Question Period Rewind - November 28 1989

Welcome to Question Period Rewind. I'm Donna Skellyy, speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. 1989, what a year. The legendary Daryl Sitler was inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame. In Ontario, the OHL season was fierce with the Peterborough Pets winning the Jay Ross Robertson Cup. But perhaps the biggest sports milestone for us was the opening of the Toronto Blue Jays Skydome. Now, let's see what some of the big milestones in provincial politics were at that time. [music] >> Oral questions. The member Tobico Rexdale. Mr. Speaker, um [applause] before I uh before I ask my question, I might uh mention that uh one of the outstanding figures in the field of public auditing in the world is our own provincial auditor. He and his staff are in our gallery and we might like to welcome him and show our appreciation. [applause] Let's >> talk about the shirt. The clock >> you're not question, >> Mr. Speaker, I um I have a question for the chairman of management board stemming from the auditor's report uh regarding um the uh contracting of consulting services by this government. Uh the provincial auditor in the report table today has concluded that although the government directives discourage continuous reliance on consultants, the annual expenditures for consulting services have increased from $86 million in 1985 to $165 million in 1989 or a 92% increase in the four years that this government has been in office. Can the minister explain why this government has so flagrantly violated its own uh directives to the extent of expending more than $165 million on hired guns last year? >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, the honorable gentleman would like to advise the people of the province that the reason that the consulting services are high is because we have had an unprecedented amount of capital construction in this uh in this Ontario that we so much love and that we are preparing us for the future. We are doing more at uh work on 4 416 407 403. We're putting more septic and water systems in the ground than ever before. We are dealing with cleanup of water pollution. We are dealing with the construction of new uh new buildings to accommodate the needs of hospitals and social services right across the province. We need the people, engineers, architects, designers of highways to do the work that could have been done before but wasn't. And we need those people to make sure that the services are available not only today for the people of the province, but also into the future when it is critical that we become highly competitive and have an infrastructure which allows that to occur. [applause] Hit him. Hit him on back. It's not justifiable. Just >> order order. >> Just before I recognize the member for the supplementary, it would be make it much easier for me and I'm sure for all if one member spoke at one time supplementary. Mr. Speaker, the auditor has given different reasons for the increase. For example, the auditor, the provincial auditor has pointed out that the uh consultant salaries were approximately 70% higher than the salaries provided to public employees approximately in the same doing the same kind of work. And why would this government spend 70% more on outside consultants than it would cost to have public servants doing identical work? Is he not satisfied with the public servants uh ability to provide the jobs or does he simply want to flout away the taxpayers's money to his uh his friends in the consulting firms? >> Thank you. >> Uh Mr. Speaker, the honorable gentleman uh minister would probably want to understand that we do go outside government to get consulting services from time to time because we do not retain on staff people with expertise to deal with certain things like architects, like engineers and we also go out and get people who have particular expertise to advise us in important uh uh legal matters. We do that because there are people who are not required on staff at all times. We do pay more for those people outside because we do not have them on the payroll and we wouldn't want the taxpayers to carry those people right on through unless they're needed. There are situations, Mr. Speaker, where quite frankly, it is better to retain outside counsel, better to retain outside engineers, better to retain outside architectural help than have them on the public payroll at all times. [applause] >> What an insult. Final supplementary. >> Mr. Mr. Speaker, the minister says that it is better to use outside consultants. That isn't the conclusion of the auditor. The auditor has concluded that in most instance, continued reliance on consultants is uneconomic to use his words. And furthermore, that it prevents that it it permits a firm to gain a monopoly on a particular area. Over the last few years, the auditor chastised many of your ministries over the way in which consulting uh services then were were tendered or or not tendered or set out. What are you going to do specifically to ensure that uh the work that can be done by public servants is done by public servants and to uh deal with the criticism which is given in this auditor's report? >> Minister. >> Well, Mr. Speaker, the uh situation ought to be put in perspective. The perspective is that in fact we're doing a good job in the province of Ontario, that we comply with the directives, that in fact there is more room for improvement, and all of us here would say there can be more improvement. But let us be very specific about what has to be done. When there are special jobs that need to be done, we must retain the best people we can. And if they're not inside, we go outside. Where there are situations that we can handle internally, we do that. With respect to the issue about a firm being able to develop a monopoly, we're quite sensitive about that. And it applies not only with respect to people who are developing expertise in engineering and other things, but also with respect to the supply of information technology and we thoroughly review the people who participate in our tender calls at all levels. We also do a very thorough analysis to see who is able to provide the service so that we're not dependent on one particular firm or one particular individual. We have a much broader participation in the consulting world than we have ever had. >> Thank you. >> Order new question. The >> Windsor Riverside for a new question. >> I have a question to the premier. Uh there's a follow-up question uh with regard to the uh dealings between the York region and developers and politicians and I'd like to ask the premier as a follow-up from uh yesterday's questions. Can the premier tell us when a decision was made not to hold a public inquiry? Who made that decision? And was the premier involved in making that decision? >> Pre that was made uh after the police in uh investigation. There was a thorough police investigation, I believe, for 11 months and then a decision was made. Uh it uh couldn't go any further. >> Supplementary. >> Well, the premier didn't give us the uh the date and didn't indicate who was involved in making that decision and whether he specifically was involved. I'd like to ask the premier since it's very clear that your minister of municipal affairs was involved in making the decision that Gordon Ashworth was involved in making the decision. A person that didn't work in somebody else's office, a person that worked in your office, a person that was high in your office and was responsible for advising you on these issues, responsible for advising you on an issue like this, which you must understand has farreaching political consequences for your future and the future of your government. Is the premier telling us today and yesterday that he had nothing to do with the decision not to call a public inquiry? Premier, Mr. >> Speaker, my honorable friend, I think misrepresents the facts in the circumstances. There was a meeting that uh that was reported. There was a I'll withdraw, Mr. Thank you. >> interpretation of the facts as uh uh shall I say a little more charitably. Uh Mr. Speaker, I think the the uh the minister and others have told you what happened in that circumstances as as did I. There was a meeting at last February in the midst of a police investigation. it it uh that police investigation carried on to its logical conclusion. It went on for some 11 months and they came to the conclusion that charges could not be laid in the circumstances. Now that was the circumstances that happened and that was well there's a there was a press release by the police I'm told in May or June of that year saying that a thorough investigation would be done and no charges would be laid. >> Final supplementary. I guess the the question is that one of the rationes that the premier has used and his minister has used is that we could not have a public inquiry while a police investigation was going on. Now it's clear that the police investigation is complete and there are still many questions surrounding the dealings between politicians, your government and your donors and and liberal politicians in that area of the province. Is it not appropriate now that the police investigation is complete? you can't use that as a copout that you quit the cover up of the problems in this issue and call a public inquiry into this matter. Now [applause] >> I say I say to you there's a thorough police investigation. They came to their conclusions. I can tell my honorable friend I don't fear a public inquir if there's any facts of anything to inquire into. Why don't you stand up in this house? The minister did not say that. You are factually incorrect again. Just because you stand up and say it and repeat it and shout doesn't mean you're correct. I can tell you that is absolutely wrong. And you can ask the minister andor the former minister, but I understand people like you wanting to stand up and say something that wasn't accurate in fact and we're used to that on this side of the house. But if you stand up in this house, give one sent of evidence of anything a miss and I can tell you we'll look into it in exhaustive detail. So rather than just casting innuendo or or or allegations, stand up in this house, tell us what you know, and we will track it down. The police didn't find anything after 11 months, you you may be a lot brighter than they are. You may know a lot of things they don't know. If you do, stand up and say so, but don't hide behind the immunity of this house casting aspersions on things yet you don't know or don't understand. If you have proof, stand up and say so. And that's nonsense. New question. The member for Sarnia. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I uh I'm being uh encouraged to perhaps raise a question with the attorney general, which I'll save for another moment. My question, however, today is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. Uh the auditor's report indicates that up to onethird of all daycare centers in Ontario are in fact not in compliance with the safety rules and regulations as set down by the legislative requirements uh of the province. Uh recognizing uh Mr. Minister that that does cause some uh degree of concern uh quite obviously among the parents who have children in those daycare centers. Why is it that your government continues to issue unrestricted licenses to those particular establishments recognizing that they are not in compliance with the rules and regulations that you yourself have set down? >> Minister, >> thank you very much. Uh Mr. Mr. Speaker, uh I think if uh the honorable member would uh care to review the statement which I made in the house last week uh that we have addressed the major issues and questions which the auditor uh has brought forward. Indeed, we recognized those uh earlier this year when uh my predecessors set up an an internal review of all of our procedures. And in that statement last week, I set out uh the various uh checklists and inspection procedures uh that we have been and are now following uh which we believe ensure that people can place their children uh in the daycare centers and know that they are properly uh licensed. >> Supplementary. Well, let me quote you from the auditor's report, Mr. Minister. Infractions included consistent understaffing, unsafe supervision of children, unsanitary facilities, and substandard meals. And these conditions were identified in 11 out of 24 daycare centers. In eight of the 11 uh problem daycarees, conditions have existed for an average of some three years. Now the minister indicates that uh he is going to be taking action on the concerns that are in the auditor's report uh which I am repeating for him today. But I wonder how the minister can answer the question raised and and the uh fact that you're already aware of that your staff have been fully aware of this problem for some time now. This didn't just come up during the course of the last seven days as the attorney general is well aware. And in fact, you could have taken action some some long time ago. Why have you waited until this period of time before any action has been taken? >> Mr. Speaker, in fact, and let me be very clear that uh we have been taking action and have not just uh begun this process in in the last week. In fact, uh when we received the uh report, uh we issued directives in terms of specific things that should be done. But let's just back up a moment and I think uh understand very clearly uh the tremendous growth that has been experienced by the entire child care system and I think we recognize with the auditor uh that some of that growth uh has produced problems and one of the things that we have been particularly conscious of uh during this last year has been the need to ensure uh better management procedures throughout uh to take care of exactly some of the situations which uh uh which you have raised which the auditor has raised raised and in fact which have come up internally. We believe the steps that we have taken are going to ensure that this system uh which has has as I say uh grown at a great rate over the last three or four years uh is one in fact where people can place their children and know that they will be in safe and secure conditions. >> Thank you. >> Good answer. up to 35,000 children, according to the auditor's estimates, are in fact being looked after in daycare centers in either unsafe or unacceptable conditions at the moment. Your staff have in fact been aware of this for some time and I wonder why and by way of question, Mr. speaker to the minister why your your uh daycare centers were not required in any way, shape or form to advise the parents of these children that the centers that they were occupying were not in compliance and that they were not getting the full service as required under the legislation. Surely, it would only stand to reason and make common sense, Mr. Minister. the parents should at least be advised there's a problem or that you're taking corrective action or some steps are being taken. Why was that not done? >> Minister, >> thank you, Mr. Speaker. We uh encourage very highly parent participation in all of the uh the daycare centers and operations that we fund uh under the guidelines that we have been working on now through the better part of this year. uh we are ensuring that everyone is aware uh of exactly what the situation is in the daycare. Uh previously we set out a a a pamphlet or rather a a poster which which sets out so that parents may see clearly upon entering the premises uh the checklist of all the different things that are supposed to be there and be available. Uh as I said before, we recognize that in the past with the tremendous growth that there have been some problems, but we believe that we have specifically addressed the points raised by the auditor and indeed have taken action on those earlier this year. >> New question, the member for Cochran South. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions to the premier. The 1989 annual report of the provincial auditor, I think, clearly indicates your lack of commitment to the justice system of Ontario. Uh two of the worst problems uh referred to in the auditor's report involve your lack of safety measures in our courts and the underutilization of existing and new courtrooms. In fact, even in our busiest cities where the backlog of cases awaiting trial has risen to 15,000 in 1988 and criminal cases awaiting trial for more than 18 months has risen to over 600. Our courts in those busy centers are being used for only 2 and 3/4 hours a working day. How can you justify justice denied to the people of Ontario by these by delays and at the same time the availability of empty courtrooms? >> Premier speaker, I think the attorney general could help out my honorable friend. >> Been referred to the attorney general. >> There is great utility in the auditor's report because he finally puts to rest the assertion that additional courtroom resources are needed in Ontario. That is a point that I've been trying to make to the house and to my friends for four years >> that what is required is not new courtroom resources but better utilization of the resources. Now, [applause] the practical the the practical difficulty here is that as the honorable members would know if they would listen, the matter of assigning judges to a courtroom or to a trial is not a matter over which the administration of justice has any control whatever. It is a feature of judicial independence and only judges can assign judges to courtrooms or cases. We are working with the judges in our new regional system to try and improve utilization. Honorable members will be interested to know that the two drug cases in the district court that were dismissed two weeks ago because of charter delays did not represent a shortage of resources. They represented a failure to assign judges to cases. Now, this is a problem that we have to work with, but it is almost entirely a question of judicial independence. >> Supplementary. Mr. Speaker, now that we've established that the attorney general's answer to the auditor's report is to blame the judges, the provincial auditor finds something very different. He finds that the problem is a lack of commitment of the attorney general to a proper utilization of our court facilities. And because of that, we have courtrooms being used on average in our busiest centers for two and three/arters hours a day. And not only that, we have the attorney general with not even a system of monitoring courtroom use or assigning courtrooms more properly for better usage for the use of the citizens of the province of Ontario. You had no summaries of information available in your ministry to the provincial auditor to detail courtroom use. You had no information available about a lack of security uh uh provisions in these courts and you had no way of monitoring their usage. That's the failure. >> I guess there's a question there. Attorney General. >> Wrong. >> The auditor has noted that the court security bill presently passed by the house will take care of the security problems. He makes that observation himself. The second thing is that I will plead guilty to is a failure of monitoring. He recognizes that we are moving in that direction. But what I want the honorable members to understand because they press me about it all the time that new courtroom and physical resources are not what is required. The auditor has made that point plainly. And if members of the third party keep coming to me asking for more courtrooms for their districts, they can eat the auditor's report. He's finally made a point I've wanted to make here effectively for years. Now, just a moment, Mr. Speaker. His overall assessment, he says, >> here we go. >> In his overall assessment, he says the government of Ontario is being satisfactorily administered overall. This view is consistent with that in the expressed in the past few years. What he means is the past four years. And what he means and what he means is when those political paleoliths were thrown out of office, we finally got started on administering the government of Ontario. [applause] Order final supplementary. >> Uh Mr. Speaker, now we have the attorney general rewriting the the auditor's report for his own purposes. It's clear. It's clear when we're talking about a failure of utilization of the justice system, delays in the justice system, he isn't telling the opposition members to eat the auditor's report. He's telling 15,000 litigants in this province who have to wait for a trial that they can eat the auditor's report. He's telling people that are concerned about 600 criminals awaiting trial that they can eat the auditor's report. And the failure of the courtroom security, the failure of the courtroom security system in this province is not the fault of municipalities who you fored the responsibility on. It's your fault because between 1988 and 1987, courtroom security procedures declined by 50% from 216,000 searches in 1987 to 112,000 searches in 1988 at a time when seven. Do you have a question? >> Order. Order. >> What the member? >> Order. Attorney General. >> Well, Mr. Speaker, I love these days when the member for Cochran comes to town. It really makes me happen so rarely. >> It makes me feel great. and I I want to thank him uh for his questions because it they make the week go faster. But as he'll want to know, as he'll want to know, the auditor uh notes that a new act has been passed that is going to deal with courtroom security for for the first time in the history of this province. And we had a government that sat around here for 42 years when I was practicing in the courts and did nothing. We have introduced a regional system, a new security act, merger of the courts. And you know, I admit that my friend was only attorney general for 6 months at the end of the regime, but nothing was done over all that time. >> Progress is being made. And if the honorable member wants to know what a political paleolith is, it's an extinct historic out of power animal. NEW QUESTION. >> It just screw up. Would the members please allow another member to ask a question? >> Thank you. The member for Windsor Riverside. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to go back to the premier. >> I'd like to ask the premier since he didn't answer the question uh that I asked a few moments ago. Could the premier tell us today whether he was involved at all in the decision-making process either prior to the February 1st meeting or after the February 1st meeting uh when the final decision was made not to call a public inquiry into the dealings between York Region developers and politicians? What was your involvement in that process of determining there would be no public inquiry? >> Premier, >> Mr. Speaker, after the police investigation concluded and as I said to my honorable friend, I think that was in May or June. Uh there was a decision made and I was aware of it uh uh to uh leave it at that. There was nothing else that could be done in the circumstances barring some new evidence or some new proof. Now, if you have any new proof, why don't you stand up in this house and tell everybody about it and we'll investigate it. >> Supplementary. >> Mr. Speaker, all we've been saying in the last few days is that we accept the recommendations from your Ministry of Municipal Affairs, and that's that there should be a public inquiry. You and your bureaucrats and your minister are the ones that are involved in a cover up, not to get the facts out about what's going on up in the York Region. I'd like to ask the uh I'd like to ask the premier. Yesterday, he indicated that he was not aware of the February 1st meeting. Today in the Toronto Star uh when uh Mr. Ashworth's lawyer was asked whether the premier had been made aware of that meeting. Asked whether the premier was involved in the decision-making process surrounding the February 1st meeting, Brandon, the lawyer representing uh your former employee was quoted quoted Ashworth as saying no comment. Now, Mr. Speaker, is that not very clear that what Mr. Ashworth is saying is that you were involved in the decision leading up to the February 1st meeting. You are aware of it. You are aware of it and your staff had done their job. They had advised you. You were aware of it. >> The question's been asked. >> Friend takes license. He takes liberty. He believes that he by by standing up in this house, he can draw his own conclusions on anything. He's entitled to do that. But just because you say something doesn't mean it's correct. As a matter of fact, I find a lot of things you say are incorrect on many many occasions fraught with hyperbole and exaggeration and accusation. Frankly, you're quite wrong in the circumstances. You you've got you've got the right, I guess you're over 21, to stand in this house and say anything you want to draw your own conclusions. Even if you're wrong, which I find frankly you consistently are. >> New question. The member for Sernia. Well, my question, Mr. Speaker, is to the premier, and I trust that this will not be fraught with hyperbole and exaggeration. And I trust as well I trust as well that uh the premier will read page 28 of the auditor's report which uh states and I quote that uh the expenditures demonstrate and it's at the bottom of the page to save the premier some time. Expenditures demonstrate a lack of respect for taxpayers funds. Something we've been saying about this government for some time. I wonder if the premier could perhaps inform the house who the ministers were who were engaged in these rather questionable activities. $6,300 for a staff Christmas party, $3,700 for a retirement dinner, $1,100 for a membership to a social club, and if you want more, I've got them. I'd like to know the answer to those three. >> Premier, >> Mr. Speaker, the attorney general tells me he could answer that question. I want to tell attorney general >> that the Christmas party was a Christmas party held by the ministry of the attorney general. No, parallel to one held by every ministry in government for which the bill was sent to the minister's office rather than the ministry. That bookkeeping error was corrected and the ministry paid for its Christmas party like any other. The retirement dinner was a dinner held for the judges of the Supreme Court of Ontario which was attended by the honorable member for Rainey River and a member of the Conservative Caucus and is is a series of annual dinners that is given every year not in respect of retirement but to the judges. Now the now now the last item is the is the social club fees. The university club fees where I entertained for the ministry were build to the minister's office and were paid. That was corrected years ago, but it was an oversight. It should not have occurred. It was an invoicing error, and I'm grateful that the auditor brought it to our attention. >> Supplementary. >> Well, >> you know, it's uh it's so nice >> to hear the attorney general fess up once in a while. >> Yeah. as to what's going on in his ministry. Perhaps since this question has been referred by the premier to you, sir, maybe you could also enlighten the house as to which minister Torontobased was in fact so insensitive as to charge the taxpayers of Ontario over $400 for dry cleaning bills when that is clearly uh in in opposition to anything that is ever allowed to any minister. Was that you again, sir? Or was it someone else? >> My life. >> Next time, go with the star. >> Order. Order. I thought maybe it was the attorney general's tie the other day. Attorney General, >> members, some honorable members may recall that in 1985 when the new government was elected, a poll was done of the press gallery to determine who was the best dressed member of the House and as a matter of fact, it was me. But I >> but I have been in government four years and I can only speak for the treasurer and myself when I say that neither of us have had any pressing done in the entire [laughter] period of time. But I do want to draw to the honorable member's attention the useful work the auditor does. And I will speak to the university club fees because that is my responsibility. But what should be noticed is that it really is I think an appropriate observation but not a criticism to say that the ministry Christmas party because it was misinvoiced and the judge's annual dinner because it was misidentified isn't >> Thank you. Order. >> Order. >> I think the me order. >> New question. >> The member for Lake Nipagon. >> Uh thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Health regarding the very serious u nursing shortage particularly in Ontario. Um last week, Mr. Mr. Speaker, the minister indicated that she felt um comfortable with a vacancy rate of some 2%. Well, with respect, Minister, I think you're simply simply playing with numbers. For in northeastern Ontario at present, the vacancy rate, the shortage of nursers is in the magnitude of 5.5%. And in the Northwest, it's 5.1%. As the minister responsible for healthcare in the province of under of Ontario, Minister, what specific plans do you have to correct or alleviate to some extent this serious problem in Northern Ontario? >> Minister, >> thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As the member opposite knows, I've traveled extensively through Northern Ontario on a number of occasions uh since becoming minister, and I know that he's aware of my understanding of the issues of remoteness and of geography and the special challenges of delivering health care services throughout Northern Ontario. uh one of the reasons that I established the uh uh northern health manpower committee was to look at seeking the advice of people who live in the north to best advise us on how we can meet those challenges. I want him to know as well that there are a number of innovative programs which are underway via the underserviced area program who are looking at how we can offer the kinds of incentives uh for individuals whether they are in nursing or in other areas of uh health care such as physiootherapy, occupational therapy, speech pathology, aiology uh uh sheropus and so forth as well as uh others. Mr. Speaker, to offer services throughout Northern Ontario >> supplementary, the me >> Mr. Speaker, more fluff. >> The point is that the nursing shortage in northeastern and northwestern Ontario has gone on now for over two years. In fact, the numbers are slightly better, a little bit better. But in northwestern Ontario alone, there is a shortage of 59 nurses. the nurse uh shortages most frequently occur in acute care and critical care. Now, the minister said that she now has the Northern Health Manpower Committee. That committee was announced last November. The people appointed to it weren't appointed until July, and to our information, it's met only once. Now, what is the minister going to do? Offer us more fluff? These are real shortages. These are people who are going without acute care and critical care because there's a shortage of nurses and you're in charge. What are you going to do? >> Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And in fact, I would say to the member opposite that if he were to uh look at this situation fairly, he would acknowledge that while there is much to be done, we are making progress. We have, I think, gathered together some of the very best advice uh possible through the Northern Health Manpower Committee, which has met He knows as well that we have a number of programs to ensure that people of Northern Ontario have access to the services that they need. I'm not saying that there isn't more to do. Of course there is. And the challenges that the north uh poses to us are challenges of remoteness and of geography and of the fact that uh we must do I believe much better in overall manpower planning, human resource planning in all aspects of healthcare in this province. I want him to know of my commitment to ensure that uh we we review the needs of Northern Ontario as well as the needs of southern Ontario as we develop policy initiatives because of my commitment to make sure that the people of this province have equity and access to effective and quality health care as close to home as possible. >> New question, the member for Nippasing. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to uh stick with questions on the auditor's report to the chairman of management board. The uh chairman of management board will know that the guidelines for rental cars calls to rent compact and subcompact cars. Uh, I wonder if the minister can explain why the auditor's report turns up not isolated cases, not the odd one, not I by that I by that I interpret him to mean not just the Ministry of the Attorney General, which the auditor seems to expect to be over on everything and violate the guidelines, but he says numerous instances where Cadillacs, Lincoln, Fifth avenues >> where these kinds of cars uh have been uh on a numerous instances been the rule of the day. I wonder if the the I wonder if the minister can explain that and also explain why at at the same time on this similar related matter the hotel rooms where the government rate was not even asked for and I see in here 18 occasions $100 a night in North Bay. Were you nowhere close to that hotel anywhere in my city? >> Did that include your supplementary >> minister? Um, Mr. Speaker, with respect to North Bay, I can tell the honorable gentleman that that particular rental uh was for a judge um not a government employee. You know that the judiciary is independent. A number of the rentals which have been noted were for members of boards and agencies. I can tell the honorable gentleman that that is no reason for uh for us to refuse to look at how we can ensure that people rent proper cars for sure. But just note that the independent nature of some of our organizations uh makes it somewhat more difficult to pursue uh adherence to the guidelines. We however are pursuing that. We have seen for instance in the auditor's report that our activity level on that is quite well progressing beyond where it was when we first came into office. We wish to have accountability not only with respect to the guidelines for rentals of cars but also for the accountability of transfer payment agencies about which the auditor says that we have done good things. I also want to note Mr. Speaker, just to put this in context for the people of the province that the auditor has said that we have improved in our administration that we have taken seriously the points which he has uh shown to us in the past could be rectified and improved and we [clears throat] are making progress substantial progress but we likewise are not perfect but we're working on that and we're making very good progress on that. >> Supplementary Mr. Speaker, the auditor in fact says cumulatively on all of many you you you smile and the attorney general laughs at some of these these expenditures because individually they don't seem large. Cumulatively the auditor says collectively then these findings are significant and demonstrate a lack of respect for taxpayers funds. Can you explain to me why you could not have a policy that no minister, >> no member, no employee of this government will ever be reimbursed in excess of the amount of the guideline for a government rate for a hotel or a compact or a sump compact car? Why can you not have that simple policy that says you might have spent more, but we're only paying you the government guideline? Why can't you do that? >> Mr. speaker. Um, >> lest the people get the wrong impression from the way that gentleman interprets uh our role over here, we have been very keen to fix up practices which we didn't find to be completely acceptable. We have done a revamping of the way in which we tender contracts. We heard about consulting contracts before. We have dealt with the issues about the problem of not pro providing timely decisions about bringing capital projects into place for sewage and water for dealing with outstanding issues. We have dealt with improving and updating and upgrading the guidelines in a manner which is practical and enforcable. And when somebody brings to our attention that we can improve, we agree we can improve. We have made wonderfully good grand strides towards improving our accountability. The auditor has indicated that he would rate us as seven out of 10 and that's good. It's a good performance, but it's not good enough. And we will do better. But I can tell you we're doing a lot more with the money that we are spending on a comparison basis than you guys ever thought was possible. And we'll continue to improve. We're not perfect, but we will enforce our guidelines. >> New question. The member for Simco Center. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Transportation. In June of 1988, a young man by the name of John Wolf was killed in the hit-and- run incident in Barry by a person who was driving a stolen vehicle. The vehicle had been left unattended and with the keys in the ignition. Uh there was an inquest and a recommendation of the inquest read as follows. That the Minister of Transportation add the following to the Highway Traffic Act. It be an offense to leave keys in an unattended vehicle on either private or public property resulting in the loss of points and a fine. My question to the minister is would he consider this or a similar amendment to help deter future loss of life and property? Minister, Mr. uh Speaker, very clearly the uh instance that the honorable member raises is a very um very serious and very tragic instance of a uh really uh terrible loss of human life through uh through the re recklessness of another individual. Uh I have asked my officials to take a look at the issue uh uh very carefully and I thank the honorable member for raising the issue uh for us so that as we uh bring forward our next amendments to the highway traffic act we can determine whether this would be an appropriate amendment. I think very clearly the honorable member and uh and and other members of the house would recognize that there is a uh that there is a measure of uh of not wishing to interfere in terms of vehicles and private property or indeed not uh not wishing to interfere in an area where to do so really doesn't enhance other than in a single situation the issue of public safety. Uh I would much prefer, Mr. speaker to uh to begin to work uh on a number of and to continue working on a number of educational programs which are designed to uh to convince the public that leaving keys in an unattended car is is very injudicious and very dangerous. >> Supplementary. >> Yes, Mr. Speaker. Um the family of this young man are very well known and respected in the Berry area. They feel that their son and brother would be alive today if it was an offense to leave keys in an unattended vehicle. They realize that passing such a law would not bring John back, but they feel it might save someone else's life. Uh, and I agree with them in the opinion that the kind of person who would steal a car might well be one who would drive that same car in a reckless manner. And I would ask the minister if he could uh address this particular problem and try to help someone else's life in the future. >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, I can only say to the honorable uh member that we are as we uh bring forward further amendments to the Highway Traffic Act going to review this matter uh and the very serious recommendation that the coroner's jury uh put forward. We are as well going to look at the experience and indeed whether there are precedents in other jurisdictions. Uh I say to the honorable member uh that at the very least uh that uh it is our view that additional education measures uh are necessary. It is certainly at the very least uh drivers who leave keys in unattended cars are leaving themselves open to theft and a lot of additional heartache for themselves and police work. At the very most uh we end up with situations such as a very tragic constit uh situation in his own constituency. So we are looking at additional educational efforts. >> New question, the member for Hamilton West. >> Mr. Speaker, I want to take the Minister of Community and Social Services back to the provincial auditor's report and the section dealing with with daycare. The minister will know since he's seen the report and had an opportunity to re review it in advance that uh the auditor notes at one point that one-third of the licenses issued were unrestricted even though the program adviser had explicitly identified areas of non-compliance with the legislation and I underline that had explicitly identified areas of non-compliance with the legislation. The report then goes on to site two and then further on 22 more centers which were not in compliance for periods of three, four and five years even though the non-compliance had to do with quite serious matters. Mr. Minister, I want to ask the minister uh there were regulations in the past. They weren't enforced. You sent out a poster last year. You're sending out a letter now that will advise that regulations are going to be tightened up and they will be enforced. But how can we really believe that anything's going to change? >> Minister, >> thank you very much. Uh Mr. Speaker, u as uh my colleague has pointed out, we have instituted uh new procedures. Uh these are I think uh open and uh and public. there will be plenty of opportunity to ensure that in fact we are following the practices that we have put forward and I certainly want to make that commitment not only to members of the house but to all of the people in the province who are using uh daycare facilities. I think again as I said in answer to an earlier question, we recognize that over the past few years with the tremendous growth of the system. Uh there have been some problems with that in terms of the management of the system. Uh one of the things we are now trying to address as specifically and clearly as we can uh is in fact the issues which the auditor has raised and which others have raised to ensure in fact that this kind of situation is not repeated. >> Supplementary. Well, Mr. Speaker, we've heard, parents have heard those kinds of commitments from previous ministers in the past. There have been regulations in the past quite clearly. Presumably, the minister made some attempt to get the regulations out into the field so they'd be known about and they'd be complied with, but they weren't and nothing was done for years on end. Mr. Minister, I think perhaps you should tell us uh what is your new budget and how much improved is your budget for enforcement and what are you new how many more new personnel are going to be thrown into the task of enforcement? What your new resources are you throwing into this task so that parents can be absolutely clear that the new regulations unlike the old will in fact be enforced. >> Thank you minister. >> Thank you very much Mr. Speaker. I think that what we have done in terms of the uh directives that went out several months ago regarding these uh these procedures that they are in fact uh being followed and and are being carried out. Uh in terms of our commitment to uh future program as the member is aware we are at work now on the second uh three-year cycle for child care and we'll be addressing that issue in the new year in the house. But these specific directives which are in the auditor's report and are in the statement that I made last week I think are our public commitment to everyone in the province uh that we are going to be following up with each center to ensure that these initiatives are followed. >> New question the member for Perry Stone. >> Mr. Speaker, I have a question of the Minister of Health rising out of the auditor's report. The auditor's report clearly identifies a particular matter at York Finch General Hospital on page 47 to be helpful to the minister of the auditor's report stating that approximately 15% of all beds in Yorkfinch hospital were occupied by chronic care patients when in fact it's designated solely as an acute care hospital. The auditor's report goes on to point out that this has led to a loss of funds for the hospital and a loss of service in terms of health care to the community. Madame Minister, some of those patients, 15 of them to be exact, were chronic care patients that were in York Fence General Hospital for over a year. How is it that your ministry was unable to find appropriate chronic care placement for those patients? >> Minister, >> thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. where the member opposite once again displays his lack of knowledge about how the health care system overall works and the relationship uh both between the ministry and the hospitals. He knows as well that we have undertaken a review of long-term care and an acknowledgment that in fact there is in fact today a fragmented and uncoordinated approach to long-term care. He knows that the Yorkfinch General Hospital provides services as a transfer payment agency and that one of the things that the ministry has undertaken uh to support hospitals in delivering services is the establishment of such things as central bed registries so that the hospitals will know uh what services are available in different hospitals across this province. Supplementary >> speaker uh supplementary in conversation with the auditor's staff during the lockup some of our researchers were told that Yorkfinch situation is not unique. Many hospitals in Metro Toronto and in fact I believe the exact quote out of the auditor's report is 148 out of 223 public hospitals in the province have chronic care patients in their system when they're supposed to be providing acute care. As the auditors pointed out, this not only results in loss of funds to those hospitals, but it results in a very a loss of very basic health care service to the community that those hospitals are supposed to provide. Well, you shake your head. The auditor disagrees with you. You can tell me I don't know anything about it. You're going to tell the auditor he doesn't know anything about how the healthare system works either. >> Question. >> Will you not now admit that you've made a mistake? you should reinstate your commitment to deliver those extra 3,000 chronic care beds that your premier said were necessary during the 1985 election campaign and the auditors confirmed again today are necessary here. >> Minister, >> thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would say to the member opposite that the fact that there are uh people inappropriately placed whether they are in acute beds or in chronic care beds or in nursing homes or in homes for the aged is in fact one of the challenges that face us here uh in the province of Ontario. That's one of the reasons that what we have instituted in a review of long-term care is to start focusing on people and the services that they need and all of the alternative ways that those services can be provided. Many, in fact, most of the hospitals in this province experience the frustration of finding services that could be provided in alternative ways, whether they are inpatient services that could be provided on an outpatient basis or those services which could be provided in alternative ways right across this province. And we're working with them to identify those opportunities so that we can use our resources more effectively, Mr. speaker to ensure that the care that the people receive is in fact appropriate. >> It appears to me that there are quite a few conversations taking place. >> Order. I didn't recognize the member for Missaga South. >> New question. The member for St. Andrew St. Patrick. Speaker, a question to the Minister of Health. Uh, Madame Minister, the issue of organ donations has once again been highlighted by the decision of the family of Olympic swimmer Victor Davis to donate his organs so that others may have a second chance at life. As the minister will recall, last April, uh, this house adopted my private members resolution to encourage organ donations in Ontario. Could the minister tell us what initiatives have been taken by the government to increase the awareness of the public about the need for organ donations? >> Minister, >> thank you, Mr. Speaker. First, I'd like to uh commend the member from St. Andrew St. Patrick for his efforts uh to increase awareness uh in the public on this very important issue. I think all members of the house recognize the importance of increased awareness uh for organ donations. Um he knows that the ministry uh is funding the multiple organ retrieval and exchange program referred to as more m. It's expected that this initiative will be operational by January. It will be the first of its kind, Mr. Speaker, in Canada and uh we're confident that in fact it will help those who need organ transplants uh in this province. >> Supplementary. >> Uh yes. Uh Mr. Speaker, Madame Minister, I appreciate the information about the more program which is designed to help in the retrieval of these organs. Uh as you will recall during the debate I made a specific proposal calling on an amendment to regul regulations under the public hospitals act so that attending physicians are encouraged to uh ask some questions to uh to have more potential donors under appropriate circumstances in hospital. Can the minister advise whether she has uh made any progress on amendments to the regulations under the public hospitals act to encourage the supply of of uh organs for donations? >> Minister. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to say to the member and to all members in this house who participated in the debate that we took very seriously the discussion and the debate that took place at that time and that we have uh proceeded to draft regulations uh which would uh provide for the establishment of protocols and procedures in hospitals to encourage the donation of organs and tissues. Well, I'm pleased to inform the member that in fact we're in the final stages of consultation and that the uh legislative council has has informed us of suggested revisions. We'll be discussing this with the Ontario Hospital Association, uh the Ontario Medical Association more themselves, the Ontario uh nurses association and the registered nurses association of Ontario because we want this regulation to give us the result which is to improve access to uh uh organ retrieval in this province. I want to acknowledge the contribution that the member opposite has played in this most important issue and say that we hope to see this regulation in place in the very near future. >> New question, the member for Lake Nipagon. >> Uh thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the Minister of Transportation. The Minister plans to allow extra long trucks on our overcrowded highways. Officials, Mr. Speaker, at both CNN and CP are saying that your decision, Minister, could possibly kill the railways. The Ontario Provincial Police are saying that your your decision will make a bad situation worse. Officials at the Canadian Automobile Association are predicting that we shall have more fatalities on our highways or and more people will be badly injured. Last month, Minister, and I've been watching you very carefully, I remember very vividly that you mentioned that you were against longer trucks for safety reason. And now you've changed your mind. Why did you do so? Minister, who got to you, >> minister? U Mr. Speaker, I think uh it's interesting to hear the point of view that is offered by the honorable gentleman and the point of view that he that he offers that some people uh that that he suggests some people are saying. I would only say to the honorable gentleman that the decision we have taken uh makes uh makes Ontario no longer part of what I would call a regulatory island. Uh the honorable member would know that uh that 35 the honorable member would know that some 35 states already have exactly the same kind of the same kind of trucking uh length regulations as as we have proposed. The honorable member would also know uh that the proposal which we uh which we are suggesting we will put in place is now present in four western provinces and in the province of Quebec. And the honorable member will further know uh that since we uh brought in u brought in the uh the safety code in uh earlier this year uh the levels of compliance have improved quite dramatically and so consequently some of the safety concerns which uh existed earlier are no longer present >> supplementary. Well, thank you very much Mr. Speaker. >> Mr. Speaker, tell me why should I take the word of the minister against the word of a of the provincial auditor or the word of a police officer? >> Is that your >> This is what your safety record is. Mr. Speaker, in 1988, 22% of truck inspected were removed from the highway. The provincial auditor says that last week at one scale station on Highway 400, more than 20% out of 300 trucks were told to get out of the highway. You can't even police what you have at the present time. And because of a lobby, with respect, minister, you want to make the situation worse. When will you simply come to your senses, do what's right, consult with those associations, and say no >> to expediency. >> Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, the honorable gentleman uh the honorable gentleman raised a couple of interesting points in the course of his question and he suggested we had in the course of his first question an overcrowded highway situation and that this would make it worse and he suggested that again. I would just point out to him that a number of uh that large businesses which now use the highways with their trucks not only say that there will not be an increase in the number of trucks as a result of this proposed change. They are talking about reductions of the number of trucks that they will be needing on the roadways of 10 to 15%. And so rather than going up in numbers of trucks, we are actually going to go down. As well, the honorable member continues to raise the issue of safety concerns. And I acknowledge and I acknowledge that there's uh uh that that the honorable member and uh my friends at the CIA and others are quite correct to be worried about ensuring that safety is is the absolute number one uh uh result of this of this uh change. I can only say to the honorable gentleman that where the uh where those uh where those same regulations are in place in the United States and 35 of of 50 states that there is no different Thank you. >> Let's relax just a little bit. >> Just just just relax. I think >> I must relax. >> I'll recognize the member for Burlington South. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the Minister of Health. Minister, today the auditor's report makes reference to about a 90% increase in the amount of money spent by your government on consulting fees. Could the minister please confirm or deny that she or members of her immediate staff or members of her ministry engaged the consulting firm specifically for the purposes of developing a strategy to combat the uh exposure of your government's failure to honor its election commitment for 4,000 4,400 new beds in the province of Ontario? Will you confirm or deny whether or not you have uh commissioned such an activity to assist you to defend against that election promise you broken? >> Asked twice. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. In fact, I would say to the member opposite that from time to time in a number of different areas, we seek advice as you heard from the chairman of management board uh to uh um give us the expertise whether it is in uh planning uh for uh new facilities or whether it is in fact for uh a number of different areas. I I can't specifically uh mention to the member any or all of uh the areas of expertise which the ministry uh uh goes out to would determine for but I would be pleased in fact to uh look into his request. >> That completes the a lot of time for oral questions and responses.