6 MAI 1991 ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO
The House met at 1330.
EDUCATION PROGRAM EVALUATION
The goal of this project is to provide a Canadian information base that will enable provincial ministries of education to assess the performance of their education programs in comparison with Canada-wide standards. During hearings before the Ontario select committee on education from 1987 to 1990 many participants decried the lack of meaningful data on the performance standards of our education systems. This national program would help in establishing Canadian criteria, data and outcomes that would help us to improve our educational programs for all our students.
We all recognize that standardized tests alone are not a fair measure of any education system, but as part of a broader evaluation process they are a vital tool. Indeed, as the council's background document on this issue makes clear, there is growing agreement on the value of monitoring and evaluating educational systems at all levels. This has led to increased collaboration among the provinces in comparative studies of student achievement and the development of educational indicators.
I believe that the concerns as to how socioeconomic and cultural differences are reflected in the proposed school achievement indicators program can be addressed and overcome and that Ontario can and should participate. This project is one example where all the provinces, including Quebec, have agreed on a positive, far-reaching initiative. This is not the time for Ontario to opt out.
OATH OF ALLEGIANCE
The Premier's arbitrary decision to remove the name of the Queen from that oath has been met by strong opposition from all sectors of Ontario society. I know that many members of our police services have been upset and angered by it as well.
Yesterday Ontario's police sent a clear message to the Premier that they wish to stand in defence of Canadian values and traditions, including the monarchy and explicit reference to the Queen of Canada in their oath.
On behalf of the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party, I would like to congratulate the association for its stand. I would also like to announce the start of a petition campaign, to be conducted by our party, to collect as many signatures as possible from concerned citizens to have Her Majesty's name reinstated in the police oath.
I urge all who wish to sign the petition to contact a member of the Ontario PC caucus. This petition will give the citizens of Ontario an opportunity to tell the Premier that what he has done without public consultation is unacceptable to them and that he must undo the damage he has inflicted on our Canadian heritage. They will also be able to remind the Premier, who must take a responsible position at the constitutional table, about the great unifying role exercised by the crown as our foremost symbol and guarantor of Canadian national identity and parliamentary democracy.
The average person spends the majority of his or her waking hours at work. It is our sole preoccupation for at least 40 hours per week for most of our lives. Yet up until now work and workers are often considered invisible, while sports or other leisure time activities absorb the attention of the media. Work, or at least most kinds of work, is often seen as the means to an end rather than something inherently interesting and creative in and of itself.
Last week I was honoured to speak at the official launch for WorkWeek, a TVOntario-CBC program that finally acknowledges something that we have known for a long time: Love it or hate it, work is one of the single most interesting and crucial experiences in life.
Congratulations to TVOntario and CBC Newsworld for recognizing the need for a program that looks at workplace issues and for taking the initiative to get it on the air. This program hits the waves at a time when the workplace is battered by layoffs and business closures. It is a challenge to the way that business is done. Labour, management and business must tackle problems differently.
I urge everyone in this House and at home to watch WorkWeek every Tuesday night at 7:30. It offers a weekly forum for in-depth discussions on work issues.
Congratulations and keep up the good work.
The site contains some 3,000 to 5,000 gallons of cyanide chemicals and an equal volume of acid. Together this is a lethal combination. Later that afternoon, the Ministry of the Environment issued a control order requiring the company and its directors to clean up toxic chemicals at the site. That order allowed for a 15-day appeal period.
Public concern is very high. This is evident from the contents of a petition from residents which I brought to the Legislature on 23 April. As well, the city of Burlington has passed a strong resolution requesting the minister to expedite the cleanup of the site.
The 15-day period allowed for appeal expired 3 May. The minister must act now. The chemicals are stored in an unsegregated fashion in deteriorated containers. The site is not fully fenced and part of it is accessible to children through an orchard. Houses are located as close as 50 feet to the site and the area close to the site is densely populated.
There is clear reason to expect that the owners, who have not met their previous obligations, will not meet their obligations to clean up the site now, with or without an order. The Minister of the Environment must step in, clean up the site and remove the toxic chemicals and the danger to the community. She has the authority. She must act now. The people in Burlington expect it.
In co-operation with police and the insurance industry, the Ministry of Transportation, on 30 April, announced a two-week campaign called Slow Down and Survive, essentially a province-wide crackdown on speeders and bad drivers. The Insurance Bureau of Canada has contributed $100,000 to the promotion campaign and the Ministry of Transportation a paltry $8,000, indicating this ministry's relative lack of commitment to this very serious matter of highway safety.
Statistics show that 4,221 people were killed and more than 284,000 were injured on our roads in 1989. Traffic accidents remain the number one cause of death for Canadians under 45. Coupled with this human tragedy are the economic costs which are incurred every time a personal injury accident occurs, ranging from acute hospital care to insurance claims and long-term disability.
This government must assume a stronger leadership role in addressing this crucial issue. Well-planned, co-ordinated initiatives must be undertaken by the ministry in partnership with broader private industry and interest group involvement to reduce fatalities and accidents on our roads.
Without question, the Ontario Provincial Police continue to perform their responsibilities for ensuring safety on our highways with competence and professionalism. This task is not theirs alone. Too often we seem to accept death on the highway as a fact of life. Steps must be taken to change this attitude. Change will not be achieved if this government persists in its gimmicky, Band-Aid approach to solving serious problems.
At its training centre, located at 64 Signet Drive in my riding of Yorkview, Local 27, in co-operation with the Toronto Construction Association and the Ministry of Skills Development, runs apprenticeship programs aimed at preparing the apprentice of today for the technological demands of the future.
Since the opening of the Patrick J. Campbell Training and Rehabilitation Centre in 1986, the apprenticeship program has advanced and enhanced the skills of nearly 900 young men and women. In addition, this truly remarkable educational facility has achieved a 97% placement rate for its students.
The building industry in Ontario will remain strong and vibrant only if we continue to educate and replenish the industry with a skilled and competent labour force. The carpenters of Local 27 have shown their desire to contribute to a better and stronger future by providing an apprenticeship facility second to none.
They, along with the Toronto Construction Association and the Ministry of Skills Development, should be proud of the fine work they are doing, as I am proud of wearing this United Brotherhood of Carpenters jacket. I realize that I am not allowed to wear the hat, but if I did I would tip my hat to the carpenters.
SEVERANCE PAYMENT AND TERMINATION HEARINGS
Under such dire circumstances, it would only appear normal to expect support from this government. However, I believe the Ministry of Labour's procedures are aimed at hurting, not helping, the former employees of Courtaulds Fibres Canada (BCL).
After originally scheduling the severance payment and termination hearings for over 200 employees of BCL in Cornwall, it has come to my attention that the Ministry of Labour will be relocating these hearings to Ottawa.
The reason given, inadequate accommodation, is garbage. As these hearings are indeed still booked for local conference facilities, the minister knows full well that the riding of Cornwall can very well accommodate the needs of these hearings.
By relocating the hearings to Ottawa, the Ministry of Labour is sending a clear message that its hearings are neither accessible nor open. These hearings have been scheduled in Cornwall and must remain in Cornwall. The sheer distance and disturbance of travelling to Ottawa for four consecutive days is unnecessary, an additional burden for both the claimants and the company representatives of Courtaulds. I request the Minister of Labour to instruct the acting deputy minister, Jean Read, to revert back to the original plans.
ORDER OF BUSINESS
The members of our caucus believe that the government is using the routine procedures of this House, specifically the ministerial statements, to deflect the tension away from this outrageous budget, that it is making ministerial statements unnecessarily long and drawn out and that it is attempting to market its schemes as good news announcements in order to deter the attention of members of this House and the general public.
Therefore, I move that this House pass directly to oral questions immediately following the completion of members' statements today.
Developers, while receiving hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of zoning approvals, were required to promise to the city that they would begin constructing the projects within one year of approval. Developers vying for these lucrative zonings were required to post a deposit which would be forfeited if they reneged on their commitment to build. Their time expired and the developers did not keep their promise. Consequently, they should have forfeited their deposits to the city of North York. Instead, in a municipal election year, Mayor Mel Lastman and North York council in a quiet meeting decided to give developers a big break and returned approximately $25 million worth of deposits.
Mayor Lastman and council are quick to forgive developers in tough economic times, but when home owners who cannot afford to pay high property taxes require relief and file poverty appeals with the city of North York, they are not as quick to forgive these taxpayers.
ORDER OF BUSINESS
I noticed in your judgement or your ruling last week, Mr Speaker, that you said that the motion to jump from one part of the proceedings to another part of the proceedings was a dilatory motion and you drew the analogy, as did Mr Edighoffer, our former Speaker, to these two motions for adjournment of the debate and adjournment of the House.
I want to say that I do not think it was contemplated, either by you, the Speaker, or the previous Speaker, that such a motion would ever be put in front of this House. Therefore, I think the strict analogy between the motion which I now propose and a motion to adjourn the House and a motion to adjourn the debate is wrong, and I say that for a number of reasons.
Mr Speaker, in your ruling of 2 May, on page 1158, you indicate that these types of motions are tactical, and that is true; they are tactical. The two previous motions, which were moved in both cases by either the government House leader or a government minister, were used as tactics by the government of the day to avoid tactics by the opposition, and they were ruled in order at that time. In both of those cases, the ruling by Speaker Edighoffer and yourself with regard to whether or not the tactical move was the same as an adjournment of the debate and an adjournment of the House, as considered specifically under rule 44, was really an overture or an extra ruling which was not required at that time. Therefore, I do not consider it binding on the Chair in terms of dealing with this particular motion.
Second, what is good for the goose is good for the gander as well. I would say that if the government has the right to introduce motions during routine proceedings to omit part of those routine proceedings, then surely it is within the ambit of the opposition to introduce a motion during the routine proceedings to omit part of the routine proceedings which it does not want to be involved in.
I think another very important point here is that rule 44(a), which is the one we are talking about today, is a rule which says that motions to adjourn the House or adjourn the debate cannot be put before question period. The meaning and the intention of that ruling, as far as I have always read it is concerned, and I think anyone reading it would think so, would be that the government, using its majority, cannot deny the opposition benches the right of questioning the government of the day in each legislative day.
Mr Speaker, my motion, which I have placed in front of you, does not deny the opposition its right to the question period. In fact, the way the motion is framed is such that it would encourage us to get along to question period and omit the ministerial statements, for the reasons I put in my particular statement.
The purpose of this rule is to protect the opposition in terms of dealing with this government and getting at it in terms of questions. I do not believe the ruling that a dilatory motion like this necessarily comes under rule 44(a) is necessary or right. I believe what you are doing, Mr Speaker, is taking away a right of the opposition when in fact previous Speakers have given that self-same right to the governments of the day, as was exhibited by the last government during the motions part of proceedings and by this present government during the introduction of bills.
Therefore, I would ask you to reflect upon this point of order, adjourn this House for 15 minutes and then come back and give us a ruling on it. I am sure you will find the motion in order.
Also, part of the standing orders of our rules very clearly allows the government ministers to make statements where the opposition parties have always said we should be making them, and that is in the House rather than out in the public without being held accountable in the Legislature. That is certainly a rule that we in this government want to continue to follow. Mr Speaker, if you are to accept the point being made by the acting House leader for the Conservative Party, it would also remove the right for the opposition parties to reply to policy statements by the government.
Clearly the ruling that was made by Speaker Edighoffer was made so that the motion to move to orders of the day could only be made at the point at which he suggested, which is clearly to protect the government's right to make announcements and the opposition's right to hold the government accountable, and I think that ruling is as applicable today as it was then.
Members will know that the Minister of Education indicated at page 1153 of Hansard that she was distressed that she was being "misrepresented in terms of my position and our government's position with respect to the school accommodation issue."
These remarks were made in response to a question from the member for Essex South, but they did not specifically allude to him or to any other member. Therefore, I do not find that the remarks of the minister transgress our standing orders.
I would be remiss if I did not indicate to all honourable members, and indeed remind them, that they should conduct themselves with dignity, decorum and respect, not only for the letter of our standing orders but for the spirit of those orders.
ORDER OF BUSINESS
STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY
This landmark agreement is the first in Ontario that reflects a determined effort to bring uncontrolled health costs into check. It was approved by the OMA council on the weekend.
Members may be aware of an internal OMA legal challenge to the ratification process. I have every confidence that the matter will be resolved soon. We will continue preparations to implement the agreement and will have everything in place when the OMA informs us it has acted on proper authority.
With the ratification of this agreement, Ontario's health care system is much healthier. Working together in a co-ordinated effort, we will foster efficiency and high quality where before there was misallocation and inattention. The heart of the system, fiscal management, will no longer have the overspending that had threatened medicare.
As the Treasurer said in the budget last week, to maintain a high quality of life in the midst of changing times we must establish new social partnerships to better manage our resources. Our new agreement with the Ontario Medical Association is an excellent example of the co-operative approach that will bring effective management.
This agreement brings to the system a new, co-operative approach to management that will allow for the kind of health care planning this province has always needed.
The very first page of the framework agreement sets out our common goals. For the first time in this province, physicians have committed themselves as a group to maintain the principles of medicare, with equal access to all our citizens.
Physicians have agreed to help the government achieve more value for health care spending in Ontario. They have agreed to help achieve the appropriate number, mix and distribution of physicians based on Ontario's needs.
A joint management committee, with representatives from the OMA and from government, will work to enhance the quality and effectiveness of medical care, including the pursuit of more value for existing spending.
The JMC will develop action plans to look at issues raised both by physicians and government. The plans will suggest areas of improvement and develop ways to implement those improvements. Those areas include such things as drug utilization, appropriate use of hospitals and waiting list registries. Each plan will suggest areas of improvement and consider effective ways to make those improvements.
It will constantly monitor our medical system, recommending new ways to improve care while making sure the people of Ontario are getting the most for their scarce tax dollars.
The committee will also provide a forum for physicians and government to work together, to end the animosity that has for too long characterized relations between the two parties. We both serve the people of this province. When we work together, that service will improve significantly.
Let me take a moment to put some figures in perspective. Total health care spending in Ontario this year will comprise about one third of our entire budget expenditure -- $17 billion. Fees for physicians alone last year accounted for about 10% of provincial expenditures -- more than $4 billion. Before this agreement, skyrocketing increases were beginning to shake the very foundations of medicare.
This collaborative effort with our physicians will result in immediate savings to the people of Ontario.
Over the last 10 years, payments to fee-for-service physicians have been increasing at an average annual rate of 12%. Even with a fee increase of under 2% in 1988-89 and zero fee increases in 1989-90 and 1990-91, physician payments in the two years without increases jumped nearly $400 million. That is because there was no management system in place to control utilization, the growth of volume of services.
This year, per capita utilization is budgeted for a growth of 1.5%. If per capita utilization grows above that number, the government will be reimbursed for half of the excess from the total pool allotted for fee-for-service physicians.
The result is a system that provides a strong incentive for doctors to help in the process of bringing health care costs under control.
In 1977-78, OHIP payments accounted for 24% of Ontario's spending on health care. This year the health insurance portion will have mushroomed to about 32%. Not surprisingly, those increasing health insurance payments have come at the expense of other components of the health care sector and other government priorities.
This year, fee-for-service doctors will receive a total increase of 3.95%. In dollar terms for 1991-92, the increase for fee and utilization will cost about $250 million. That is an increase of just under 7%, a full 5% below the recent historical average. That 5% represents a saving of $180 million in just one year.
Because Ontario doctors have not had a fee increase since 1989, the agreement provides for a one-time payment in lieu of a fee increase of 2% for each of the last two years at a cost of about $140 million. ln addition, the government has agreed to provide malpractice insurance assistance for this year and the past two years at a cost of $84 million. These one-time payments will not be incorporated in the base amount for determining future fee increases.
As well, individual doctors will face limits on gross fee-for-service billings. Physicians billing above $400,000 will have excess fees discounted by one third. Amounts above $450,000 will be discounted by two thirds. The threshold levels will be adjusted annually. The money saved by this measure will be used to pay for natural growth in the system, such as increases in population. These thresholds will encourage doctors to make high quality their priority, not high volume of high billings.
The economic portion of the agreement also features a new mechanism to settle disputes over monetary issues between the two sides. Dispute resolution will help us to achieve a fairness that this government considers a central principle.
The most important achievement is the creation of a system of management. For the first time since the introduction of medicare in 1971, there will be an annual budget for medical spending in this province. Government and the medical profession, in partnership, will stay within that budget. The days of open-ended medical spending are over. This government is establishing proper control over this essential social program.
We are moving away at last from the haphazard insurance system of the past to a planned system, a managed system.
The people of Ontario have clearly said that preservation of medicare is on the top of their priority list. That is one of the reasons they elected a social democratic government. They know our commitment to universal health care.
With this agreement we will not only preserve medicare; we will improve it. We have made sure that the people of Ontario will continue to have access to the highest-quality medical care at a cost they can afford.
ARTS AND CULTURE FUNDING / SUBVENTIONS POUR LES ARTS ET LA CULTURE
En présentant son budget la semaine dernière, mon collègue le Trésorier a reconnu que la culture est une importante industrie croissante.
The Treasurer announced that $7.5 million has been allocated in the provincial budget as an increase to the annual base funding of the Ontario Arts Council. When added to the annual inflation allowance, the OAC budgetary increase in 1991-92 is over 25%.
With the additional $7.5 million in annual funding, the OAC will be able to create and provide strengthened links between education and the arts, more assistance to francophone and regional communities, more and larger individual grants to artists and organizations and secured operating grants to organizations for audience development.
In addition, we will see an arts council in this province that will truly reflect the multiracial, multicultural and multilingual makeup of Ontario.
De plus, nous aurons dans cette province un conseil des arts qui reflète véritablement la composition multiraciale, multiculturelle et multilingue de l'Ontario.
When the Ontario Arts Council was established in 1963, there were fewer than two dozen publicly supported arts organizations in this province. Today, the council supports some 46 orchestras, 32 public art galleries, 3 visual arts schools, 6 first nations groups, 11 folk festivals, 46 theatre companies and 24 dance companies. That is in addition to over 1,600 individual artists who receive project funding. The OAC has a history of expanding to meet the needs of a flourishing Ontario cultural community and industry.
Today, the cultural sector employs over 75,000 people in Ontario: writers, choreographers, composers, visual artists, dancers, musicians, crafts persons, filmmakers, designers, actors, technicians, administrators and others. Representing nearly half of Canada's artistic activity and resources, the Ontario arts sector has very significant direct and indirect impacts on Ontario's economy. This boom reflects the wealth of talent, skill, ingenuity and creativity of the many rich and diverse cultural roots of this province.
Nous savons que la culture nous sert à trouver des emplois, à rester en contact les uns avec les autres, à ne pas oublier qui nous sommes, et elle nous indique ce que nous pourrions devenir.
But this week's budget announcement moves our understanding a step beyond this critical role. As a government, we appreciate that the cultural sector is the fourth largest industry in Canada in terms of labour force. The economic impact of the arts and culture sector is about equivalent to that of mines and metals -- larger than textiles, clothing and furniture. Yet almost a third of Canada's artists live below the poverty line. This is as likely to be true of accomplished, acclaimed performers, writers or visual artists with years of training and experience behind them as it is of a young person just starting out.
The vast majority of cultural workers are unprotected by unemployment insurance, health and safety benefits and the kind of routine protection we have fought to earn for other workers.
Les femmes, les autochtones et des minorités ethni-ques, raciales et linguistiques sont parmi les groupes de travailleurs culturels le plus souvent sous-employés, sousreprésentés et les moins bien payés. Ce sont eux également qui le plus souvent subventionnent notre culture collective par leur travail bénévole.
Women, members of the first nations, and racial, linguistic and ethnic minorities are the most underemployed, underpaid and under-represented among our cultural workers. They are also the ones who most often subsidize our collective culture with their volunteer labour.
Many culturally diverse arts groups have limited access to public funds, and the arts sector itself is in serious financial trouble.
We need to ensure access to public funding for emerging groups and for those groups that have been shut out in the past. This means eliminating cultural or regional biases and supporting the growing number of artists and groups, particularly among first nations, francophone and other racial, linguistic and cultural communities.
I believe that the main challenge for this province and our country today is to create conditions in which we can live together in mutual respect. We need a society which protects what we want to be without destroying the right of others to be different and proud of it. This aspiration is not a new one, but it happens to be this generation that has acquired the need to make it possible.
A final point: Unlike other economic sectors, the arts cannot rely solely on market forces for revenue. Limited and falling private sector sponsorship, free trade, the recession and its effects on dwindling audiences and a decline in federal government funding have left many artists and artistic agencies in a financial crisis.
Canadian cultural products are systematically undercut by mass-produced imports: 76% of books sold in Canada are foreign; 97% of theatrical screen time is US-produced; 90% of TV drama is non-Canadian; and 85% of our music is produced outside of Canada.
In providing the Ontario Arts Council with the largest single increase to its funding in history, we are saying that our culture is not expendable and not negotiable. It is not for sale.
C'est à nous de publier nos écrivains, de produire nos propres films, de mettre en scène notre danse et notre théâtre, d'exposer et de mettre en valeur nos artistes visuels. C'est à nous de soutenir les travailleurs et les industries qui créent et protègent notre riche culture unique et irremplaçable.
It is up to us to publish our writers, to produce our own films, to stage our own dance and theatre, to exhibit and appreciate our own visual artists. It is up to us to support the workers and the industries that create and protect our own unique and irreplaceable culture.
Certainly there are some issues in here that I would like at least to raise now, and as we have a chance to review the agreement over time, to feel confident that I can raise questions in the House around it.
First, I think we should appreciate that there is the establishment of a major new joint management committee with some very substantial responsibilities, with 50% from the government side and 50% from the OMA. The deputy minister will be on that committee. It will meet at least monthly and will have a large number of important agenda items. Decisions will be made by that committee on the basis of votes.
I guess my first concern is as we look at the public health issues that will move from the public domain into the private domain. This committee, as I say, will have a staff, will have a budget, will meet at least monthly, and will have a 50-50 representation. We have a brand-new model for dealing with some very important health issues here. On the one hand, all of us obviously very much support the co-operation between the government and the OMA. But one thing I think we must be careful of is that major policy public-health issues do not move from the public domain to the private domain. That would be one question that I will raise now and be perhaps asking further questions on.
The second thing is about the financial side. The minister mentioned that for this fiscal year there is some certainty. My understanding, though, reading the document, is that the determination of the size of the fund -- of the pot, if you will -- can be made by the arbitrator. So the certainty, in many respects, leaves the government at that stage and goes to an independent arbitrator. That may be fine, but that independent arbitrator is making a decision on the basis of about a $5-billion pot. That, the Treasurer will know, is more money than he receives from the federal government in transfer payments. So a very major step is being taken here as we let that decision move from the government to an independent arbitrator.
The third issue that I would raise and that we may have the chance to talk about over time is just how much flexibility we have lost with this agreement in terms of looking at new ways to solve our health issues in the future.
We are very pleased that an agreement has been reached. I would say to all members, though, that they will want to pore over this agreement because it fundamentally changes the way the health care system in this province works and will work in the future. It puts enormous responsibility in the hands of this joint committee. We will want, as I say, to further understand how that will unfold.
ARTS AND CULTURE FUNDING
Of course we welcomed the Treasurer's announcement a week ago of this funding increment. It is something that the Treasurer promised us details about; however, there are no details in this statement whatever. There are just platitudes and generalities and pillow talk.
Where are the promises that we heard about last summer? Why is the minister not telling us something about that? Why can he not be specific about what he is going to do? What about the new powers for artists on advisory boards and the imaginative new funding programs that we heard about? What about the upgrading of the arts in our school curricula, promoting of the arts in our factories and with our workers? What about the bold new funding measures for arts festivals we heard about, and what about the new tax breaks for artists and performers? What about the new programs for visiting performers and visiting artists and arts fairs? What about the expansion of the Royal Conservatory of Music and the promise of six years of free instrumental training for our children in Ontario? What about the new funding support for the Art Gallery of Ontario?
We would like to hear some real details of this funding increment. We welcome the $7.5-million increment, and the arts council certainly does deserve it. We praise what is good in what we have heard, but we want to hear much, much more.
Unfortunately, our party has just received a copy of the agreement. We have not had an opportunity to review the agreement in detail and we are not certain as to what the total cost will be to our taxpayers. That is something that we are extremely concerned about.
We are also uncertain about the role of the joint management committee. It appears that some of the decision-making is going to be taken out of the hands of the public and become part of the private decision-making process. We certainly have some questions about that.
I think it is also important to remember that when we talk about health care costs, it is not the doctors who make up 100% of these costs. We must remember that if we are going to meet the needs of the citizens in this province, if we are going to provide the quality and effectiveness of health care to our citizens, we need to take a look at the hospitals that are running deficits, the hospitals that are closing departments, and the number of patients who are still being forced to cross the border for treatment and to go to other provinces.
We need to remember that in this last budget, there was absolutely no mention of community-based care or long-term care. I know that was very disappointing to seniors in this province and to those with disabilities who were looking forward to seeing some mention.
Therefore, although this agreement is a progressive step forward, I am still concerned, as are the members of our party, as to what the cost will be, and at what cost to the taxpayers in this province. I would ask the government to come forward at a later date with more of those details.
ARTS AND CULTURE FUNDING
Frankly, I think the government has received its praise for its funding to the Ontario Arts Council. We have always supported the work of the Ontario Arts Council. We support the fact that the OAC in fact allocates the funds itself, that the money has always been given by the government to the Ontario Arts Council for its own disbursements.
However, I really have to wonder what it is that we are getting into with this new government. Are we going to get these sort of whoopee statements every day on stuff that it has already announced in the budget? Maybe it indicates that they do not have anything else to tell us. Maybe it is an indication that they are reaching so far that they have to go back and think: "Now, what is it we can announce today? Oh, yes. We'll reannounce something that we announced in the budget last week."
Quite frankly, I would have been more encouraged if this minister had made an announcement today dealing with the publishing industry support program. That is the statement and that is the announcement we are looking for. We already know from a federal government study that there are six Canadian publishing companies in the red. We would think that this government would be concerned about that. We would think that we would have more than just a sketchy outline of what that program is going to be, and we look forward to this minister telling us something in a ministerial statement that we do not already know.
ASSISTANCE TO BUSINESS
My question to the minister is: Since in 1991 the budget for MITT is exactly the same as it was for 1990, and since he has announced these new programs, could he please tell me where he is going to get the new additional funding to provide these programs?
I am hoping we can have more luck with the minister. He has just announced that he is going to increase his budget by 11%. Is that correct? I take it that it is. If he could just add and if he could calculate, he has announced $57 million for the manufacturing program, the recovery program. He has announced $11 million for the Innovation Ontario program. There is a flat line on the budget which represents a 5% decline. In total, the amount of money that is being utilized for this program is 40% of the MITT budget.
There was, within the budget, a realignment of priorities, which I think is typical of all budgets from year to year. As well, the financing for many of the programs is on a multi-year basis because the takeup will be over a successive number of years. That perhaps is an explanation as to why the member cannot quite come to terms with the exact figures: there is a takeup, it is on a phased basis, the program is multi-year and it will be financed on a multi-year basis.
The point I am trying to make is that notwithstanding the minister's 11%, even though he had his 11%, there is a 30% discrepancy. There is 30% that he has not accounted for. We have all of the programs he has announced; they are already at the ministry. There is nothing new at all. The point is that the minister is playing games, and I would like to know what programs he is going to discontinue when we have all of these serious problems affecting Canadian industry. What 30% of his budget is going to disappear? Could he answer that question, please.
The question as to why the member cannot seem to add all the numbers up and make them come out to where he thinks they should is simply because the applications are closed off, but the take up and the development of the program may span one, two or three years. Management Board sets the method of financing of when these allocations will come forward. That is why the budgeted amounts are spread over that particular time and not shown in the very same year in which it was allocated and announced.
HUNTING AND FISHING IN ALGONQUIN PARK
The minister will know that under the leniency guidelines which have been in effect under the previous two governments and, I believe, in a slightly modified form in this one, it has been the practice to lay charges under the Game and Fish Act in cases where the take is beyond the needs of personal consumption and then to apply the leniency guidelines following that, so that the public knows that a charge has been laid; then it is withdrawn and the public knows an act of leniency has taken place. This practice has been followed by both preceding governments and I believe by this one. The minister will be aware of a large investigation at Cape Croker in which there was evidence that some six tons of fish were taken. We have been told, and there has been, I gather, a leak to the Toronto Star from some loyal servant of the minister's, that the deputy minister intervened to stop this process before the charges were even laid, rather than using the leniency principle.
I want to ask the minister, does he condone this type of interference in the laying of charges by the deputy minister? How often has the deputy minister acted as a judge on these issues before charges have been laid? Was the minister involved himself in the decision-making process which short-circuited this investigation?
I do not have any personal involvement in or knowledge of the particular case that the member refers to, and I want to assure him that the decision was made by the deputy minister and his senior staff in whom I have the fullest of confidence.
The Sparrow case says that personal consumption is the test. The minister accepts that. That has always been the leniency guideline. In this case what was proposed to be consumed was six tons of fish. It clearly cannot meet the personal consumption test.
I want to ask the minister -- I presume he will accept responsibility for his department and for his agents, even if the Solicitor General continues not to -- what he is going to do to interview the deputy minister to determine the circumstances that happened. We have six tons of fish going bad. We have an investigation that took $140,000. We have the decision made not to lay charges, in which the minister played no part. What I want to ask is, has he changed his policy? If not, is he going to apply the --
He also will be aware that since the Sparrow decision the government has instituted consultations with aboriginal organizations and with many groups, such as the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters, the Federation of Ontario Naturalists, the World Wildlife Fund Canada and others, about a new enforcement regime that will be an interim regime while we negotiate the agreements that will ensure that the aboriginal right recognized by the Sparrow decision is able to be exercised while conservation and public safety are protected. That is the situation we are in. That is the situation as it has been stated in the House. Nothing has changed.
What I want to say to my honourable friend is, when will he face up to it? Have the guidelines been changed, or has the deputy taken a step that is not consistent with the guidelines? While we are at it, as a supplementary, having aborted this investigation, the OPP have now, I understand, been called in to pull out all stops to find out who leaked this information to the Toronto Star about the whole affair. What I want to know is, what happened after all to this government, which was going to allow whistle-blowers full freedom, even in the Ministry of Natural Resources?
Considering the fact that the response from both management and union has been the same, what does he suggest he tell these auto workers, or we tell these auto workers when we come across them, that his government has just changed the word from "green" to "greed," and that they lose their job because of it?
I would simply remind the member that I think only about 15% of the vehicles that are covered under the gas guzzler tax are sold in this province and the rest are exported, so I think that to put it in perspective the member should understand that it is not as though every one of these vehicles or engines is sold in the province of Ontario and will be affected by the new tax in the province.
The Ford Motor Co chairman, Ken Harrigan, has said that without question this gas guzzler tax is going to cost jobs for Ontario auto workers in St Thomas and Windsor. Windsor, a town ravaged by this recession, needs more job layoffs like it needs a hole in the head.
The response has been very clear. The Treasurer changing the name of this gas guzzler tax in the name of the environment is just simply changing the word "green" to "greed." It is simple greed and a tax ripoff that is costing people their jobs and new taxes.
The question to the Treasurer is, what does he say to those auto workers who are now going to be unemployed, who are going to lose their jobs because he cannot accept the fact that this tax is going to cost the Ontario economy dollars and jobs? What does he say to these auto workers?
There were three reasons for the gas guzzler tax to be increased. One was for protection of the environment, two was for energy conservation, and I would be less than candid if I did not say that it increases revenues for the province of Ontario as well.
I will take the Treasurer back to 1988; this debate was taking place in the House. Let me alert the members to what the Treasurer, the then critic in the NDP caucus, said regarding the Liberals' increases in the tax for the gas guzzlers: "simply another tax grab by the Liberals." In 1988 the Treasurer called these taxes tax grabs by the Liberals. Today he is calling them responsible environmental laws passed by his government.
All power companies have called it a bad news budget. All union locals have called it a bad news budget. The only person who supports this is the president, Bob White, and he does not speak for the union representatives who are being laid off in the car towns.
As far as my comments in 1988 are concerned, I think fairminded observers would agree that in 1988, when the economy was booming, there were a lot more alternatives and options for raising revenues than there are today, and I think the public out there expects us to pass laws and to pass taxes that will both conserve energy and enhance the environment.
I have heard from the people. Their response on his budgetary policy is loud and clear -- they believe he is proceeding 180 degrees in the wrong direction. They are angry, they are not going to take it any more. Why is the Premier so opposed to my call to hold full public hearings on this budget before proceeding further?
My sense is that the people of the province understand that we are in a recession. They understand that this is precisely the time when governments need to reach out and do something for people. That is precisely what we are trying to do as a government, and I would say to the honourable member that if they have to choose between the policies that we are advocating and the policies that are being advocated by his federal cousins which have contributed so directly to the mess that we now find ourselves in, I still believe the people would prefer the option which we are presenting to them in this budget. I really believe that.
That notwithstanding, let me say to the honourable member --
Here is what the Premier said, and I will read it to him one more time.
Seventy-five per cent of the eligible voters in this province did not vote for his government. He does not have a mandate to destroy this province's economy. He has pursued a disastrous course that is clearly 180 degrees in a different direction from what the people felt he stood for, listening to all his comments through the campaign and before. Why is he so opposed to letting the public come before a legislative committee and tell him what they think of this budgetary direction? Why is he opposed to hearing from the public before he starts down this track that they are so opposed to?
I just got a copy of the press release put out by the PC party, in which the leader of the third party alleges, "The New Democrats tried to silence us last week." The only people who tried to silence anybody were the people who were ringing bells. They silenced themselves. We are ready to debate the budget any time he wants to debate the budget, anywhere, any place. He should name the place. Why not do it right here?
What I am asking the Premier for is what he called for in opposition, what he has always said, what he said right in his throne speech: "To the best of our ability, we will listen to the people." Before he starts debating, before he asks people on all sides of the House to make up their minds, I am asking him to listen to the people. Why then will he not allow the whole budget to go out to a legislative committee so we can hear from the people before we hear the debate?
Under the constitutional rules of the House, it seems to me that the leader of the third party is certainly entitled to express himself in any way he chooses, but I can only say to him that we have brought in a budget which reflects the situation that we are in, which is a very serious recession. We have charted a path with respect to the future that we are prepared to debate in this House at any time. We are more than happy to have the bills referred out to committee and have them fully discussed in committee. In the normal course of events, we will have an estimates process. Why would the leader of the Conservative Party deny the New Democratic Party what every other government in the history of the province has been able to do?
It is certain in reading the document that this committee is going to have a very large input into the health care system in the province in the future. The mechanisms that are set up, as the minister knows, call for a structure in voting that requires both sides to agree on matters before action can be taken. How does the minister respond to people who say that the structure of this committee does hand over, some say excessive, but certainly a very large amount of power and responsibility in the determination of public health policy to a non-elected group, albeit of high-calibre people, that is operating really behind closed doors in a manner that will take an awful lot of the public policy issues and see them decided, in a sense, in a bargaining environment between two parties?
The composition of the joint management committee will allow for us on the government side to involve others in that process, and we fully intend to make use of that opportunity. Additionally, with respect to the issues that the joint management committee will be dealing with and developing its action plans on, those are issues that can be brought forward by the physicians and by the government. It is our hope that together, collaboratively in a partnership, we will actually develop better-working plans. But in areas where there is not a clear answer or where there is not a clear implementation plan, the government will have to continue to manage and will have to continue to develop health care policy in the broadest sense of consultation with consumers and other health care providers.
The minister, in her response to my first question, suggested that she is prepared to consider involvement by other professions. I wonder if she is prepared to consider that in some formal mechanism. I realize she said they could be part of the government side, I gather, of the joint management committee, but is she prepared to look at similar models for other professions that might have a similar input into the health care issues in the province?
With respect to this particular joint management committee, as we indicate in the agreement, there will be issues of joint concern, brought forward either by physicians or by the government, that will be dealt with. Let me give an example of some of those issues so that it might be clear, although we do not intend at all to exclude the input of other health care professionals, why we want to start off with this joint committee and this joint structure under this agreement.
For example, the system of management that we are putting in place is one that relies on our being able to have a utilization formula that will actually keep us within a limit, within a budget, within a pool of money set aside for doctors, billings. That utilization formula, in order for it not just to be arbitrary and unilateral, will require the cooperation of both parties to work on things like the growth in number of physicians and where physicians practice. We have a problem in this province with respect to rural medicine.
Action plans around those sorts of issues will be addressed by this joint management committee, and I think I would say as an old negotiator that when you look at a negotiated deal from a negotiator's point of view you usually look for a win-win situation. I think here in this one we have a win-win-win situation.
I wonder if the minister would tell the House exactly what steps he is prepared to take to ensure that the current rate of spending on such fees and charges is brought under control and that persons providing services for these programs are paid only for the work they actually perform. Would he not agree that the Treasurer's budget promise of refining programs, speeding up approvals and reallocating units suggests only that haste might make for even further waste?
I understand where the Housing critic for the Conservative Party is coming from. He is coming from the point of view that the government should not be involved at all in the creation of housing in this province. Our party fundamentally disagrees with that point of view.
At a time when the economy is very poor, we decided that we were going to create the 35,000 units that are in the system now plus 10,000 more of those units. That will provide affordable housing for the people of this province and thousands of jobs for people in the building industry. That is something I am very proud of, and I am not at all defensive or going to attack that type of program as the member seems to be willing to.
Given the fact that by my calculation there are just over 22,000 Homes Now units which are neither built nor as yet under construction, would the minister confirm the fact that there are just over 22,000 Homes Now units that are not built yet? Would the minister agree with me that if that is the case, it is not too late to introduce proper cost controls that would apply to these units as well as to the 10,000 units that were referred to by the Treasurer in his budget last week?
The critic for the Conservative Party will know that we are going to be releasing soon a consultation document on supply. If the critic for the Conservative Party has any suggestions of how cost can be further refined, I am more than willing to listen to those suggestions from the critic. But this morning when he was asked that question by the press, he could not answer it.
HUNTING AND FISHING IN ALGONQUIN PARK
The member will also know, as I indicated in a previous answer, that in cases where commercialization is suspected or special investigations are needed, a policy similar to the one instituted in 1979 has been continued. However, it is important to recognize that in 1986 under the previous government, the policy was changed to ensure that the deputy minister and senior staff intervened both at the beginning of the investigation and prior to the laying of charges.
The ministry is currently involved in negotiations with the Algonquins of Golden Lake for subagreements on enforcement in relation to moose hunting, deer hunting and fishing in their land claim area. These negotiations and subagreements deal with levels of harvest, seasons, methods, enforcement mechanisms, conservation, public safety, parks' values.
The moose agreement, for instance, sets forward hunting from late fall to mid-January. Areas will be excluded where tourists are frequenting the park, and there will be rules regarding the use of motorized vehicles and vessels in the park. This is not unrestricted hunting or fishing.
Accepting the legitimacy of a concern around the environment, what does he say to the thousands of people who live in rural communities like Renfrew county, North Addington, North Hastings, Haliburton, those tens of thousands of Ontarians living in the rural parts of the province who on a daily basis must drive, must depend upon their half-ton truck and their automobile for their work and for their family life? What does he say to those people who will be burdened with this 25% increase in something as essential to their livelihoods and their jobs as fuel in communities where there is absolutely no alternative?
I would simply say to those people about whom the member is concerned that it is one of those taxes that we feel will accomplish a couple of things. I have said this before. It will make a contribution, we think, to energy conservation. We think as well, and I would not pretend otherwise, that it contributes to the coffers of the province to help us deliver important social programs which those same people who pay the taxes require, whether it is education or health care or whatever.
Two-part supplementary: Will the Treasurer contemplate some relief to people living in rural communities all across Ontario in light of this situation where they have no alternative and where this 25% increase in an essential service like fuel is going to be very burdensome? Would he comment that perhaps he has changed his opinion in this Legislature since that day in December 1988 when, speaking to a gasoline tax increase brought about by a previous government, he said, "Any politician who would seriously argue that there was an environmental ingredient in a gasoline tax hike was misleading the Legislature with hogwash"?
However, I would say to the member in a serious way that if I had considered relief to people in border communities, to people in northern Ontario, to people in rural communities, to people in eastern Ontario, it would have eroded the whole tax base of the fuel tax system to a degree that was unacceptable to me. I think before we pass judgement simply in opposition to taxes we should think very seriously about the services that those taxes help us deliver.
COST OF ELECTRICAL POWER
Last Friday, Energy Probe released a statement claiming that Ontario Hydro was providing a discount rate to large industrial consumers of 2.4 cents per kilowatt-hour. Is Ontario Hydro providing these kinds of discounts for big power users?
All rates offered by Ontario Hydro are published rates. All rates for industrial customers have been examined in detail by the Ontario Energy Board and none offers power below the cost of production. Energy Probe's calculation is based on a statement made by the lawyer for the Association of Major Power Consumers in Ontario at the demand-supply plan hearing. He stated that AMPCO members purchase approximately 21% of the electricity that Hydro produces --
The minister may not understand the level of concern that has created among representatives of seniors and of the disabled people across this community. They have been waiting with a great deal of anxiety to know what this government plans to do with long-term care, and to this point they have heard nothing.
These people need to know what the government's intents are. I would ask the minister whether she can tell us if specific proposals are being taken forward to policy and priorities board this afternoon and what those policies are or whether this is simply going to be an extension of the moratorium with another consultation.
We are in fact designing -- and have practically completed that design -- a consultation paper which would allow for the people out there to have an opportunity to respond to what it is that we will be applying. The previous government did go out with its paper. It was not a consultation; it was information sessions. I was a part of it.
We were informed by Treasury officials during the budget lockup last week that there is an increase of $102 million in this budget for long-term care. Is any of the $102 million new money? If it is, why was there no reference to it in the budget? If it is not new money, what is the purpose in proceeding with the consultation about reform?
This is good rhetoric. This is exactly what the public is looking for in political leadership. They are looking for human beings. They are looking for people who do not pretend they are above them. I think it is something that is important, something I have talked about for a great deal of time.
I wonder if, to show us this is not just rhetoric, she would tell us some of the mistakes she has made.
Standing order 95(d) states, "The minister shall answer such written questions within 14 calendar days unless he or she indicates that more time is required because the answer will be costly or time-consuming or that he or she declines to answer, in which case a notation shall be made on the Orders and Notices paper following the question indicating that the minister has made an interim answer, the approximate date that the information will be available, or that the minister has declined to answer, as the case may be."
The order paper questions are supposed to be answered within 14 days, yet it has been almost four months since I tabled the question and we have as yet been told only that we would receive the answer on or about 15 April 1991. We have now passed that date and we are now in a position to begin to question whether or not this government has any intention of answering the question that has been placed on that order paper.
I see this as a reflection of the government's response to myself. It is an important question, because with that information we will be able to look at the former deputy minister, what he has been doing and various other matters.
I would hope, Mr Speaker, there would be something that you can do to take the necessary steps to enforce the standing orders of the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario.
It was tabled, as I said, on 22 November 1990. An interim answer was tabled on 13 December 1990. It said that the information would be available on 28 December and so far I have not heard or seen any response to that order paper question.
Under standing order 95(d), it states:
"The minister shall answer such written questions within 14 calendar days unless he or she indicates that more time is required because the answer will be costly or time-consuming or that he or she declines to answer, in which case a notation shall be made on the Orders and Notices paper following the question indicating that the minister has made an interim answer, the approximate date that the information will be available, or that the minister has declined to answer, as the case may be."
I am wondering, on my point of order here today, whether the minister is declining to answer, since I was supposed to have the information by 28 December. Order paper questions, as I said, are supposed to be answered within 14 days, yet it has been almost six months since I tabled this question. An interim answer was provided, as I said, on 13 December, but that has not been forthcoming. It has now been five months since the date that the information was to be made available.
The failure to answer order paper questions is also a breach of privilege under the Legislative Assembly Act, paragraph 45(1)6, which states that a breach of privilege occurs when there is a refusal to produce papers before the assembly or a committee thereof, access to information that is essential for me to do my job as a representative of the people and, more important in this case, as the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party's critic for Tourism and Recreation.
Mr Speaker, it is your responsibility to ensure that the standing orders of this assembly are complied with. The government has shown blatant disrespect for our standing orders by not answering this question, and I ask that you take the necessary steps to enforce the standing orders of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. I am a little taken aback that I would have to get up and remind you of your responsibility at this point and I ask you to take my concerns into consideration.
"Would the Minister of Culture and Communications list the three travel agencies with which the minister placed the greatest portion of its travel business for fiscal years 1987-88, 1988-89, 1989-90 and the year to date. November 22, 1990."
I would note at this time that there is actually a typographical error in the printed order. Under the year 1987 they have it printed as 1897. I think it would be important to have that corrected in future printings of that order paper question.
Standing order 95(d) states: "The minister shall answer such written questions within 14 calendar days unless he or she indicates that more time is required because the answer will be costly or time-consuming or that he or she declines to answer, in which case a notation shall be made on the Orders and Notices paper following the question indicating that the minister has made an interim answer, the approximate date that the information will be available, or that the minister has declined to answer, as the case may be."
Order paper questions are supposed to be answered within 14 days, yet it has now been almost six months since it was tabled. I would also like to say that an interim answer was provided on 11 December 1990, but that answer predicted that the information would be available on 26 April 1991. It has now been about 15 days since that date that the information would be made available.
The failure to answer order paper questions is also a breach of privilege under the Legislative Assembly Act, paragraph 45(1)(6), which states that a breach of privilege occurs when there is a refusal to produce papers before the assembly or a committee thereof.
As a member of this assembly, I feel that I have the right to access to information that is essential for me to do my job as a representative of the people of Ontario.
Mr Speaker, it is your responsibility to ensure that the standing orders of this assembly are complied with. The government has shown blatant disrespect for our standing orders by not answering my question. I ask you to take the necessary steps to enforce the standing orders of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.
I would like to say that we are doing the very best we can to respond to the over 400 order paper questions that the opposition has put on the order paper. We are going to respond as quickly as we can, but the third party should understand that if we are going to answer these questions immediately, we will have to hire hundreds more civil servants at a cost of millions of dollars to the taxpayers, and we are trying to protect the public purse.
I just have to go on record when you hear the statement that is made by the acting House leader of the government. The fact of the matter is that this House has a set of rules that we are living and working within. The government has accepted those rules, and now it is absolutely disregarding the rights of the members on this side of the House by not responding to the questions in the time frame that has been agreed upon in the standing orders. I therefore take the position that what the Minister of Housing has given in defence of the government is totally unacceptable.
If in fact he is trying to change the rules of this House in the middle of the game, it is wrong. We will not accept it. I take it as a very serious affront to our rights in opposition to be able to defend those rights. If he is saying that the government is not about to honour those rules now, then it is now causing us to have great second thoughts on how this House can work. We are in the process of trying to do our duty. It is obvious that they are not doing theirs.
"Inquiry of the ministry: Would the Chairman of Management Board provide copies of all reports prepared by and for the ministry on the capital and human resource costs of the government's decentralization program. November 22, 1990. Interim answer tabled 11 December 1990. Approximate date information available, 25 January 1991."
Standing order 95(d) states: "The minister shall answer such written questions within 14 calendar days unless he or she indicates that more time is required because the answer will be costly or time-consuming or that he or she declines to answer, in which case a notation shall be made on the Orders and Notices paper following the question indicating that the minister has made an interim answer, the approximate date that the information will be available, or that the minister has declined to answer, as the case may be."
Order paper questions are supposed to be answered within 14 days, yet it has been almost four and a half months since I tabled this question. An interim answer was provided on 11 December 1990, but that answer predicted that the information would be available on 25 January 1991. It has now been approximately three and a half months since the date that information was to be made available.
The failure to answer order paper questions is also a breach of privilege under the Legislative Assembly Act 45(1)6 which states that a breach of privilege occurs when there is a refusal to produce papers before the assembly or a committee thereof.
As a member of this assembly, I feel that I have a right to access to information that is essential for me to do my job as a representative of the people of Ontario.
Mr Speaker, it is your responsibility to ensure that the standing orders of this assembly are complied with. The government has shown blatant disrespect for our standing orders by not answering the question. I ask you to take the necessary steps to enforce the standing orders of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.
INTRODUCTION OF BILL
LOI ENQUÉTANT LES MOULES ZÉBRÉES / ZEBRA MUSSEL ACT
M. Harris propose la première lecture du projet de loi 95, Loi réclamant la ministre de l'Environnement de libérer ses responsabilités sous l'article 15(1) de la Loi sur les ressources en eau de l'Ontario afin de déterminer le contenu des moules zébrées du :
Castor Ponds, Castor River, Castra Lake, Casurnmit Lake, Caswell Bay, Casvell Lake, Cataract Falls, Cataract Lake, Cataraqui Bay, Cataraqui River, Catastrophe Creek, Catastrophe Lake, Catawba Lake, Cat Bay, Catchacoma Lake, Catcher Lake, Cat Creek, Caterpillar Lake, Cat Falls, Catfish Bay, Catfish Creek, Catfish Lake, Catfish Rapids, Catharine Lake, Cathro Lake, Cathy's Lake, Catlonite Creek, Catlonite Lake, Cat River, Cat Tail River, Cattral Lake, Cauchon Creek, Cauchon Lake, Caulfield Lake, Cauley Lake, Cauliflower Creek, Cauliflower Lake, Caulkin Lake, Caution Lake, Cavalary Creek, Cavalary Lake, Cavanagh Lake, Cavan Creek, Cavano Lake, Cave Harbour, Cave Lake, Cavell Creek, Cavell Lake, Cavendish Lake, Caverly's Bay, Cavern Creek, Cavern Lake, Cavers Bay, Cavern Creek, Cavern Lake, Cavers Creek, Cavers Lake, Caviar Lake, Cawanogami Lake, Cawdron Creek, Cawdron Lake, Cawing Lake, Cawston Lakes, Cawthra Creek, Caya's Lake, Cayer Creek, Cayer Lake, Cayiens Creek, Caysee Lake, Cayuga Creek, Cayuga Lake, Cebush Lake, Cecebe Lake, Cecil Creek, Cecile Lake, Cedar Bay, Cedarbough Lake, Cedarclump Lake, Cedar Creek, Cedar Falls, Cedargum Lake, Cedar Harbour, Cedar Lake, Cedar Rapids, Cedar River, Cedarskirt Lake, Cedric Lake, Cee Creek.
Then we have Ceepee Lake.
The leader of the third party is introducing a bill. Procedure dictates to us that we have to listen to his introduction of bills.
If I could carry on: Ceepee Lake, Celastruc Lake, Cellist Lake, Celt Creek, Celtis Lake, Celt Lake, Cemetery Creek, Cemetery Lake, Centennial Lake, Centralis Creek, Centralis Lake, Central Lake, Centre Channel, Centre Creek, Centre Falls, Centrefire Creek, Centrefire Lake, Centre Lake, Centreville Creek, Ceph Lake, Ceres Lake, Cerulean Lake, Cerullo Lake, Chabbie Lake, Chabbie River, Chabot Lake, Chadwick Lake, Chagma Lake, Chagnon Lake, Chaillon Lake, Chain Creek, Chain Lake, Chain Lakes, The Chain of Lakes, Chainy Creek, Chainy Lake, Chair Lake; Chalet Creek, Chalet Lake, Chalice Lake, Chalk Bay, Chalk Creek, Chalkend Lake, Chalk Lake, Chalk River, Challener Lake, Challener River, Challis Lake, Chalmers Lake, Chamandy Lake, Chamberlain Lake, Chamber Lake, Chambers Lake, Champagne Lake, Champlain Creek, Champlain Trail Lakes, Chance Lake, Chancellor Lake, Chandos Lake, Change Lake, Chanley Lake, Channel Lake, Channel Lakes; Green River, Greenrod Lake, Greens Bay, Green's Creek, Greenshields Lake, Greenshore Lake, Greensides Lake, Greens Lake, Greenstone Rapids, Greensward Lake, Green Tree Lake, Greenwater Creek, Greenwater Lake, Greenwich Creek, Greenwich Lake, Greenwood Lake, Greenwood River, Greer Creek, Greer Lake, Greers Bay, Greggio Lake, Greggs Lake, Gregory Bay, Gregory Creek, Gregory Lake, Grehan Lake, Greig Lake, Gremm Lake, Grenadier Creek, Grenadier Lake, Grenadier Pond, Grenfell Lake, Grenier Lake, Grenville Lake, Greske Lake, Greta Lake, Gretchel Creek, Gretchel Lake, Gretel Creek, Gretel Lake, Grew Lake, Grew River, Grey Duck Lake, Grey Lake, Grelava Lake, Grey Owl Bay, Grey Owl Lake, Green Creek, Greengrass Lake, Greenheart Creek, Greenheart Lake, Greenhedge Lake, Greenhill Lake, Greenhill Rapids, Greenhill River, Greenhorn Bay, Greenhue Lake, Greening Lake, Greening's Bay, Greenish Creek, Greenish Lake, Green Island Bay, Green Island Lake, Green Lake, Green Lakes, Greenland Lake, Greenlaw Lake, Greenleaf Creek, Greenleaf Lake, Greenlee Lake, Greenmantle Lake, Greenmantle River, Greenock Creek, Greenock Lake, Greenough Harbour, Greenpike Lake, Gravel Lake, Gravel Lakes, Gravelly Bay, Gravelpit Lake, Gravel Pit Pond, Gravelridge Lake, Gravel River, Gravenor Lake, Graves Lake, Graveyard Creek, Graveyard Lake, Graveyard Rapids, Gravy Lake, Grawbarger Lake, Grawbarger's Rapids, Graydarl Lake, Graydon Lake, Gray Lake, Grayling Lake, Graymud Lake, Gray Rapids, Grays Bay, Grays Creek, Grays Lake, Grayson Lake, Grayson River, Grays River, Graystone Lake, Graytrout Lake, Grazing Lake, Grazing River, Great Lake, Great Mountain Lake, Great North Bay, Great Portage Lake, Great South Bay, Grebe Lake, Greb Lake, Green Bay, Greenbough Lake, Green Bug Lake, Greenbush Lake, Green Creek, Grants Lake, Granzies Lake, Grape Lake, Graphic Creek, Graphic Lake, Graphite Lake, Grapnel Bay, Grapnel Creek, Grapnel Lake, Grasett Lake, Grass Creek, Grasser Lake, Grass Hill Lake, Grass Lake, Grassy Bay, Grassy Creek, Grassy Lake, Grassy Portage Bay, Grassy River, Gratton Creek, Gratton Lake, Grave Bay, Grave Creek, Grave Lake, Gravel Bay, Gravel Beach Lake, Gravel Falls, Graham Bay, Graham Creek, Graham Lake, Graharns Creek, Graharn's Lake, Granary Creek, Granary Lake, Grand Bay, Grand Campment Bay, Grande Lake, Grandeur Lake, Grand Lake, Grandmaison Lake, Grandma Lake, Grandma Stevens Pond, Grandolph Bay, Grandpa Lake, Grandpop's Lake, Grand Rapids, Grand River, Grandview Lake, Granite Bay, Graniteboss Lake, Granite Creek, Granite Falls, Granitehill Lake, Granite Lake, Granite River, Granitic Lake, Granka Lake, Granny Bay, Granny's Creek, Grano Lake, Grant Bay, Grant Creek, Grant Lake, Grant Point Harbour, Grants Creek, Grants Creek Bay, Gosselin Creek, Gosselin Lake, Gosselin's Bay, Goss Lake, Goudreau Creek, Goudreau Lake, Goudy Creek, Goudy Lake, Gough Creek, Gough Lake, Gouinlock Lake, Gouin Lake, Goulais Bay, Goulais Lake, Goulais River, Gould Creek, Goulding Lake, Goulet Bay, Goulet Creek, Goulet Lake, Gourd Lake, Gourlay Lake, Gourlie Creek, Govan Lake, Gove Lake, Gover Lake, Government Bay, Government Creek, Government Lake, Governor Bay, Gowan Creek, Gowan Lake, Gowar Bay, Goward Lake, Gowganda Bay, Gowganda Lake, Gowie Bay, Grabers Lake, Grab Lake, Grace Bay, Grace Creek, Graceful Lake, Grace Lake, Gracie Lake, Grady Lake, Graff Lake, Goose Lake, Goose Neck Bay, Gooseneck Creek, Gooseneck Lake, Gooseneck Rapids, Goose Pond, Goose River, Gord Lake, Gordon Bay, Gordon Creek, Gordon Lake, Gordon Rapids, Gordons Bay, Gordons Creek, Gore Bay, Gorge Creek, Gorge Creek Falls, Gorge Lake, Gorman Creek, Gorman Lake, Gorrnan River, Gormans Creek, Gormire Lake, Gormley Creek, Gornupkagama Lake, Gorrie Lake, Gorr Lakes, Gorse Creek, Gorse Lake, Gort Creek, Gort Lake, Goshawk Lake, Goshen Lake, Gosling Lake, Goldie Lake, Goldie River, Goldilocks Lake, Golding Lake, Gold Lake, Gold Mountain Lake, Goldsborough Creek, Goldsborough Lake, Gold Seekers Bay, Goldsmith Lake, Goldspink Lake, Goldstein Lake, Goldthrope Lake, Goldwin Creek, Goldwin Lake, Golf Course Bay, Golf Lake, Goltz Lake, Golub Lake, Gong Creek, Gong Lake, Gooch Creek, Gooch Lake, Goodchild Creek, Goodchild Lake, Goode Lake, Goodens Creek, Gooderham Creek, Gooderham Lake, Goodeve Lake, Goodfish Lake, Good Fortune Lake, Good Harbour, Goodie Creek, Goodie Lake, Goodier Lake, Goodkey Creek, Goodlad Lake, Good Lake, Goodliff Lake, Goodman Creek, Goodman Lake, Goodmorning Lakes, Goodoar Lake, Goodreau Lake, Goods Lake, Goodwill Lake, Goodwin Lake, Gooley Lake, Goosander Creek, Goosander Lake, Goose Bay, Gooseberry Brook, Gooseberry Creek, Gooseberry Lake, Goose Channel, Goose Creek, Goose Egg Lake, Gilder Creek, Gilder Lake, Glimmer Lake, Gling Lake, Gliskning Lake, Glitter Creek, Glitter Lake, Globe Creek, Globe Lake, Gloomy Lake, Glorious Lake, Glory Creek, Glory Lake, Glosser Bay, Gloucester Pool, Glover Bay, Glover Lake, Glovers Bay, Glue Lake, Glynn Lake, Gnat Lake, Gneiss Lake, Gneiss Rapids, Gnome Lake, Goat Creek, Goat Island Channel, Goat Lake, Goat River, Goblin Bay, Goblin Lake, Godda Lake, Goddard Lake, Godfrey Creek, Godfrey Lake, Godin Creek, Godin Lake, God's Lake, Godson Creek, Godson Lake, Goff Lake, Gog Lake, Gohere Bay, Go Home Bay, Go Home Lake, Go Home River, Going Lake, Golborne Lakes, Goldbar Lake, Gold Creek, Golden Creek, Goldeneye Lake, Golden Gate Lake, Golden Lake, Goldfield Creek, Goldfield Lake, Glass Falls, Glass Lake, Glassy Creek, Glassy Lake, Glay Lake, Glaze Lake, Gleason Brook, Gleason Lake, Gleave Lake, Gledhill Lake, Gleeson Lake, Glen Creek, Glendening Lake, Glen Erin Brook, Glenfield Creek, Glen Lake, Glenney Creek, Glenney Lake, Glenn Lake, Gillies Creek, Gillies Lake, Gilligan Creek, Gillin Lake, Gill Lake, Gillmor Lake, Gillnet Lake, Gill's Bay, Gilman Bay, Gilman Lake, Gilmour Bay, Gilmour Creek, Gilmour Lake, Gilroy Lake, Gilson Lake, Gilt Lake, Gimby Lake, Gimlet Lake, Gina Lake, Gin Creek, Ginger Lake, Gin Lake, Ginn Lake, Ginozhe Bay, Gipsy Lake, Giraffe Creek, Giraffe Lake, Girardin Pond, Girard Lake, Girdlestone Bay, Giroux Creek, Giroux Lake, Giroux River, Girty Lake, Girvan Creek, Girvan Lake, Girvin Lake, Gitche Lake, Gitche River, Gittins Lake, Giunta Lake, Giving Lake, Giwshkwebi Bay, Glabb Lake, Glacier Creek, Glacier Lake, Glade Lake, Gladstone Lake, Gladwin Creek, Gladwin Lake, Gladys Lake, Glaister Creek, Glaister Lake, Gilmor Lake, Glanmire Creek, Glanmire Lake, Glasford Lake, Glasgow Lake, Glasgow Pond, Glass By, Glasser Lake, Gessie Lake, Ghee Lake, Ghost Bay, Ghost Creek, Ghost Lake, Ghost River, Giacomo Lake, Gibbery Lake, Gibb Lake, Gibboney Lake, Gibbons Lake, Gibbons Lake, Gibi Lake, Gibraltar Bay, Gibraltar Lake, Gibson Creek, Gibson Lake, Gibson River, Gibsons Bay, Gibsorns Lake, Gids Harbour, Giffins Lake, Gifford Bay, Gifford Lake, Gignac Lake, Giguere Lake, Gilbert Creek, Gilbert Lake, Gilboe Lake, Gilby Lake; Gilchrist Bay, Gilchrist Creek, Gilchrist Lake, Gilden Lake, Gills Bay, Gilhuly Lake, Gillard Lake, Gilleach Lake, Gilleran Lake, Genessee Bay, Genessee Lake, Geneva Creek, Geneva Lake, Genier Greek, Genier Lake, Gennis Lake, Genoa Creek, Genoa Lake, Genricks Lake, Gentian Creek, Gentian Lake, Gentleman Creek, Geoffrey Lake, Geoffrion Lake, Geometry Lake, Geordie Lake, Geordies Lake, George Creek, George Lake, Georges Bay, George's Lake, Georgia Lake, Georgian Bay, Georgie Creek, Georgina Lake, Geraldine Lake --
I think I left off at -- Mr Speaker, I thank you for maintaining order. I think you are doing a fine job in very trying circumstances -- Aerobus Creek, Aerobus Lake, Aerofoil Lake, Aeroplane Lake, Affleck Lake, A-Frame Lake, Again River, Agam Lake, Agar Lake, Agassiz Lake, Agate Creek, Agate Lake, Agawa Bay, Agawa Lake, Agawa River, Agawask Creek, Agimak Lake, Agnes Lake, Agnes River, Agnew Lake, Agonzon Lake, Agreen Lake, Aguasabon River, Aguasabon Lake, Ague Lake, Agusada Creek, Agusada Lake, Agusk Lake, Agutua Lake, Agutua River, Agwa Bay, Agwasuk River, Agwatik River, Ahdik Lake, Ahern Lake, Ahmabel Lake, Ahme Lake, Ahme Creek, Ahmic Creek, Ahmic Lake, Ahsin Bay, Ahsine Creek, Ahsine Lake, Aide Creek, Aide Lake, Aidie Creek, Aikens Lake, Aikman Lake, Aileen Lake, Ainslie Lake, Air Base Bay, Aird Bay, Aird Lake, Airfield Creek, Air Hole Lake, Airplane Lake, Airport Drain, Airport Lake, Airstrip Lake, Airy Creek, Airy Lake, Aitken Creek, Aitken Lake, Ajax Lake, Akandamo Lakes, Akandamo River, Akebia Creek, Akebia Lake, Akey Lake, Aki Lake, Aikin Lakes, Akonesi Creek, Akonesi Lake, Akonewi Lake, Akow Lake, Akron Creek, Akron Lake, Alabama Lake, A Lake, Alaska's Lake, Alba Lake, Albany River, Cox Bay, Cox Creek, Cox Lake, Cox's Lake, Coy Lake, Coyle Creek, Coyle Lake, Coyne Lake, Coyston Lake, CPR Bay, Crabcraw Creek, Crabclaw Lake, Crab Lake, Crabtree Lake, Cracknell Lake, Crackshot Lake, Craddock Creek, Craddock Lake, Cradle Creek, Cradle Lake, Craft Creek, Craft Lake, Crag Lake.
I see we have changed Speakers. I would like to welcome the new Speaker to the chair and thank the previous Speaker for maintaining order with this rowdy group.
I believe I was at Craft Lake, Crag Lake, Craig Lake, Craignative Lake, Craigs Creek, Craig's Swamp, Crain Lake, Crains Lake, Cramadog Creek, Cramadog Lake, Cramp Creek, Cramp Lake, Cranberry Bay, Cranberry Creek, Cranberry Lake, Chenier Lake, Cherie Creek, Cherniuk Lake, Cherries Bay, Cherrington Lake, Cherry Creek, Cherry Lake, Cherry River, Chesakan Creek, Chesakan Lake, Chesley Lake, Chesney Bay, Chesterfield Bay, Chesterfield Creek, Chesterfield Lake, Chester Lake, Chewink Creek, Chewink Lake, Chiah Lake, Chiblow Lake, Chicago Bay, Chicault Lake, Chickadee Lake, Chicken Farm Lake, Chicken Liver Channel, Chick Lake, Chicobi Lake, Chicot Lake, Chief Bay, Chief Creek, Chief Lake, Chief Peter, Chief's Creek, Chiki Lake, Chilcott Lake, Childerhorse Creek, Childerhorse Lake, Chill Creek, Chill Lake, Chilton Lake, Chimahagan River, Chime Lake, China Lake, Chin Creek, Chiniguchi River, Chiniguchi Lake, Chin Lake, Chin River, Chipai River, Chipai Lake, Chipchase Lake, Chipican Lake, Chip Lake, Chipman Lake, Chipmunk Creek, Chipmunk Lake, Chippawa Channel, Chippego Lake, Chippewa Creek, Chippy Lake, Chisamore Lake, Chisholm Drain, Chit Lake, Fade Lake, Fagan Lake, Fagan Ponds, Fagus Bay, Fahey Lake, Fairbairn Creek, Fairbairn Lake, Fairbanks Creek, Fairchild Creek, Fairchild Lake, Faircloth Lake, Fairholme Lake, Fair Lake, Fairloch Lake, Fairplay Lake, Fairs Creek, Fairview Creek, Fairy Creek, Fairy Lake, Faith Lake, Fakeloo Lake, Fakeloo Creek, Falan Lake, Falby Lake, Falcon Lake, Fall Creek, Fallduck Lakes, Fallen Creek, Fallen Lake, Fall-In-Lake, Fallis Pond, Fall Lake, Fallon Island, Falloon Lake, Fall River, Fallscamp Creek, Fallscamp Lake, Falls Lake, Falls River, False Creek, False Lake, Falsetto Lake, Fan Lake, Fanny Lake, Fanshawe Lake, Fansher Lake, Faraday Creek, Faraday Lake, Farah Lake, Farden Lake, Farewell Bay, Farewell Lake, Faries Lake, Faris Lake, Farlain Lake, Far Lake, Farlane Lake, Farlette Lake, Farley Lake, Farleys Creek, Farlinger Lake, Farrn Bay, Farrn Bay Lake, Farm Creek, Farmer Lake, Farm Lake, Farncomb Lake, Farncomb Creek, Farner Lake, Farnes Lake, Farnham Creek, Farquhar Creek, Farquhar Lake, Farr Creek, Farrel Creek, Farrel Lake, Farrell Lake, Farrer Lake, Farrington Lake, Farrington Creek, Farrow Lake, Farwell Creek, Fassett Lake, Fatima Lake, Fat Lake, Fat River, Fatty Creek, Fatty Lake, Faubert Lake, Faulkenham Lake, Faulk Lake, Faulkner Lake, Fault Creek, Fault Lake, Faultside Lake, Fauquier Lake, Favel Bay, Favel Lake, Favell Bay, Favot Creek, Fawcett Lake, Fawn Creek, Fawn Lake, Fawthrop Lake, Faya Lake, Feagan Lake, Fear Lake, Fearless Lake, Feather Lake, Feather River, Feaver Lake, Fecteau Lake, Fee Lake, Feely Creek, Feely Lake, Feeny Lake, Feist Creek, Feist Lake, Felcite Lake, Feldman Lake, Feline Lake, Felix Lake, Fells Bay --
Felsen Creek, Felsen Lake, Felst Lake, Felt Lake, Felto Lake, Fenelon River, Fen Lake, Fennah Lake, Fennell Lake, Fenn Lake, Fenson Lake, Fenton Lake, Fergus Lake, Fergus Creek, Ferguson Lake, Ferguson Bay, Ferguson Creek, Ferguson Drain, Fergusons Lake, Ferland's Lake, Fermoy Lake, Fern Creek, Ferndale Bay, Fern Lake, Fernley Drain, Fernlund Lake, Fernow Lake, Fernow River, Ferns Lake, Ferrier Creek, Ferrie River, Ferrim Lake, Ferris Lake, Festuca Lake, Fetter Lake, Fewster Drain, Fib Lake, Ficht Lake, Fiddler Lake, Fidler River, Fido Lake, Field's Lake, Fife Lake, Fifteen Lake, Fifteen Mile Creek, Fifteen Mile Lake, Fifteen Mile Pond, Fifth Lake, Fifty Creek, Fifty Dollar Lake, Fifty Nine Lake, Fifty Two Lake, Fillet Creek, Fillet Lake, Fillion Lake, Fills Lake, Film Lake, Filter Creek, Filter Lake, Final Lake, Fin Bay, Finch Lake, Fin Creek, Findlay Creek, Findlay Creek, Findlay Lake, Fine Lake, Finger Bay, Finger Lake, Finish Lake, Fink Lake, Fin Lake, Finland Creek, Finlay Bay, Finlay Creek, Finlayson Creek, Finlayson Lake, Finnegan Lake, Finney Creek, Finney Lake, Finn Lake, Finton Lake, Fintry Creek, Fire Creek, Firefly Creek, Firefly Lake, Fire Hill Creek, Fire Hill Lake, Fire Lake, Fireline Lake, Firella Creek, Fire River, Firesand River, Firesteel River, Firetail Creek, Firetail Lake, Fir Lake, Firman's Creek, First Concession Drain, First Creek, First Depot Lake, First Egan Lake, First Government Lake, First James Lake, First Justin Lake, First Kargus Lake, First Lake, First Loon Creek, First Loon Lake, Firth Creek, Firth Lake, Fischer Lake, Fishbasket Lake, and that it now be read the first time.
-- Canonto Lake, Can Opener Lake, Canterbury Lake, Canthook Lake, Cantin Lake, Cantley Creek, Cantley Lake, Canton Lake, Cantrill Lake, Canty Lake, Canvas-back Lake, Canyon Creek, Canyon Falls, Canyon Lake, Canyon River, Cap Creek, Capee Lake, Cape Harbour, Cape Hurd Channel, Capella Lake, Capin Lake, Cap Lake, Capper Lake, Capre Lake, Capreol Lake, Capricornus Lake, Capsell Lake, Captain Lake, Captains Lake, Captain Tom Lake, Capton Lake, Caput Lake, Carafel Creek, Carafel Lake, Caragana Lake, Caramat Creek, Caramat Lake, Carcajou Bay, Carcajou Creek, Carcajou Lake, Carcass Lake, Card Bay, Carder Lake, Cardiff Creek, Cardiff Lake, Cardinal Creek, Cardinalis Lake, Cardinal Lake, Card Lake, Cards Lake, Cardwell Lake, Carew Lake, Carey Creek, Carey Lake, Carfrae Lake, Cargill Lake, Cargill Mill Pond, Carhess Creek, Cariad Lake, Carib Creek, Carib Lake, Cariboo Creek, Cariboo Lake, Caribou Bay, Caribou Creek, Caribou Lake, Caribou Rapids, Caribou River, Caribou Throat Lake, Caribus Lake, Carillon Rapids, Carkner Lake, Car Lake, Carl Bay, Carlbom Lake,
Carl Creek, Carleton Lake, Carling Bay, Carling Lake, Carl Lake, Carlo Lake, Carlson Lake, Carstead Bay, Carlton Lake, Carlyle Lake, Carman Bay, Carman Creek, Car man Lake, Carmichael Lake, Carnachan Bay, Carnahan Lake, Carney Creek, Carney Lake, Carnilac Lake, Caro Lake, Caroline Lake, Carol Lake, Carolyn Creek, Caron Creek, Caron Lake, Carpenter Lake, Carpenter River, Carpet Lake, Carp Lake, Carp River, Carre Lake, Carrick Creek, Carrick Lake, Carrie Lake, Carriere Lake, Carrigan Lake, Carrington Lake, Carroll Creek, Carroll Lake, Carroll Wood Bay, Carrot Lake, Carruthers Lake, Carrying Lake, Carry Lake, Carscallen Lake, Carson Bay, Carson Creek, Carson Lake, Carss Creek, Carstens Lake, Carswell Lake, Cartan Lake, Carter Bay, Carter Lake, Carter Rapids, Carthew Bay, Cartier Lake, Cartier Creek, Cart Lake, Cartwrights Creek, Carty Creek, Carty Lake, Carver Lake, Cascade Falls, Cascade Lake, Cascaden Lake, Cascade Rapids, Cascade River, Cascanette Lake, Case River, Casey Creek, Casey Lake, Casgrain Creek, Casgrain Lake, Cash Creek, Cashel Lake, Cashman Creek, Cashore Creek, Casino Lake, Caskie Bay, Caskill Lake, Cask Lake, Casper Lake, Casque Lake, Cassdaga Lake, Casselman's Lake, Casselman's Creek, Cassels Lake, Cassidy Bay, Cassidy Creek, Cassidy Lake, Cassidys Bay, Cass Lake, Casson Lake, Castellar Creek, Castellar Lake, Castelbar Creek, Castelbar Lake, Castel Bay, Castle Creek, Castle Lake, Castleman Lake, Castlewood Creek, Castlewood Lake, Castor Creek, Castor Lake, Castoroil Lake, Castor Ponds, Castor River, Castra Lake, Casummit Lake, Caswell Bay, Caswell Lake, Cataract Falls, Cataract Lake, Cataraqui Bay, Cataraqui River, Catastrophe Creek, Catastrophe Lake, Catawba Lake, Cat Bay, Catchacoma Lake, Catcher Lake, Cat Creek, Caterpillar Lake, Cat Falls, Catfish Bay, Catfish Creek, Catfish Lake, Catfish Rapids, Catharine Lake, Cathro Lake, Cathy's Lake, Catlonite Creek, Catlonite Lake, Cat River, Cat Tail River, Cattral Lake, Cauchon Creek, Cauchon Lake, Caufield Lake, Cauley Lake, Cauliflower Creek, Cauliflower Lake, Caulkin Lake, Caution Lake, Cavalary Creek, Cavalary Lake, Cavanagh Lake, Cavan Lake, Cavano Lake, Cave Harbour, Cave Lake, Cavell Creek, Cavell Lake, Cavendish Lake, Caverly's Bay, Cavern Creek Cavern Lake, Cavers Bay, Cavern Creek, Cavern Lake, Cavers Bay, Cavers Creek, Cavers Lake, Caviar Lake, Cawanogami Lake, Cawdron Creek, Cawdron Lake, Cawing Lake, Cawston Lakes, Cawston Lakes, Cawthra Creek, Caya's Lake, Cayer Creek, Cayer Lake, Cayiens Creek, Caysee Lake, Cayuga Creek, Cayuga Lake, Cebush Lake, Cecebe Lake, Cecil Creek, Cecile Lake, Cedar Bay, Cedarbough Lake, Cedarclump Lake, Cedar Creek, Cedar Falls, Cedargum Lake, Cedar Harbour, Cedar Lake, Cedar Rapids, Cedar River, Cedarskirt Lake, Cedric Lake, Cee Creek, Ceepee Lake, Celastruc Lake, Cellist Lake, Celt Creek, Celtis Lake, Celt Lake, Cemetery Creek, Cemetery Lake, Centennial Lake, Centralis Creek, Centralis Lake, Central Lake, Centre Channel, Centre Creek, Centre Falls, Centrefire Creek, Centrefire Lake, Centre Lake, Centreville Creek, Ceph Lake, Ceres Lake, Cerulean Lake, Cerullo Lake, Chabbie Lake, Chabbie River, Chabot Lake, Chadwick Lake, Chagma Lake, Chagnon Lake, Chaillon Lake, Chain Creek, Chain Lake, Chain Lakes, The Chain of Lakes, Chainy Creek, Chainy Lake, Chair Lake, Chalet Creek, Chalet Lake, Chalice Lake, Chalk Bay, Chalk Creek, Chalkend Lake, Chalk Lake, Chalk River, Challener Lake, Challener River, Challis Lake, Chalmers Lake, Chamandy Lake, Chamberlain Lake, Chamber Lake, Chambers Lake, Champagne Lake, Champlain Creek, Champlain Trail Lakes, Chance Lake, Chancellor Lake, Chandos Lake, Change Lake, Chanley Lake, Channel Lake, Channel Lakes, Green River, Greenrod Lake, Greens Bay, Green's Creek, Greenshields Lake, Greenshore Lake, Greensides Lake, Greens Lake, Greenstone Rapids, Greensward Lake, Green Tree Lake, Greenwater Creek, Greenwater Lake, Greenwich Creek, Greenwich Lake, Greenwood Lake, Greenwood River, Greer Creek, Greer Lake, Greers Bay, Greggio Lake, Greggs Lake, Gregory Bay, Gregory Creek, Gregory Lake, Grehan Lake, Greig Lake, Gremm Lake, Grenadier Creek, Grenadier Lake, Grenadier Pond, Grenfell Lake, Grenier Lake, Grenville Lake, Greske Lake, Greta Lake, Gretchel Creek, Gretchel Lake, Gretel Creek, Gretel Lake, Grew Lake, Grew River, Grey Duck Lake, Grey Lake, Grelava Lake, Grey Owl Bay, Grey Owl Lake, Green Creek, Greengrass Lake, Greenheart Creek, Greenheart Lake, Greenhedge Lake, Greenhill Lake, Greenhill Rapids, Greenhill River, Greenhorn Bay, Greenhue Lake, Greening Lake, Greening's Bay, Greenish Creek, Greenish Lake, Green Island Bay, Green Island Lake, Green Lake, Green Lakes, Greenland Lake, Greenlaw Lake, Greenleaf Creek, Greenleaf Lake, Greenlee Lake, Greenmantle Lake, Greenmantle River, Greenock Creek, Greenock Lake, Greenough Harbour, Greenpike Lake, Gravel Lake, Gravel Lakes, Gravelly Bay, Gravelpit Lake, Gravel Pit Pond, Gravelridge Lake, Gravel River, Gravenor Lake, Graves Lake, Graveyard Creek, Graveyard Lake, Graveyard Rapids, Gravy Lake, Grawbarger Lake, Grawbarger's Rapids, Graydarl Lake, Graydon Lake, Gray Lake, Grayling Lake, Graymud Lake, Gray Rapids, Grays Bay, Grays Creek, Grays Lake, Grayson Lake, Grayson River, Grays River, Graystone Lake, Graytrout Lake, Grazing Lake, Grazing River, Great Lake, Great Mountain Lake, Great North Bay, Great Portage Lake, Great South Bay, Grebe Lake, Greb Lake, Green Bay, Greenbough Lake, Green Bug Lake, Greenbush Lake, Green Creek, Grants Lake, Granzies Lake, Grape Lake, Graphic Creek, Graphic Lake, Graphite Lake, Grapnel Bay, Grapnel Creek, Grapnel Lake, Grasett Lake, Grass Creek, Grasser Lake, Grass Hill Lake, Grass Lake, Grassy Bay, Grassy Creek, Grassy Lake, Grassy Portage Bay, Grassy River, Gratton Creek, Gratton Lake, Grave Bay, Grave Creek, Grave Lake, Gravel Bay, Gravel Beach Lake, Gravel Falls, Graham Bay, Graham Creek, Graham Lake, Grahams Creek, Graham's Lake, Granary Creek, Granary Lake, Grand Bay, Grand Campment Bay, Grande Lake, Grandeur Lake, Grand Lake, Grandmaison Lake, Grandma Lake, Grandma Stevens Pond, Grandolph Bay, Grandpa Lake, Grand pop's Lake, Grand Rapids, Grand River, Grandview Lake, Granite Bay, Graniteboss Lake, Granite Creek, Granite Falls, Granitehill Lake, Granite Lake, Granite River, Granitic Lake, Granka Lake, Granny Bay, Granny's Creek, Grano Lake, Grant Bay, Grant Creek, Grant Lake, Grant Point Harbour, Grants Creek, Grants Creek Bay, Gosselin Creek, Gosselin Lake, Gosselin's Bay, Goss Lake, Goudreau Creek, Goudreau Lake, Goudy Creek, Goudy Lake, Gough Creek, Gough Lake, Gouinlock Lake, Gouin Lake, Goulais Bay, Goulais Lake, Goulais River, Gould Creek Goulding Lake, Goulet Bay, Goulet Creek, Goulet Lake, Gourd Lake, Gourlay Lake, Gourlie Creek, Govan Lake, Gove Lake, Gover Lake, Government Bay, Government Creek, Government Lake, Governor Bay, Gowan Creek, Gowan Lake, Gowar Bay, Goward Lake, Gowganda Bay, Gowganda Lake, Gowie Bay, Grabers Lake, Grab Lake, Grace Bay, Grace Creek, Graceful Lake, Grace Lake, Gracie Lake; Grady Lake, Graff Lake, Goose Lake, Goose Neck Bay, Gooseneck Creek, Gooseneck Lake, Gooseneck Rapids, Goose Pond, Goose River, Gord Lake, Gordon Bay, Gordon Creek, Gordon Lake, Gordon Rapids, Gordons Bay, Gordons Creek, Gore Bay, Gorge Creek, Gorge Creek Falls, Gorge Lake, Gorman Creek, Gorman Lake, Gorman River, Gormans Creek, Gormire Lake, Gormley Creek, Gornupkagama Lake, Gorrie Lake, Gorr Lakes, Gorse Creek, Gorse Lake, Gort Creek, Gort Lake, Goshawk Lake, Goshen Lake, Gosling Lake, Goldie Lake, Goldie River, Goldilocks Lake, Golding Lake, Gold Lake, Gold Mountain Lake, Goldsborough Creek, Goldsborough Lake, Gold Seekers Bay, Goldsmith Lake, Goldspink Lake, Goldstein Lake, Goldthorpe Lake, Coldwin Creek, Goldwin Lake, Golf Course Bay, Golf Lake, Goltz Lake, Golub Lake, Gong Creek, Gong Lake, Gooch Creek, Gooch Lake, Goodchild Creek, Goodchild Lake, Goode Lake, Goodens Creek, Gooderham Creek, Gooderham Lake, Goodeve Lake, Goodfish Lake, Good Fortune Lake, Good Harbour, Goodie Creek, Goodie Lake, Goodier Lake, Goodkey Creek, Goodlad Lake, Good Lake, Goodliff Lake, Goodman Creek, Goodman Lake, Goodmorning Lakes, Goodoar Lake; Goodreau Lake, Goods Lake, Goodwill Lake, Goodwin Lake, Gooley Lake, Goosander Creek, Goosander Lake, Goose Bay, Gooseberry Brook, Gooseberry Creek, Gooseberry Lake, Goose Channel, Goose Creek, Goose Egg Lake, Gilder Creek, Gilder Lake, Glimmer Lake, Gling Lake, Gliskning Lake, Glitter Creek, Glitter Lake, Globe Creek, Globe Lake, Gloomy Lake, Glorious Lake, Glory Creek, Glory Lake, Glosser Bay, Gloucester Pool, Glover Bay, Glovers Lake, Glovers Bay, Glue Lake, Glynn Lake, Gnat Lake, Gneiss Lake, Gneiss Rapids, Gnome Lake, Goat Creek, Goat Island Channel, Goat Lake, Goat River, Goblin Bay, Goblin Lake, Godda Lake, Goddard Lake, Godfrey Creek, Godfrey Lake, Godin Creek, Godin Lake, God's Lake, Godson Creek, Godson Lake, Goff Lake, Gog Lake, Gohere Bay, Go Home Bay, Go Home Lake, Go Home River, Going Lake, Golborne Lakes, Goldbar Lake, Gold Creek, Golden Creek, Goldeneye Lake, Golden Gate Lake, Golden Lake, Goldfield Creek, Goldfield Lake, Glass Falls, Glass Lake, Glassy Creek, Glassy Lake, Glay Lake, Glaze Lake, Gleason Brook, Gleason Lake, Gleave Lake, Gledhill Lake, Gleeson Lake, Glen Creek, Glendening Lake, Glen Erin Brook, Glenfield Creek Glen Lake, Glenney Creek, Glenney Lake, Glenn Lake, Gillies Creek, Gillies Lake, Gilligan Creek, Gillin Lake, Gill Lake, Gillmor Lake, Gillnet Lake, Gill's Bay, Gilman Bay, Gilman Lake, Gilmour Bay, Gilmour Creek, Gilmour Lake, Gilroy Lake, Gilson Lake, Gilt Lake, Gimby Lake, Gimlet Lake, Gina Lake, Gin Creek, Ginger Lake, Gin Lake, Ginn Lake, Ginozhe Bay, Gipsy Lake, Giraffe Creek Giraffe Lake, Girardin Pond, Girard Lake, Girdlestone Bay, Giroux Creek, Giroux Lake, Giroux River, Girty Lake, Girvan Creek, Girvan Lake, Girvin Lake, Gitche Lake, Gitche River, Gittins Lake, Giunta Lake, Giving Lake, Giwshkwebi Bay, Glabb Lake, Glacier Creek, Glacier Lake, Glade Lake, Gladstone Lake, Gladwin Creek, Gladwin Lake, Gladys Lake, Glaister Creek, Glaister Lake, Gilmor Lake, Glanmire Creek, Glanmire Lake, Glasford Lake, Glasgow Lake, Glasgow Pond, Glass Bay, Glasser Lake, Gessie Lake, Ghee Lake, Ghost Bay, Ghost Creek, Ghost Lake, Ghost River, Giacomo Lake, Gibberry Lake --
Loi réclamant la ministre de l'environnement de libérer ses responsabilités sous l'article 15(1) de la Loi sur les ressources en eau de l'Ontario a fin de déterminer le contenu des moules zébrées du:
Cana Lake, Canal Bay, Canal Lake, Canard Lake, Canard River, Canary Lake, Cancer Lake, Candide Creek, Candide Lake, Candler Lake --
An hon member: No.
Motion agreed to.
La motion est adoptée.
The House adjourned at 1802.
top | new search