court will continue as usual there. >> New question, the member for Simco East. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the minister of health. Uh yesterday in the house the member for Durham York gave a great uh statement with regards to the Markham Stoville Hospital. The 74 million that uh funding the 40 million from the plus from the province, 7 million from the community. On uh July the 30th 1987 the former minister came to Aurelia and made a great announcement with regards to 30 million for the soldiers memorial hospital there. Madame Minister, you've been signing a lot of letters there today and I'd like to know if one of those letters is for approval of that or when do you think you would be able to satisfy the hospital board? >> Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Uh to the member opposite and to all members in the house. I recently announced a framework for capital planning which I believe will be of assistance to all of the hospitals and all of the regions district health councils as they move forward to look at meeting the needs uh of the people of the province of Ontario. There are a number of components of the uh capital framework and they are as follows. One, we will be supporting as a priority those which support innovation, alternative ways of providing services, shifting from inpatient to outpatient and ambulatory in line with the opportunities that new technologies permit. Infrastructure maintenance and renewal is a major priority in the province and we believe that that can all be achieved within existing operating budgets. We know as well that uh demographics are extremely important and so we are looking at both uh rapid growth areas as well as ensuring appropriate services for our aging population knowing that they want to be as independent for as long as possible. A the uh last component of the transitional uh of the uh capital framework um will ensure that we strengthen those areas of specialty care. the member is very aware of them. He knows that on a regional basis across the province, all of the uh district health councils and the hospitals are working very hard to uh bring their projects uh in line with the capital framework and I'm pleased to tell him that much work is ongoing. >> Supplementary >> supplementary, Mr. speaker is uh I've heard most of that answer before and I want to reffirm this position from the community with regards to the six plus million dollars that's been raised there through the efforts of many organizations and I say to you madam minister the district health council and most of those agencies have agreed with what is taking place there and I think it's begun you to say to the community yes we we will allow you to proceed why will you not allow them to proceed >> minister >> thank you very much Mr. Mr. Speaker, I've been really pleased with the amount of support that we've had for the capital framework that was announced. In fact, right across this province, district health councils and hospitals are working together in a partnership planning approach. He knows that many of the plans across the province will be adjusted uh to see how they align with the new capital framework. And in Simco County, I know that the district health council and ministry of health officials are meeting to discuss uh the new capital planning framework and the implications for Simco County. >> New question, the member for Essex Kent. >> Mr. Speaker, uh I have a question for the Minister of Education. Uh in conversations that I've had with the minister, uh I know that he's aware of the teacher strike in the secondary school uh panel of the Essex County Roman Catholic Separate School Board. I wonder if the minister would uh provide the House and the parents and the students uh with a clear understanding of his position in this matter. >> Minister, >> Mr. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the honorable member's question and his interest in uh the situation in in his home county. Uh I can assure him and the members of the house that I share the concern of of the honorable member in bringing this dispute to a speedy resolution. But I have said on previous occasions and I would repeat now that uh I believe very strongly in uh in the collective bargaining process. I believe further that it is quite within the power of both parties to resolve this. The Education Relations Commission uh monitors the situation. A mediator uh from the Education Relations Commission has been working with the parties. He was uh he was with the parties over the weekend. It's my understanding that uh some progress was made. The mediator stands by ready and willing to to assist in any further way. And I'm very confident that both parties working with the commission will accept their responsibilities and resolve this dispute uh very soon in the best interest of the students of of Essex County. >> Supplementary. >> Supplementary. Mr. Speaker, well, like the minister, I share his uh thoughts and hope that this will be settled, but the parents and the teachers are quite concerned and I would wonder at what point would the uh minister be prepared to intervene in this strike? Minister, >> one of the uh responsibilities that falls to the Education Relations Commission under Bill 100, Mr. Speaker, uh I say through you to the honorable member from Essex Kent, is the uh determination of of jeopardy. And it is the responsibility of the commission and no one else to make a finding of uh of when it is in their considered opinion the educational programs of the students involved in this kind of a dispute are in jeopardy. To date, the commission has not made any such finding of jeopardy. >> New question, the deputy. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the treasur. The treasur is aware that many Ontario residents of border communities are regularly now purchasing their gasoline in the United States. With gasoline prices now at record levels in communities like Sue St. Gasoline sales revenues have declined at local service stations by 40 to 50% over recent years. Given that most of this price difference is in fact due to the high gasoline taxes in the province of Ontario, will the comm will the uh will the treasur be taking corrective action at least for border communities? >> Treasur >> Oh yes, the list will work just one fine. The March the 11th gasoline price in Susain Maria I'm told was 54.8 in Ottawa was 56 cents. At Earl Shell Service it was 48.9. Having said that I would say Mr. Speaker that we are not contemplating any regional reduction in um gasoline taxation. >> Order please. Supplementary. The minister's prices are a bit out of date, but even at that level, they are at least 50% higher than the prices of gasoline in Sous St. Marie, Michigan. In this example, the minister knows that uh in Quebec, they have implemented a uh uh border program which includes buffer zones with phased in gasoline uh uh uh tax levels which enable their gasoline stations to compete on a on a fair and equitable basis with uh outside the province of Quebec. In Sue St. Marie, considerable amounts of uh business have left Ontario and have gone to Michigan with sales of other products as well as a result of the difference in gasoline prices. Will the minister take some kind of action to ensure that we have some incentive to keep consumers in our own Ontario businesses? >> Mr. Speaker, I I certainly sympathize with the problems that uh the honorable member's constituents have, particularly right on the border. It's difficult to persuade them, as I try to do when uh my friends talk about the gasoline prices in Buffalo, that if they want to drive from Buffalo to the state capital in Albany, there is a toll on the road of about $11. Or if I warn them to be sure not to get sick over there and have to pay for their own medical bills because we have to uh we have to support a wide variety of very progressive programs here that are paid for through public dollars. And then the last thing I always say to them is that uh Mr. Wilson, the progressive conservative minister of finance for Canada extracts a larger tax per liter in Ontario than the province of Ontario does. And he doesn't build a mile of road. He takes the money and uses it for god knows what because his deficit this year went up by$2 billion. >> Question. The member for East Petro. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Tourism and Recreation. Mr. Minister, the people of Marmmeran area believed the announcement for the funding for their new arena was going to take place around the 1st of April. They have heard nothing yet. Uh when are they going to get that funding they're entitled to? >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, I'm aware of the fact that the member uh from Hastings has a real concern about the welfare of his community and I know that uh he keeps in touch with all of his constituents and I know that he's been expressing within his writing the need for a an arena in Marmmer and I want him to know that uh when we get to the point where we're ready to approve uh all of our capital expenditures, we'll be making announcements about all of those across this province. >> Supplementary >> when? >> Right now, >> Minister Well, >> Mr. Speaker, I'm sure the member is aware of the fact that one has to go through the process of evaluating all of the applications and ensuring that uh the applications that this government funds are sound. We want to be sure that uh when we fund arenas that there are uh there is a capability within the community to operate those arenas and and provide sound programming. >> And so when we've completed our determinations, we will make an announcement. This completes the time allocated for oral questions.