Question Period Rewind - May 1 1989

Welcome to Question Period Rewind. I'm Donna Skellyy, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. Let's go back to 1989. The most significant global event was the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, symbolized by the fall of the Berlin Wall that marked a pivotal moment in ending the Cold War. Back at home, the Canadian Space Agency was created and combat roles in the Royal Canadian Air Force were open to women for the very first time. Now, let's tune in to the conversations the MPPPs were having. [music] Oral questions. The member for Nickel Belt. [applause] Uh, Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the treasur. The treasurer will know the treasurer will know that uh in uh Metro Toronto the average resale price of a home now in March of uh 89 is up to $277,000. >> But it's not, Mr. Speaker, simply a Toronto problem. Across the province, it's up to over 190,000 average across the province. And since that price in Metro of $277,000 requires a family income in excess of $102,000, is the treasurer finally prepared to make a commitment to introduce a speculation tax on houses in Ontario? >> Treasurer. >> Mr. Mr. Speaker, when we're uh within three or four weeks of the budget, uh I think it would be inappropriate for me to indicate to the to the honorable member who's questioning me uh what specifically I have in mind. I think he's aware that the proposal for a speculation tax has come from himself and other reasonable sources over the last number of weeks. And uh I have always indicated that while I wasn't enthused about it, that I thought that the concept had merit. But uh I think it's inappropriate for me to talk about it in more detail now other than to say no. >> Thank you. >> Order supplementary. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh it's refreshing to hear the treasur at least say some positive words about uh the the tax. He said in a couple of years ago, two years ago now, he said that the price of homes had peaked and that was they were at 188,000. the following a year ago. Now, the the premier said that the heat was out of the market and the average price was 233,000. Now, we're up to 277,000. So, perhaps the treasur is seeing the error of his ways. Mr. Speaker, the treasur should know that the federal goods and services tax, which is about to will be introduced in January of 1991, will add approximately, according to the federal figures, $14,000 to the price of a new home. They'll also add to the price of uh resale homes because previously untacked services such as uh commissions and lawyers fees will be taxed as well. So does the treasurer understand that the federal budget because it the new sales tax will not take place until January of 91 is an invitation to speculators to get into the market in the next 18 months and drive up the price of homes even further. Does the treasur understand that? >> Treasurer. >> Yes. Well, I understand the point of view that the honorable member is expressing and uh I'm glad to hear it. This is exactly where it should be put. I without um without um without making a mistake without making a mistake like I made previously, there is some indication that some of the prices are uh uh not rising as rapidly as they have in the past. Perhaps that is about as safe a point that uh I can put on it. But um I uh I personally feel that uh that market forces are having some effect on pricing. And it's interesting to note as the honorable member himself pointed out about 3 months ago that Toronto is not the center of the most rapidly growing uh price surge that this is in an area which is even more attractive for people to live and it's called South Dumpries Township. final supplementary land there. >> Mr. Speaker, the [laughter] uh the federal min the federal minister of finance and the federal minister of housing have both indicated that the goods and services tax to take place in ' 91 will indeed cause an affordability problem in the housing market. And I guess what what we're asking the treasur to think about is whether or not he wants to be a silent partner in the most dronian budget this country has ever seen. and will he make a commitment to do something about speculation in the housing market? >> Treasurer, >> I certainly am the last person to defend the federal budget. So, I'm not I'm not some sort of a subrosa supporter of it in that uh in that connection. We have to make our own decisions here based on what the federal people do and then we have to simply cut our pattern to fit that cloth. And that's exactly what we're doing as we uh review exactly the impact from the federal budget and we will design our programs accordingly. I'm not going to make any particular commitment to a land speculation tax, but the honorable members member and other members who've heard my response over the months know what I think about it. >> New question. The member for Riverdale. >> Mr. Speaker, my question is to the premier. I'd like the premier to help us with a basic reality check. This is what the government says. The increasing number of elderly people and the requirements of chronic illness point out a need to evolve an effective and rationalized long-term care continuum. Research has shown that many seniors now living in institutions would be better cared for in the community with appropriate support services. Now, let's look at what the government does, Mr. Speaker. Last winter, the opposition had to come to the aid of the Red Cross, which was about to go down the tubes because the because the government wasn't funding it adequately. This year, the Victorian Order of Nurses is saying that unless they get a better funding deal from the government, they will not be able to continue to provide the home care the government says it wants. Would the premier indicate to the house uh whether or not we can expect this government to take care of the problems of the Victorian Order of Nurses quickly and appropriately? >> Premier. >> Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the honorable member's question. As I understand it, the minister is meeting uh this week with the Victorian Order of Nurses. As I understand it, the deficit is in the $2.5 million range. I think there's some acknowledgement that perhaps some uh um uh perhaps some operational changes can be brought into into uh into play to to assist in that in the future. Uh the the government has certainly suggested it's willing to help and I think it's a question of getting all the people together uh to work out a strategy for the future. My honorable friend, I'm sure will will will agree with the with with the government when it says it just can't go in automatically whatever any deficit any group runs to obvious to write a check but that isn't a responsible way to run a government as well. And so uh we have to make sure it is planned in an orderly way and an on an ongoing basis. We have great respect for the work of the v but I think that we have to organize this thing in the long term not just a patch up of a short-term problem today. supplementary >> would be delighted if the government would begin to behave with a view towards the long term. There's a second check against reality that I'd like the premier to help us with. The government has been saying often that it needs to contain the cost spiral of the health care system. And in fact, it says the benefits of a community-based system include coste effective capital and operating funding. The premier knows, as does every member of the house, that a home care visit's about 40 bucks a day. Hospital is between 200 and 400 a day. >> How can the government even contemplate saving money by nickel and dimming the V because they will have to pay for it in increased hospital costs? Will will the premier not acknowledge that that there's a certain illogic to ignoring the plight of the Victorian Order of Nurses? >> Premier, Mr. Mr. Speaker, um we are not ignoring the plight of the Victorian order of nurses. That is an important constituent element of the continuum of health care services offered uh in the province. Uh obviously we need uh we proper institutional care as as well as proper uh uh community based care. The minister has said and I'm sure my honorable friend has read the throne speech carefully that there is a new emphasis on community based care. We've got to make sure that all of it is well is well managed and uh and uh I think my honorable friend will will find that that will be the case. >> Final supplementary, the member for Lake Nippagon. It should be obvious to the to the premier with high respect of course that u he cannot or should not continue to press those highly qualified and dedicated people to do to do more work for less pay. The premier will surely be aware that the average nurses under the order is paid approximately 9% less than comparable experience and qualifications in general hospital. Now is the time very simply, Minister, by way of a question to put the respect that you have and the commitment that you have into the quote proverbial pay envelope. Will you commit your government to redress this injustice? >> Premier, >> Mr. my my honorable friend tends to find injustice everywhere. Uh and that's sort of his uh that's that that's his his nature. That's his nature and his nature of his is his his uh colleagues office. Let me say that I think that this problem is uh uh can be addressed. As I said, the minister is meeting with the honorable uh the honorable minister is meeting with the group sometime this week and I think that my honorable friend will be delighted with the results whatever they are. [snorts] >> New question. The member for Perry S. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to >> a somewhat similar question, seeing as how he hasn't answered that question or the two subs. >> Mr. Premier, we're constantly hearing about your government's supposed policy away from institutionalized care in the health care field and toward home care. How can you stand there and justify refusing to adequately fund the Victorian Order of Nurses who provide 80% of nursing visitations in the province of Ontario? Doesn't this seem somewhat inconsistent to you, >> Premier? No. To my I say to my honorable friend, and I I think I answered the question quite fully to my uh my two friends from the official opposition, and my answer to my honorable colleague is exactly the same. Now, you may not understood it, but the member in the back row over there did understand it. Maybe that says that the members in the back row are far ahead. >> They don't need to understand. They just >> supplementary But he's just >> Mr. Speaker, it certainly doesn't surprise me that Mr. Ballinger understood. >> Premieres premier, your very your very own Price Waterhouse report that your Ministry of Health Commission last year on the Ontario Home Care Program estimates that home care saves the Ontario government about $500 million a year. In fact, in excess of $500 million a year in operational funding and last year alone saved an estimated $1.8 8 billion in capital funding that would have cost your government had you not had this very important service. V projects that this year their shortfall will be in excess of 2.5 million. This is in addition to the 2.6 million they already have as a deficit and the rates this year were established by your minister of health without any consultation or negotiation whatsoever according to the V with them. So why don't you live up to the rhetoric of your government over there and make a commitment to the house today and to the people of Ontario that you will adequately fund the Victorian Order of Nurses. >> Premier, >> Mr. Speaker, we adequately fund everybody. It's question of there's sometimes a difference of opinion over the question of adequacy. As I told my honorable friend, we'll work it out and I sure my honorable friend will be quite excited about the resolution. >> Final supplementary >> new lottery. We'll have a new lottery for us. talking about being uh about living up to its commitment. It's its very own government's report that Price Waterhouse did on your behalf that made this recommendation that you're not living up to. >> You have a minister of health that's quoted as saying that beds are no longer the benchmark in the health care system today. >> And yet we've seen the home care service in our province seriously compromised because your lack of commitment to it. You talk about community health. Community health represents only 4% of your budget and the home care component represents only 2.3% of the Ministry of Health budget this year. Do you consider to that that to be a sufficient commitment by your government to community based healthcare? >> Premier, >> my honorable friend um argues a different line different days depending on depending on what he uh reads in the newspaper that particular day, Mr. Speaker. But I I don't want to let that to deter us from the the strategy this government has. As I told my honorable friend, we have great respect for the work of the V. I'm sure we can work out this uh uh uh situation uh just as we do expand uh as a government into community- based care. And I think everything that minister has said to you is quite uh is quite uh uh consistent. Now, our idea, frankly, of running a health care system is is somewhat unlike yours. You write a check to everybody that makes a noise that particular day. I say to my friend, what you are seeing today is a is a health care system that's being planned and being rationalized in a thoughtful long-term way. And we are going to be able to keep a quality system, a system that looks after all of those the needs of people in society. And I think my honorable friend will be very proud of the results of that and and shouldn't get deterred just by uh uh reading one article in the paper. >> New question, the member for Carlton. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have a question of the attorney general. Mr. Mr. Attorney General, you said in your statement today that a manager management of a court system is a particularly difficult and complex undertaking requiring the cooperation of administrators, judges, crown attorneys, and the bar. Now, Mr. Mr. Attorney General, given that the provincial court judges are seriously considering job action in order to bring you attention to their total frustration and concerns that they have with the deteriorating system of justice in this province. What priority priority are you going to give to reviewing and responding to the recommendations of the Henderson report? >> Attorney General, >> I know, Mr. Speaker, that all honorable members will be pleased to know that we give this the highest priority. The honorable member who asked the question will want to know that we established with the judges a mechanism designed to uh uh determine a salary level for them subject to the uh determinations made by the executive council. That report has now been on hand and we are obliged to give it earnest and serious consideration. We are doing that and the government I know hopes to respond in due course. >> Supplement Mr. Mr. Attorney General, you know that this report has been referred to the Justice Committee of the Legislature, and you also know that the government controls not only the business of the House, but the businesses of all of those committees. Now, considering the matters that are before the Justice Committee, they include bill 4, the Toronto Police uh Toronto Police Force Complaints Act, uh the Bill 149, the amendment to the Trespass to Property Act, bill 187 as well as well as the Henderson Report. What priority do you put the Henderson Report with respect to these other pieces of legislation? Are you willing to put the Henderson report at the top of the priority list as we are in the opposition? >> Attorney General >> um >> there must be some legislative equivalent of the street expression. Give me a break. [laughter] Uh we uh we have given the Henderson report which comes before the justice committee the highest priority and indeed between sessions we asked for unanimous consent so that the matter could come before the justice committee. before the house came back somebody's house leader refused to give consent so the matter is now where it is but not withstanding that kind of effort we in intend to respond to it at an early date >> final supplementary >> uh Mr. Speaker the only time that this became a priority with this government was after it was raised in the justice committee by myself and the fact of the matter is that they wanted to give uh our party uh about two days notice uh to have this hearing when in fact we were involved in other uh other legislative committees. Mr. uh Mr. Attorney General, I'm uh I'm quoting from an article in the Globe and Mail. The job of selling court reform has now become much more difficult because Mr. Scott lost the goodwill of many of the important players. Many judges, lawyers, and colleagues who have crossed swords with him in the past are embittered. >> Mr. Attorney General, how do you expect to implement the Zuber report and take forward quotes your vision? If in fact you can't even handle a small situation or a situation dealing with the provincial court judges and dealing with the Henderson report in a timely manner, how do you expect to get further and larger reforms through? >> Attorney General. >> Well, Mr. Speaker, in answering the question, I owe an inadvertent I owe an apology to the honorable member for North Bay for inadvertently suggesting that his veto had prevented this matter getting to the justice committee. I'm advised by my house leader that the person responsible for that action on the part of the third party was in fact the honorable member for Perry Sound who communicated >> who otherwise an excellent friend of mine showing a high level of cooperation at every turn in the house has prevented the Henderson report aided and abetted by the member for Carlton from getting before the justice committee. >> The judges suffer >> but and so the judges suffer. Be that as it may, >> point of personal privilege. >> I have never prevented the Henderson report from being debated in the justice committee whatsoever. This is a >> order order order order. >> Order. Attorney General >> Order. Attorney General. >> Well, Mr. Speaker, you know, every time you have them neatly pinned, they take the hot potato and pass it from one to the other, from row to row. >> I'll say one thing. The honorable member for Missaga is not responsible for this attitude on the part of the Tory party. >> If it was up to her and not up to the front bench, this matter might have been dealt with by the third party in a productive way. >> [applause] >> As I indicate, >> does that complete your response? >> As I indicated to my honorable friend from Carlton, the government will be responding to this very shortly. >> New question. The member for Hamilton Mountain. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Energy. I'm absolutely sure the minister has had the opportunity to uh review the hydro response to the select committee's recommendations from January of this year. The minister will be aware that this uh response by hydro to the select committee's report is uh to say the least a disgraceful effort and a a direct insult to all of the members of the select committee. Minister will know that it's a it's a response in which hydro has regurgitated old data data which the select committee already reviewed and the data which the select committee was concerned about. The recommendations which the select committee made in this report were recommendations on the areas of the hydro demand supply planning strategy about which we felt hydro's work was inadequate. question. >> Will the minister assure this house today that he will take this response from Ontario Hydro and and appropriate appropriately place it in the garbage and direct Ontario Hydro to get on in a serious and meaningful way to deal with the the recommendations of the select committee? >> Minister, >> good question. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh in response to the uh member from Hamilton Mountain, let me uh say that the government's first and main priority in terms of the demand and supply planning for electricity in this province to the year 2000 and beyond is based upon energy conservation and uh energy efficiency. When the honorable member seems to suggest that perhaps hydro is not listening, is not doing enough in that area, let me remind the house that in February of last year, the cabinet instructed hydro to uh give us a specific set of targets. They gave us a 5,500 megawatt figure, which Mr. Speaker would be not insignificant. This would be equivalent to one and one half Darlington plants. Nevertheless, this government said to Ontario Hydro, "We believe that you can do more." We are, as the honorable member knows, in the process of passing amendments to the Power Corporation Act. In addition, last year together we passed the first energy efficiency act in all of Canada. These are some of the measures that are being taken. Mr. Speaker, >> supplementary [applause] >> member for Tobico Lake Shore. >> Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, I think the minister misses the point of the response from hydro that we released today. What was before the select committee on energy was a strategy put forward by hydro as to how they were to go into the next century. The select committee said the strategy was missing a number of important elements and made some recommendations. on the recommendation that the minister has just res referred to. Hydro's response to the committee's suggestion they do more energy efficiency was to say the committee's recommendation is consistent with our existing draft strategy. >> What kind of a response is that? Can the minister be very clear? Does he consider the response by hydro adequate? And is he going to insist that hydro come up with the studies and the planning and the figures that the select committee called for? >> Order. Minister, >> this government believes uh Mr. Speaker that what we need is >> a proper legitimate response. And just so that the honorable member knows, last month I made a reference to the Ontario Energy Board with relation to the forthcoming rate hearings. And in paragraph five, I specifically addressed the energy management plans and programs of hydro and said to the chairman, chairperson of the OEB, these plans and programs should be examined to determine whether they are effective and appropriate and to what extent they are meeting Ontario Hydro's demand management objectives. So, Mr. Speaker, the government will be continuing its uh examination to determine the factual basis upon which we can make some sound decisions in this province. >> New question, the member for Carlton. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question to the Minister of Corrections. Uh Mr. Minister, last Thursday, a 27year-old Ottawa man was brutally beaten to death in the Ottawa Carlton Regional Detention Center. Mike Shankovich was in jail for a breach of probation from uh a break and enter uh charge and conviction two years ago. He was scheduled to be released one week after his death. Can you, Mr. Minister explain how a man with a record of a non-violent crime uh ended up in a maximum security section of the Ottawa Regional Detention Center with other violent prisoners and wound up unfortunately dead while all of the guards apparently were on a coffee break. >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, uh I would rather not comment on this case as it is uh before a police investigation and our own investigation at this time. supplementary. >> Great comfort. >> Uh Mr. Speaker, uh I would like to also ask the minister with regard to another facility last Thursday. Again, two 16 year olds escaped from the Vanet Center for Women and arrived on a Bmpton man's doorstep. One of the escaped youth has been charged with the February slaying of a halfway house worker, Christa Seep. What are the dangerous young offenders doing in a medium security facility where security is obviously inadequate? Mr. Minister, these are two circumstances which arise arose on the same day. What corrective actions are you taking to secure people outside of your the institutions, the general public, and what security measures and changes are you going to to take with regard to the incident at the Ottawa Carlton Detention Center? >> Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank the member for the for the second question is supplementary. Uh all incidents that uh happen with our ministry are investigated by our ministry and these uh uh recommendations that possibly come out of that are put forward to our uh uh our audit group and uh improvements come out of that process. >> New question, the member for Scarbor Ellir. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology. Minister, concerns have been raised lately about economic problems being experienced in some sectors in the north. In particular, the lumber industry has been hit hard. Companies such as LC Lumber have been forced to close down and companies such as GW Martin have had to lay off workers. Minister, can you advise this house if this trend will continue or do you anticipate a change in the horizon? >> You never order. >> Mr. Speaker, there's no question that there's been some rationalization taking place in the north in the lumber industry, but I should tell members, and I'm sure uh many of you know, that is certainly not a an all-inclusive trend. We've had Boise Cascade announced just recently, a $90 million uh addition to their operation in Fort Francis for their groundwood paper specialty mill. Uh in total, they've had four projects that put about $300 million into the north. So I think that although we will continue to experience some problems because of competitive forces because of the uh nonproductivity of some of these mills I think generally uh things haven't been going quite that badly in the north in recent years and I think that the indication from companies like Boise Cascade is that they still have confidence in the north and it'll continue to progress. >> [snorts] >> supplementary. >> Uh Minister, by way of supplementary, uh members will be aware of the need for industries to increase their competitiveness. >> Uh can you advise this house of how industry in Northern Ontario can achieve this in the future? >> Minister Minister, >> well, Mr. Speaker, we we have that problem. What we have to do is we have to get them turned around to the point where they are creating value added businesses. And we're doing that through the Northern Ontario Development Corporation, through the technology fund. Uh we've already put about $10 million into it. We've got companies like uh Rexwood Lumber and Nean Castings that are utilizing these particular programs and they are really starting to progress. >> New question, the member for El. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question to the Minister of Agriculture and Food. in view of the fact that the despite the importance of agriculture to Ontario's economy and the fact that uh farm debt has reached crisis proportions in this province and that the Ontario family farm interest rate reduction program is coming to an end at the very time when the federal government is increasing interest rates. Can the minister explain why there was no mention at all of agriculture in the uh recent throne speech? Why does his government give agriculture such a low priority? >> Why hasn't the government announced an interest rate reduction program for farmers as a successor to the offer program? >> Minister. >> Well, Mr. Speaker, as the honorable member knows, the throne speech set the framework for the uh government's agenda for this session and the programs of the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food are consistent and supportive of the overall goal as announced in the throne speech. >> That's right. >> There are three main points in the throne speech, Mr. Speaker, that apply to the agriculture and food industry. One, economic development. here. >> Pursuing new markets and supporting the growth of Ontario-based industries as they compete in the global economy. >> Two, promoting healthier lifestyles. The production of safe quality food products is an essential element of the preventive health strategy. Three, leadership and environmental protection. We will continue to show leadership to ensure the quality of our air, our water, and our food. Now, >> Mr. Speaker, you can't tell me that there's no mention in the throne speech about agriculture and food when it fits into the framework >> as announced in the throne speech [applause] >> supplementary. >> Mr. Speaker, to follow the minister's logic, all of us eat, so therefore we're involved in agriculture. the uh uh the uh uh the uh uh could the does the minister not agree does the minister not agree that for every 1% increase in the interest rates we add about 9.5 million to farm debt liabilities in this province and if that is the case does He not recognize that like Quebec, Alberta and Saskatchewan, the province of Ontario should have a substantial presence in agriculture credit market and we should be establishing a program as a successor to offer. When will he announce it? >> Minister Speaker, I've always contended that the responsibility for credit, whether it be long, intermediate, or short-term credit, is that of the federal government. And we were hoping we were hoping that the Farm Credit Corporation would come out with a brand new face and that the federal government would face up to the real challenges that lie ahead of the farmers. We have other programs in place that will assist the farmers in this province and we will continue to implement these programs and to come out with new initiatives. But still again, it is the responsibility as far as I'm concerned of the federal government to look after the credit needs of farmers and hopefully Mr. Mazinowski will >> come out with the new face to the Farm Credit Corporation which will address those needs. However, if interest rates continued to go up and if commodity prices took a turn and came down and we're in the same situation as we were in the early 80s, then I am going to have to look at what may need to be done at that time, but we're not quite at that position yet. >> New question, the member for Markham. >> I have a question for the Minister of Transportation. Last year, some 12 months ago, his ministry released this document, transportation directions for the greater Toronto area. And one of the principles that uh he stated in that document was to reduce congestion in the short term. Uh in that year, congestion has become far worse in the greater Toronto area. It more and more people are standing on the the GO trains. More and more people are crowded on the platforms and crowding into TTC. More and more people find the traffic congestion on the Dawn Valley Parkway, the Gardener 401, and all the routes coming in and out of Metro as being even more congested. Uh, in as much as that this is one of the principles that you stated that you were going to do something to reduce congestion in the short term, what have you done in the last year to reduce congestion in and around Greater Toronto Area? Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, I welcome my co my friend's uh question. He clearly is reading his uh his preparation for question period, not taking a look at what is in fact going on out there. One of our difficulties is coping with the rapid growth of Toronto and the greater Toronto area often created because the very buoyant economy that this government has helped foster and uh and maintain in this part in this province. he would be aware of a number of transit improvements. Uh some by the way recently announced starting in June going up to Richmond Hill which I believe was either part of or adjacent to your very writing but perhaps you were aware of that. No, he's >> and many others. The very incre the very significant increases in ridership with GO Transit and with the TTC and other transit systems around the regions would indicate very strongly the the efforts that we're putting forward to bring riders and new riders onto transit uh operations and get them off the road where possible. supplementary. >> The greatest number of people, the greatest number of people that are coming in and out of metropolitan Toronto are feeling that congestion. I mean, it's becoming far, far worse than anyone could have imagined even several years ago. It's obvious that your ministry has no plan, no envision, no vision at all, no investment. You didn't even mention the whole subject in the speech from the throne. Now, the fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, there needs to be something done to address the greater problems around Toronto that deal with the congestion of traffic and the movement of people. What does your ministry plan to do to start solving the problem? just dealing with the symptoms. >> Minister, >> I I I find the member's position here today in total contradiction to a statement in this house the other day wherein he is opposed to the East Metro Transportation Corridor, which is designed >> to help relieve from Markham from your home and your writing some of the problems you've just identified. But clearly he's not aware of the work that has been completed and continues on the 404. The work that's starting in June on the 401 to the collector system east which will serve those people moving in coming in from Markham. He is very much not aware of the many initiatives have taken place both in rapid transit and in road building. And I'd offer him sir the opportunity of walking him through those documents. That's right. >> They're not very happy. >> New question. The member for High Park Swansy. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Energy. Mr. Minister, you are undoubtedly aware of the recent rather controversial experiments conducted by Ponds and Fleshman in Utah known as cold fusion. Cold fusion uses heavy water as a fuel to create at room temperature and with a relatively simple technology a source of energy which is virtually waste-free and this has profound implications both for economical power generation and for a cleaner environment. Mr. Minister, are there any similar experiments being conducted in Ontario, both to confirm the results of the Utah experiment and to ensure that Ontario will share in the benefits of this quite dramatic new advance? >> Minister, >> thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh I wish to uh point out that because of the um well first of all I thank thank the honorable member for his question because I know the member from High Park Swansea is very interested not only in energy but uh energy um uh the environmental aspects. Um the uh prospect of cold fusion is indeed very exciting as the member indicated it could be. Uh there are experiments going on all over the world and I'm pleased to indicate that right here in downtown Toronto there happens to be uh one such experiment uh which coincidentally is in my writing the writing of Fort York. But um the important thing here is that um the scientists from all over the world whether they are particle physicists or electrochemists are trying to determine firstly whether or not the fusion process is really at work here. So that's one question that is being addressed in this particular experiment in Ontario. A second question that has to be addressed is uh will this be an environmentally benign uh potential source of energy? And thirdly, of course, Mr. Speaker, if it turns out that this does work, then people will be asking what would the cost really be to put in a major power plant? >> Supplementary. >> Mr. Speaker, >> Mr. Minister, the prospect of an almost limitless, economical, and environmentally safe source of energy is extremely tantalizing. Is there any reliable information at this stage which would indicate when and if cold fusion might be available to help uh help all of us meet the energy needs here in Ontario? Minister, >> I think the answer is that the scientific jury is still out. Uh we do not have conclusive uh information or evidence yet that uh the cold fusion uh does work. uh but I wish to answer the second part of the honorable member's question with respect to Ontario's future and indicate that we will of course be considering the total mix of supply and demand options and uh we would certainly be interested in the outcome on the research and cold fusion and uh when the time comes I can assure the honorable member that we will be uh looking at all the options to make sure that Ontario has reliable safe and secure supplies of electricity. um and wherever we produce it that our resources are done in an environmentally sound manner. Thank you. >> New question, the member for Ashawa. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Housing concerning the uh pre-selling of some condominiums at a project in North York known as Concord Place located at Don Mills Road in Edgington Avenue. Can you explain why neither your ministry nor the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations has done anything for those people who in good faith thought that they had finally found an affordable house in Metro, had gone through the proper buying procedure, thought that they had in fact bought a condominium in North York at a reasonable rate, and found out that in fact there was no condominium for them because the proper zoning had not yet been attained. Can you explain to them why neither one of the two ministries nor this whole government could do anything to stop that ripoff of those people who thought they had finally bought their own home? >> Minister, >> thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm of course uh very very concerned about the fact that people don't have the kind of choices to buy housing that they can afford that that all of us would like them to have. But in the case that you're talking about, the the issue had to do with the municipality allowing the building to go forward. It is a municipality that made the decision that they were not prepared to create the conditions within which that building could go forward. And I I believe that that the problem really is is located there. My concern through the land use policy process that we have initiated is to make sure that municipalities do take some responsibility to make sure that in designated neighborhoods and all over the entire new development process, housing that's affordable to people, lowerc cost housing, housing that people can manage to buy will be built in much greater quantity all over the province. That requires municipalities to designate the ways in which they're going to meet the affordability guideline of 25%. And we are beginning to make some progress in that in various municipalities in the province. I'm of course saddened for anyone who who was in a position where they thought they had such housing to have that taken away from them by decision of municipality >> supplementary. Well, it's fine for the minister to blame the municipality involved, but your ministry and the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations both were made aware that these units were pre-sold, that there was not the required zoning already in place. How do you explain to people that even though the Consumers Association of Canada, for example, has made it clear that they don't believe that pre-selling is a reasonable way to proceed with the development of these projects? How do you explain that your government sat around and allowed the practice to continue, did not even require the developer to tell people that there were not the required zonings obtained yet? That in fact people were buying dreams that were nothing but pieces of paper. Your ministry was aware of it and you did nothing about it. How can you continue to make pious speeches about affordable housing and do nothing about these individuals? >> [applause] >> uh the member the member opposite is very knowledgeable about housing issues and he knows >> and he knows >> that the entire question of how condominiums are financed and how and how consumers are protected in this area is one of the areas the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations works on. But he should also know that the work of this ministry and the work of this province is much more specific than mere piety. He knows that we have walked around this province and talked with the municipalities including Association of Municipalities of Ontario. Indeed, some of his friends have been present at some of those meetings. He knows that we've talked with mayors with regional councils. I believe he does have some friends and um and he knows very well that we have been working actively to increase the supply of lowerc cost housing all over the province. That is a commitment we've made and we've acted on and will continue to act on in a framework policy which will have an impact on all the housing that's built in the province. As to the question of of pre-sold condominiums and the way in which consumers are treated, I would recommend that he talks to the Ministry of Consumer Relations. [applause] >> Thank you. New question, the member for London North. Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Community and Social Services. Uh, Mr. Minister, in your April newsletter, you stated with respect to the SARKC report transitions, and I quote, "A comprehensive consultation process which included representatives from other levels of government as well as a number of interested agencies and organizations was completed at the end of February, and a response to those meetings will be forthcoming in the spring in the government's budget announcement." Mr. Minister, I would like to know specifically what groups, agencies, and levels of government you have consulted with. >> Minister, >> um Mr. Speaker, the honorable member will be aware of the fact that uh uh during the months of uh February and into early March, I met with 16 provincial umbrella groups uh from all across the province of Ontario representing I would suggest by far the majority of of groups on whom this would impact either directly or through their clients. Um, for example, the Chamber of Commerce, the uh Federation of Labor, uh, a number of church groups, the uh, uh, the Native Chiefs organization, and the list goes on. I can't take it all from memory, but I can certainly get it for the honorable member, and I can get her the dates, and I can also get her the, uh, the, uh, the messages that they left with us. That was the one level in Ontario. And of course, we're getting all kinds of, of individual u uh, submissions from people across the province. Uh secondly, I met with the directors of income maintenance from all provinces of Canada and uh they in turn had a chance to uh to look at this document before they came and I got some feedback from them. The general impression from them was that it was a a good document. It was uh as good as anything they'd seen anywhere and they were going back to their individual jurions. Uh I have also met with uh uh two uh representatives from the federal u ministry of health and u and welfare also in the income maintenance branch and got the same response from them. More recently I had a chance to meet with uh the minister himself. >> Order I think that's enough response. Uh there might be a supplementary out of that. The member for London North. >> Of course there's a supplementary out of that. Um to the uh to the minister, I appreciate your response, Mr. Minister, and I now understand why there is some concern out there uh with the groups that are going to be responsible for the implementation of SARKC. And it seems to me that at this point in time, you just haven't had the opportunity uh to meet with the municipalities. And I'm now talking about the municipalities that will have to in fact implement very specific recommendations and to whom I would expect that you would be consulting around the costing. And I'm now talking about uh shelter allowances. I'm now talking about more benefits for children and very specific intricate parts for costing. Would you please, Mr. Minister, advise us as to when these municipalities can expect to hear from you and have in input to the process so that everyone will understand exactly how much money is involved. >> Minister. >> Well, Mr. Speaker, I met uh specifically with the um municipalities, the municipal organization in northwestern Ontario. uh the municipal organization in northeastern Ontario as very distinct groups and with the uh AMO the association of municipalities of Ontario there uh their income maintenance subcommittee and as a matter of fact the the chairman of AMO the u uh the mayor of Belleville I believe it is uh was present at that meeting so we've met very specifically with the municipalities and shared with them some of the cost implications the honorable members just referred to in addition to that uh the honorable member will be aware of the fact that there is an ongoing meeting uh between staff of my ministry and a representative group of AMO uh looking at a whole range of costing implications and program responsibility between the municipalities and the province and the income maintenance program is part of that. So there have been fairly significant detailed meetings uh between those two levels of government with respect to uh the social assistance review. >> Your question the member for St. Catherine's Brock. >> Mr. Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Labor. On January the 24th, the Minister introduced Bill 208 entitled Enact to amend the Occupational Health and Safety Act. Following the bill's introduction, several members of the business community expressed strong concerns with the specific provisions of the bill, specifically the role of the new occupational health and safety agency. I'd like to ask the minister to explain why he feels that this province is in need of such a body given that the current system of occupational health and safety in Ontario is among the best in this country. >> Minister, >> uh Mr. Speaker, I think that's a very good uh question from the member from St. Catherine's Brook. I should point out uh in a preliminary way, Mr. Speaker, that there are two major themes uh that are found in Bill 208. First of course uh is to enhance uh worker participation in the ongoing management of health and safety in workplaces all across the province. But secondly and equally importantly the bill put a very heavy emphasis on education and training for the workplace parties to ensure that the internal responsibility system which is the basis for the very good system that we have in Ontario is strengthened in order to ensure Mr. speaker that we have a strong system of education training in the area of occupational health and safety. There are no uh people more effectively placed to develop that training system than the workplace parties themselves, employers and workers and their representatives working together on a provincewide basis to develop that kind of training that we need to ensure that we continue to have a system that is second to none on the North American continent. In order to do that, Mr. Speaker, one needs an agency, a provincial body where employers and workers representatives can come together and develop just that sort of system. >> Supplementary. >> By way of supplementary, Mr. Minister or Mr. Speaker, you seem to set out that this is going to be a a coordinating function for this agency. What then can we expect the fate of the current safety associations to be following the development of this agency? Is this important sector by sector approach to be maintained? What will the role be under the new system proposed under bill 208? >> Minister, >> uh my friend from St. Katherine Brock uh refers obviously to the safety associations which are currently funded under the worker compensation system and under the authority of the occupational health and safety education authority uh within the compensation board. uh we felt that it it is inappropriate to have those associations work on the compensation side rather than on the regulatory side and indeed those associations under the agency will become front and center uh in the development of training and education and the delivery of training and education uh under the work uh that the agency will do. So far from disappearing or taking a secondary role, Mr. Speaker, I want to tell my friend that the safety associations like the Industrial Accident Prevention Association, the Construction Safety Association of Ontario and the others will become key players in ensuring in Ontario that we are doing everything humanly possible to make sure we have minimized risk to life and limb in the workplace. >> New question, the member for Hamilton West. >> Mr. Speaker, a question for the Minister of Community Social Services. uh he has just rehearsed for us some of the people and institutions that he has consulted with respect to the implementation of the SARKC report. Uh and yet uh those of us reading the throne speech uh see no reference to the social systems review committee, no reference to Judge Thompson, no reference to transitions. Uh we have a miscellaneous group of proposals. Apparently the ministry has abandoned and the government has abandoned any comprehensive framework when towards in order to implement social assistance reforms. Can the minister comment for us upon that obvious absence of a plan obvious absence of a framework? He was asked to provide within 6 months a comprehensive response and indication of where the government was going with you to start failed to do that. We've now got the throne speech. No direction. Mr. Minister, what's going on? >> Question. >> Minister. >> Well, Mr. uh Mr. Speaker, I would remind my honorable friend that when uh George Thompson and his committee uh submitted their report to me and included in that a letter of transmitt, they said very clearly in the last paragraph of that letter of transmitt that uh if I can paraphrase uh we are handing this to you now and we trust that it will be helpful when you as a ministry and as a government move forward to make the changes that you feel are appropriate in the system. Uh I translate that clearly uh Mr. Speaker in saying that the committee says we have done our job. It is now up to you as a government to take our recommendations and design your system. Uh I don't think that the committee at any time expected that we would simply take uh their uh their design and implement it uh from A to Zed. Uh let me make that point very clear. It is now our responsibility. It is no longer the Thompson uh structure or the transition structure or the Stark structure. It is the responsibility of this government and this ministry to implement a change and we are going to do that. That being said, [applause] >> thank you. >> Order perhaps perhaps the minister can continue after a supplementary supplementary. >> Well, Mr. Speaker, it's quite obvious that there is now no plan. There is now no design. There is a report out there the minister's got on a shelf somewhere and that's the old story. What we've got now are some miscellaneous proposals for example around a slogan of welfare checks to paychecks and yet there isn't even one single step in the proposals to make certain that the working poor in this province have got the resources to live on so that when you move off of welfare you got a paycheck you can live on. >> When are you going to complete the equation? When are you going to do something that makes some sense in terms of your responses for the let alone the large design of Thompson himself? >> Minister. >> Well, Mr. Speaker, I would uh I I would have imagined that the honorable member would realize he's being just a little bit premature. Uh he realizes that the intent >> he realizes that the intent of the throne speech is to give a sense of direction and that was clearly in the throne speech. And if he looks at the particular references in the throne speech, he will he will notice that they were the heart and soul of the first phase of that. The honorable member knows himself that even the recommendations in Thompson's report with respect to subsidization to the working poor were contained in sub in phases three and four and he knows himself that they can only carried out with consultation with the other level of government. I've indicated I've already started that. I would tell the honorable member that when he hears the budget speech and when he hears my uh further extrapolation of that the two or three days afterwards he will see the structure that we're talking about. It's there [applause] >> new question the member for Nasing >> industry trade and technology. Uh Mr. Speaker in January 2689 the premier was asked about his plans to fund the Sudbury nutrino project. at that time to the amazement of the Canadian scientific community to the amazement of the international scientific community in spite of the fact that the premier had signed correspondence back and forth in the project in spite of the fact that he chairs the premier's council on science and technology the premier indicated he wasn't even aware of the project I would ask the minister if the government has now done his homework and does this government plan to fund its small share of the subbury nutrino project. >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, for those members who aren't aware of the issue, uh, nutrinos are something that scientists find very interesting and that you can't see them, you can't measure them, and you have to take them, you have to take them, you have to take them on faith. Anyway, the way they want to do it is to use a mine shaft up in Sbury, put heavy water in it, and they feel that they can then see it as it goes through. >> There is some controversy as to what the industrial spin-offs are going to be for Sbury. There is no question as to the scientific merit. We are looking at it to see whether or not this is something that we as a province should be investing in and that decision has not yet been taken. But I can tell you that we are very, very actively looking at it. I have had several representations made to me by members of the uh governments, local governments in Sudbury plus the scientific community and it is something that we are looking at very carefully and we hope to make a decision relatively soon. >> Supplementary speaker uh are a lot like Liberals. You can't see them or hear them but something right back here let you know they're around. >> Mr. uh Mr. Speaker, the premier himself has been promising since 1985 to support and even fasttrack scientific and technological projects that would put Ontario at the forefront. The Subbury nutrino project has worldwide scientific recognition and support. It's especially important considering the recent developments in fusion experimentation. All funding is in place for this major initiative, federal, municipal, private, and international. The only thing holding up the project is David Peterson and the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology. I would ask you why this government is indeed not leading the way instead of holding up this project and threatening by its delay the very fact that it's going to be able to go ahead at all. >> Mr. Speaker, I think you'll find that the member from North Bay may not be quite right about the federal funding for this project. Secondly, I think you will find that the strategy of this government is to provide funding for the budget that that is a an expression of interest but no commitment. The situation is such that we want to make sure that there is industrial spin-off. We have not been convinced to date that there will be any industrial spin-off. It will be an interesting experiment. It will get a great deal of credit in the scientific community. but whether it will really do anything for the north of Ontario other than investing about $7 million of but there are no spin-offs other than from a there are no spin-offs other than a scientific one and that is why we are looking at it >> that completes the aotted time for all questions and responses. >> [music] [music] >> This is the Ontario Parliament Television Network. You'd think this is from a parlor in the 19th century, but in reality, it's part of the afternoon tea and tour event at the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It begins with giving guests an uplose look at the architecture, chamber, and art collection. This is followed by an Englishstyle tea service and performance. This afternoon tea program has been running in a pretty similar format since it first started in 1993 as part of the centennial celebrations for this Ontario legislative building. And it's