Committee Transcript 1991-Aug-06 | Legislative Assembly of Ontario

Retail Business Establishments Statute Law Amendment Act, 1991, Bill 115 / Loi de 1991 modifiant des lois en ce qui concerne les établissements de commerce de détail, projet de loi 115

Jack G. Masters

United Food and Commercial Workers, Northwestern Ontario Region

Nancy Loewen

Thunder Bay and District Labour Council

North of Superior Tourism Association

Ontario's Sunset Country Travel Association

Kenora and District Chamber of Commerce

Bob Meyers

Lake of the Woods Tourism Centre

Lake of the Woods Economic Development Corp

Fort Frances Chamber of Commerce

Kenora-Keewatin and District Labour Council

Ontario Hotel and Motel Association

Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce

Adjournment

STANDING COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

Chair: White, Drummond (Durham Centre NDP)

Vice-Chair: Morrow, Mark (Wentworth East NDP)

Acting Chair: Cooper, Mike (Kitchener-Wilmot NDP)

Carr, Gary (Oakville South PC)

Chiarelli, Robert (Ottawa West L)

Fletcher, Derek (Guelph NDP)

Gigantes, Evelyn (Ottawa Centre NDP)

Harnick, Charles (Willowdale PC)

Mathyssen, Irene (Middlesex NDP)

Mills, Gordon (Durham East NDP)

Poirier, Jean (Prescott and Russell L)

Sorbara, Gregory S. (York Centre L)

Winninger, David (London South NDP)

Substitutions:

Cooper, Mike (Kitchener-Wilmot NDP) for Mr White

Daigeler, Hans (Nepean L) for Mr Chiarelli

Jackson, Cameron (Burlington South PC) for Mr Harnick

Lessard, Wayne (Windsor-Walkerville NDP) for Mrs Mathyssen

O'Connor, Larry (Durham-York NDP) for Mr Winninger

Clerk pro tem: Carrozza, Franco

Staff: Swift, Susan, Research Officer, Legislative Research Service

881

The committee met at 0904 in Valhalla Inn, Thunder Bay.

RETAIL BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1991 / LOI DE 1991 MODIFIANT DES LOIS EN CE QUI CONCERNE LES ÉTABLISSEMENTS DE COMMERCE DE DÉTAIL

Resuming consideration of Bill 115, An Act to amend the Retail Business Holidays Act and the Employment Standards Act in respect of the opening of retail business establishments and employment in them.

Reprise de l'étude du projet de loi 115, Loi modifiant la Loi sur les jours fériés dans le commerce de détail et la Loi sur les normes d'emploi en ce qui concerne l'ouverture des établissements de commerce de détail et l'emploi dans ces établissements.

The Acting Chair (Mr Cooper): I call this meeting to order. For everybody's information, we will have simultaneous French and English translation. The units are just off to the left of the table. Channel 3 will be amplification, channel 4 will be English and channel 5 will be French. Mr Waters will be joining us on the committee today, and I would like to bring to everybody's attention that we have Shelley Wark-Martyn, member for Thunder Bay and Minister of Revenue, also joining us today.

JACK G. MASTERS

The Acting Chair: I would like to invite the mayor, Jack Masters, to be our first presenter. You will be allowed one half-hour. You can give either a full half-hour presentation or you can make a shorter presentation and allow questions and comments from the members of the committee. Could you please identify yourself for the record and then proceed.

Mr Masters: Thank you, Mr Chairman. My name is Jack Masters. I am the mayor of the city of Thunder Bay. I do not intend to take a long period of time. I understood that one of the aldermen also wanted to appear before the committee this morning. The first thing I would like to do is to welcome the committee members to Thunder Bay. I think it is important that the government has chosen to hold hearings in various parts of the province to receive views on this most important subject. Alors, bienvenue à notre ville. C'est un plaisir de vous voir ce matin. I thank you for bringing all the sunshine on the weekend. I know some of you arrived yesterday.

I preface my remarks by making it clear that the following are my personal views, but I think to some degree they will reflect the views of some members of council as well, and probably of some members of the community. Rather than deal with the amendments -- I hope you will not rule me out of order on this; I do not think that you will -- I would like to comment on the principle of the present legislation, with or without the amendments. I can recall making similar comments to the previous government, so my position has been consistent, as has been the position of the Association of the Municipalities of Ontario.

It is my belief that the retail business establishments act should be a provincial law, a law that applies to all parts of the provinces. To have communities give their own interpretation of what tourism is, to me, invites confusion. To try to define a border city is also an invitation to a form of chaos in the marketplace. Not having a universal law means we go back to the time when we will see the very distinct possibility of municipality being pitted against municipality.

In our community, as an example, when night shopping was not allowed, a bordering smaller municipality elected to have night shopping. A large shopping plaza was built in this neighbouring municipality, which in turn eventually led to night shopping being allowed in the larger community of the then cities of Port Arthur and Fort William, now Thunder Bay. This situation was possible because of the lack of uniformity of the law in Ontario.

There is also a bit of an analogy to be drawn from the period when the province was moving into liquor licensing for restaurants and bars. That, in its time, led to the same kind of competition, where the action of one municipality being competitive with another eventually changed the situation, despite whatever the intent of the government of the day was.

The fact is that lifestyles have changed dramatically over the last number of years. I do not believe it is in the business community's interest or in the province's interest to leave it up to the various municipalities to make their own definitions of shopping hours or days that can be used by the business community. Whatever the law is, it must be a universal law. In England, as an example, they do have many restrictions on what we commonly call Sunday shopping, but at least those restrictions, as far as I can tell from having been there, have been legislated by the national government and apply universally throughout the British Isles. They seem to have made their own definitions as to what tourism areas are, rather than leaving it up to the various communities in the various areas of the British Isles. While people may disagree with that legislation, in England they can go to one source, at least, and make their complaint or give their views, but with the full knowledge that whatever law is in place, it is the same for everyone.

There has been the opinion expressed that because municipalities determine what they feel is the tourism area or whether or not they are in fact a tourism community, they expose themselves to the possibility of litigation by both those for, as well as those against, Sunday shopping. I do not know much on this subject, and I do not know if it is accurate, but I will leave it to you as a committee to determine that, and our own council is examining the matter.

Indications are that the bill itself is not going to satisfy the needs of Ontario, and it seems to me that it is unnecessarily cumbersome. Rather than the proposed Retail Business Holidays Act amendments, it is my suggestion that the act itself and the principles should be reviewed more fully and thought out again. As you go about the province, I am sure you are going to find differing views on the subject.

I believe parts of the amendments are appropriate. Those amendments deal with the legislation concerning working hours and the right to refuse work on holidays and Sundays. I do believe there is still room within legislation to have some restrictions, but to simply say that a community can have Sunday or holiday shopping because it is a tourist area invites many bizarre thoughts, to my mind.

Saying the present legislation would somehow serve the border communities is another thing that should be thought about. What is a border community? We are 32 miles from the border; Toronto is probably double that from the border. Are they a border community? One of our neighbouring municipalities, Nipigon, is 75 miles from Thunder Bay. Does it not qualify as a border community?

The point I am trying to make is that I think the present legislation is confusing. It will lead to a lot of gamesmanship. I do not think it will solve the problem. I am entirely sympathetic with the notion of a common pause day, and there was a time I would have argued far differently, but I think it is like trying to stem a stream that is in high flood -- next to impossible.

0910

People seem to like the idea of having the opportunity to shop. That does not mean you are legislating anyone to open their doors. You can withhold or withdraw services if you are in the business community.

I often have felt hypocritical in that area. As a principle, a personal view, I have always said, because I guess I have spent a lot of time in the retail community: "We don't need Sunday shopping. We have all kinds of time to shop." Yet on vacation in Alberta, where I have a daughter, I spent a lot of time on a Sunday afternoon out shopping because shopping happens to be something we do as a pastime. It seems to be one of the great Canadian pastimes these days.

It is fine to say we will allow shopping for tourism purposes. What do we mean by "tourism"? We would consider, in a sense, those people who live in Nipigon, at Scriver Bay, at Terrace Bay or in Dryden who wish to shop in Thunder Bay because it is the largest city in the area. They come in on the weekends to shop and do other things to be entertained. Therefore, are they tourists or are they just people coming to do commercial-type things in our area? How do you define that?

In the fall I think we will be voting in Thunder Bay in plebiscite form on the question, basically, "Do you want Sunday and holiday shopping?" I oppose that. I did not oppose that particular plebiscite coming up, but I did oppose the idea of our dealing with the Sunday shopping issue at the present time for two reasons: Not being sure of what the provincial government would put in place, are we going to deal with something that will be changed somehow anyhow? And second, I still fall back to the same position I have always held and that the Association of Municipalities of Ontario holds if it could have its druthers, that the law should be universal.

Ladies and gentlemen, I know you are going to be hearing from a good number of people today. I did want to have the opportunity to make my personal views known, and I thank you for it. I do not think we can dissuade the general public from wanting to be able to shop any more than we can suddenly turn the clock back and say, "We're going to close most of the restaurants, or we're going to close the hockey rinks on Sunday." I went through that issue many years ago, being something of a hockey nut. I could remember the days when we could not play hockey before noon hour. You could not rent out the facility. At one time you could not sell tickets before 2 o'clock, so you began a football game or a hockey game by having a silver collection.

Times have changed. I think we have to recognize those changing times. We have to be consistent throughout the province. I would salute the government of the day if it thought of a way to review the law to maintain some restrictions, and if it carried through amendments that would allow for freedom of choice for the workers, whether or not they work on certain days without being penalized for it. I think those are worthy objectives. But the principle of the bill itself, giving it to the various areas to determine whether they are going to be tourism areas, to me is an invitation to confusion, a lot of hard feelings throughout the province, and a great deal of potential litigation over time as the inevitable struggles begin to happen. I thank you very much, Mr Chairman, and the committee, for allowing me to make my comments. If there are any questions, I will try to answer them.

The Acting Chair: Thank you very much. That allows about six minutes for each caucus. We will start off with Mr Sorbara.

Mr Sorbara: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Your Worship, thank you very much for your presentation. I am interested to hear that you are going to have a plebiscite on the matter coming up in conjunction with the municipal elections. I have a prediction that the people of Thunder Bay will probably, through that plebiscite, want you to pass a bylaw which allows stores to open or close at their choosing. You supported the AMO position, which is that the province have a standard law, or one rule, in respect of Sunday shopping throughout Ontario. But one possibility as a standard law is that there be no law at all, that is to say, that Sunday not be given a special status within the laws of the province of Ontario. Your Worship, how would you feel if the law were simply repealed? In other words, if we were to go back to that eight- or nine-month period when there was no law? Did that create confusion and havoc in Thunder Bay? Would that be a terrible course for the province to go down at this stage in its development?

Mr Masters: I do not think it would be a terrible thing to happen. While we had that period where Sunday shopping was allowed, it certainly did not create any big problems. What it did cause was the problem of the worker. For that reason, whether you do it through this type of law or incorporate it in something else, I think that should be looked at very carefully.

Mr Sorbara: I think all of us on this committee agree that no matter what the store opening hours or store closing laws are, we want to move forward with protection for workers. Let us hear your experience in Thunder Bay during that period. What effect did that freedom to choose have on the people? What effect did it have on store owners? Were the hours on Sunday the same as the hours on every other day? How did it play out in Thunder Bay?

Mr Masters: If my memory serves me correctly, basically they stayed open, those that wished to stay open, the department stores or plazas, from noon to 6 pm. I believe the commercial experience was, overall, that they probably did at that time the same amount of business on the seven days that they did operating for six. But what they did find was that it did accommodate, particularly, the out-of-town people who wished to come to our community to do their shopping, to take in the community auditorium or a hockey game or whatever. It did accommodate them, and probably encouraged people to stay over for a longer period of time, which had an overall benefit to the community.

Mr Sorbara: As mayor, if someone is unhappy about something, you hear about it. During that nine-month period, did you hear a lot of complaints from store owners, from shoppers, from ministers, from churchgoers? Did you hear complaints of any variety about the fact that the stores were opening?

Mr Masters: No, not in an overwhelming sense. You are right, you do hear about it. The phone is very handy in your own community to your citizens. No.

Mr Sorbara: The government is proposing a piece of legislation which will only allow those stores to remain open which are for the maintenance or the development of tourism. Are there stores in Thunder Bay which are only for the maintenance and the development of tourism? Or are most stores which have a good indigenous business and some, sometimes a lot, of tourism business?

Mr Masters: That is the point I was trying to make in my brief presentation. You now have to come up with definitions of what is tourism. If someone wishes to come into the area and is going to buy an automobile, look at some furniture and buy groceries, and he has travelled in from the area, he may not have purchased any T-shirts or amethyst, which is the gem stone of Ontario, but is that a tourist? I do not know. That is what happens when you try to use that as the criterion for staying open.

0920

Mr Poirier: Premièrement, je voudrais vous dire «merci» de nous avoir accueillis de façon bilingue à Thunder Bay. C'est le souvenir de Thunder Bay que je préfère me rappeler.

Having said that, Mr Mayor, thank you for having welcomed us to Thunder Bay. It is the souvenir I would rather keep of Thunder Bay, having been here many times and having many friends, anglophones and francophones. How would you feel if you were mayor and city council had to decide who is touristic or not?

Mr Masters: I think I would have a great deal of difficulty in deciding that particular issue because, as I have said, you may be coming in from Geraldton to Thunder Bay specifically because you need a new dining room suite. You are here acting as a tourist in that you have purchased meals, you have taken in entertainment, you have taken advantage of our beautiful waterfront and all of those things, but you also wish to buy a dining room suite, so do you allow a store to open and say, "Technically, we think you are a tourism facility"? That is what bothers me most about this legislation and the notion that it can somehow be relegated to tourism only. I have trouble with the definitions.

Mr Poirier: So it does not make sense. Thank you.

Mr Carr: The question I have relates to what you see happening in your community if the law remains in place with no changes. You said the people will basically be voting on it, presumably whichever way they will be going, and the new council will support that.

Mr Masters: I would think so, yes.

Mr Carr: The way it is now, the definitions of tourism are such that a fine community like this could meet the criteria very easily. In other words, what you see happening is that the people will decide and then the council will follow and, if the will is to open, it will say, "You meet the criteria," and away we go; and if not, it will vote against. Is that particularly the way you see it happening?

Mr Masters: Exactly, and I do not know what will happen from the governmental point of view if -- using the arguments I made earlier -- we suddenly say, "Okay, now the people want this kind of shopping, so we are now going to declare the whole community a tourism area." It may solve that problem for us, but will it then, in turn, give the government a problem? Are they going to start making the definition of what is a tourism business?

Mr Carr: One of the things that has happened is that we have gone through this and people on both sides of the issue -- the people in favour and opposed, even the big retailers who came in who want Sunday shopping -- say we have to protect the workers. What is your feeling on that aspect of the law, the protection of the workers as it is now? Do you think it is strong enough, not strong enough? Have you really had a chance to look at that part of it?

Mr Masters: I looked at the amendments, and I am not an expert in that area, but it seemed to me that those amendments were going in a reasonable way to address that problem. There is the big battle that goes on, of course, whether or not a business should be allowed to operate seven days a week without getting into overtime or double time or triple time and so on. I really feel that in the service industry it would be prudent of the government to provide protection for the workers, and it does appear that that is being addressed in the bill, which has had first reading.

Mr Carr: I know it is difficult to do, but having been the mayor of this fine community, what is your sense of what the vote will be when it comes? Do you think most people will be in favour or opposed? Maybe you can give us some idea of whether you think it is close. Is it a big debate, or is it going to be overwhelming one way or the other?

Mr Masters: My sense of it is that it will be a very large vote for Sunday shopping, and I would be surprised if it turned out differently.

Mr Carr: During this period when it was unregulated and you had opening, did you see a deterioration in the quality of life? Many people, some of the groups, are saying it will take away from people's time as a family. Did you see that to be the case in your community during that period, where for whatever reason people were being pulled apart more?

Mr Masters: That was not apparent, no. It might have had some effect on the families of the people working. That I could not judge. But in general terms in fact it may have brought families together because they could visit their shopping mall or their favourite establishment, do their business there and then continue through the day and stay together. It probably extended the weekend from a family point of view to a two-day total weekend, as opposed to one day shopping and one day just with the family. I did not see any major disruption in family life, though, no.

Mr Carr: What you were seeing too, earlier, is that as a municipality you are not interested in having a decision thrust upon you. You would rather leave it at the provincial level, just to get that clear. Is that what you were saying?

Mr Masters: I say that. I know that always sounds like a copout by the municipal politician, like, "Don't burden me with this decision; give it to someone else." I will give you one scenario. Let's say we dragged our heels in respect to Sunday laws. Then what would prevent one of the neighbouring municipalities from going for something to add to their tax base which would be attractive to them, a large mall on our border? And throughout the province we have had that history over time because of night shopping and all of those things where that is exactly what happened, as it happened here. So eventually you disrupt your marketplace and you come back to the same thing that could have been dealt with in the first place by simply -- as was suggested by Mr Sorbara -- withdrawing the law and concentrating on the labour aspect of it, with perhaps some curtailment in respect to shopping hours, although I think the business community itself would determine that there are some things that are not appropriate. Opening, you know, until midnight Sunday is an example. Regardless of what the law is, I do not think you would find many who would ever do that.

Mr Carr: Okay, thank you. Good luck.

Mr Morrow: Thank you, your worship, for taking the time to come and see us this morning. I imagine you have a very busy schedule. I just have two very quick questions for you. Do you agree with the absolute right of a worker to refuse Sunday work?

Mr Masters: I am always leery of absolutes. I think there is still room in our society, whether it be Sunday, or if Saturday be the Sabbath for someone else, that they should have the ability to follow their religious or moral persuasion without being penalized. I believe that is the intent of the proposed amendments, to allow for that in one form or another. I would put that almost in the same category, although it is maybe not the best analogy to make, as not being able to force somebody to do dangerous work. Well, maybe if it is a danger to the soul, that should be given the same consideration, so I do concur basically with the kind of amendments that are suggested in that respect.

Mr Morrow: You also know we are here to listen to you, and you mentioned that you are here to basically help us in any way that you possibly can. Is there anything you would like to see change in the amendments?

Mr Masters: In the amendments, no. I realize you are here essentially to look at the amendments, but certainly all the other views will get back into the mix. Rather than just take the common pause day as the major thrust -- and this may sound like a political copout, too -- maybe you want a common hesitant day where you say, "All right, we will allow Sunday shopping, taking that example of Sundays 12 to 6," and restrict shopping so that at least you can maintain the Christmas Day or the New Year's Day kind of approach. But in respect to the shopping hours, I cannot see the amendments being helpful when it is probably the basic notion that has to be re-examined and dealt with.

0930

Mr Fletcher: Thank you for being here. It is always nice to be back in Thunder Bay. When you are having a plebiscite this fall the question is going to be, "Are you in favour of Sunday shopping?" Are you going to put the question: "Are you in favour of Sunday working? Would you like to work on Sunday?" Is that also going to be on the plebiscite?

Mr Masters: I doubt that, but we have not completed the verbiage beyond just the simple question.

Mr Fletcher: One of the reasons I ask that is because if you ask people if they want to shop on Sunday it is always yes, but when you turn the question around, "Would you like to work on Sunday," it is usually around 70% no. So it is a bit of a dichotomy there.

As far as Bill 115 is concerned, you do not have a problem with the bill except for the tourism exemption.

Mr Masters: I have a problem with the tourism, because I think what you are saying is, "We are not going to have Sunday shopping or holiday shopping but at the same time we will give you exemptions." I think you should do one or the other. I will confess that AMO has simply said, if my recollection is correct, that whatever the law is, it should be universal. It is up to the government to decide what that law will be, which is a form of really passing the buck. But then, those things had always been in the province of the province to handle and I think that is where it properly should belong. I think that decision should be made by the province.

I think too that there is some urgency to reconsidering the bill, because we live in a new business world vis-à-vis north-south. That is not something that is going to change. It is not considered to be a terribly significant factor at the moment, but if you consider the amount of business that is going across the border, we have looked upon that as a retail problem. What about the people who manufacture and do all of the other things that put the goods on the shelf? It is a deep-rooted problem that will, over time, have to be reconciled by having an even playing field. I think this just gives us an artificial way to have some communities with a level playing field, and others will have to scramble to get it. Those are all the comments I would like to make.

The Acting Chair: On behalf of the committee I would like to thank you, your worship, for attending this morning and giving us your views.

Mr Sorbara: Mr Chairman, might I just bring a point of order to the committee as Mayor Masters leaves? He has advised us that the city of Thunder Bay is going to have a plebiscite on the very matter that we are considering, that is, whether under the current bill Thunder Bay should or should not be open. Although plebiscites and referendums ought not, in my view, to direct the formulation of public policy, the fact that there is a possibility that there will be a plebiscite in Thunder Bay and within a few weeks this committee will be bringing back to the Legislature for third reading and royal assent a bill that might close down all the stores that it just opened under a plebiscite in the city of Thunder Bay -- I just think that when the plebiscite takes place this committee should order its business so that it has an opportunity to review in very fine detail what happened in that plebiscite in the city of Thunder Bay.

I bring that to you, sir, because our purpose in holding these public hearings is to --

The Acting Chair: That is a point of information, but it is not a point of order.

Mr Sorbara: If I could just make it in the form of a motion: that following the plebiscite in Thunder Bay this committee convene in Toronto to consider the results of that plebiscite and how it might impact on our recommendations to the government. After all, we are here to get the public view. What better way to get the public view than through a plebiscite? So I am suggesting that the committee, wherever it is in its consideration of Sunday shopping, reconvene for at least one sitting day and consider the matter and the results and analyse those results as some indication of the public mood in the province.

That is a motion.

Mr Morrow: Could we not take care of that during clause-by-clause?

Mr Sorbara: I do not think it is a controversial motion. All I am saying is that we look at the results. Rather than ignore the results, we look at them. I do not think it is a big, controversial issue. Maybe we will do it for half an hour the day after the plebiscite is through. Is this a problem for you folks?

Mr Fletcher: I am speaking against the motion for the simple fact that we are on a fact-finding tour and the information can come in. We do not need a motion to have the information come to us. We do not need a motion to have another sitting day or anything else. Once this city has its plebiscite and the results are known, we can get that information. We do not need a motion and we do not have to waste people's time here today by making silly motions.

The Acting Chair: If I may, could we please put this off until 12 noon? We have presenters here waiting to do their presentations. Could we discuss this or debate this at noon, when we have time?

Mr Sorbara: It should not give rise to a grand debate. I am not sure what Mr Fletcher is afraid of; all I am suggesting is that we spend part of a sitting day considering what the results are in Thunder Bay. After all, our mandate is to garner what public opinion is. What better way than to analyse the results of a plebiscite? Maybe we would do that informally anyway. As a courtesy and as a gesture to the city of Thunder Bay, one of the important communities in the province, all I am suggesting is that we formally make it part of our agenda now. Is that a problem?

Mr Fletcher: Yes.

Mr Sorbara: I hope not. I hope you can support it right away.

Interjections.

The Acting Chair: Order, please. If it is the pleasure of the committee, could we put this off until 12 noon, so we would not have to hold up any of the presenters?

Mr Sorbara: I would prefer to deal with it here.

Mr Jackson: If Mr Sorbara would simply amend it to say, "Thunder Bay and other plebiscites," because they will all occur in this province on the same day, and if he would accept that as a friendly amendment, then we could call the question and we will resolve the matter in a minute and a half and we can proceed with the deputants. I think everyone is aware of the concept of public consultation as contained in Mr Sorbara's motion.

Mr Sorbara: I do accept that as a friendly amendment, that we spend one sitting day considering the results of plebiscites on Sunday shopping taken in conjunction with municipal elections. I really hope my friends across the table will support this. If they do not, I think that is going to cause them some degree of embarrassment.

The Acting Chair: Okay, I will call the question.

Mr Sorbara moves that following the plebiscite in Thunder Bay and other plebiscites, this committee convene in Toronto to consider the results of that plebiscite and how it might impact on our recommendations to the government.

Mr Morrow: Can we please have five minutes?

Mr Jackson: The question has been called, Mr Chairman. In the interests of time --

The Acting Chair: A five-minute recess?

Mr Jackson: No. I have called the question. On a recorded vote I call it.

The committee divided on Mr Sorbara's motion, which was negatived on the following vote:

Ayes -- 4

Carr, Jackson, Poirier, Sorbara.

Nays -- 5

Fletcher, Lessard, Mills, Morrow, O'Connor.

0940

UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS' NORTHWESTERN ONTARIO REGION

The Acting Chair: I now call the next presenters, from the United Food and Commercial Workers' International Union. Thank you for taking the time out to be with us today. You will be allowed half an hour for your presentation. You can use that time any way you wish. You can either give a half-hour presentation or you can give a shorter presentation and allow time for questions and comments from the caucuses. The time will be split evenly. Could you please identify yourself and then proceed.

Mr Fraser: My name is Mike Fraser. I am the regional director for the United Food and Commercial Workers for northwestern Ontario. At the extreme left is Dan Onichuk. He is a representative from Fort Frances. He services also Kenora and Dryden. Beside me is Gerry Morris, who is an employee of Canada Safeway. Beside me is Ed Ryma. He is a grocery clerk at Skafs Foods, which is an independent chain store here in Thunder Bay.

On behalf of over 3,000 members of the United Food and Commercial Workers, northwest Ontario region, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome you to northwestern Ontario and specifically to Thunder Bay.

Our local union represents workers in the following communities in northwestern Ontario: Hornepayne, White River, Marathon, Thunder Bay, Atikokan, Fort Frances, Kenora, Vermilion Bay and Dryden. In our region we represent employees of large retail chains as well as small independent chains and independent single-store operators.

I would just like to comment to the committee that not all the employees we represent in those communities work in retail food stores. We represent people who work in nursing homes as well as hotels such as this hotel -- I am glad you picked this, as a unionized UFCW hotel -- warehouses and other types of enterprises, so it is not just retail that we represent.

I am sure the names of companies such as A & P, Westfair Foods, which is Loblaws, and Canada Safeway are familiar to members of the committee. What may not be familiar are names such as DH Foods in Marathon, Tom Boy Foods in Atikokan, Harley's Foods in Dryden or names such as Quality Market or Skafs Foods in Thunder Bay.

While this list of independent retailers is not exhaustive, it is a good example of small, independent retailers who have indicated to this union that they prefer not to be open on Sundays and holidays and support legislation for a common pause day. We believe it is in the best interests of these employers as well as their employees, as well as the employees of large chains, to have legislation in the province of Ontario providing a common pause day. We believe, as well, this committee has the responsibility to take into consideration the legitimate needs and concerns of tourists and the tourism industry.

I am sure you are by now aware that our union has five main concerns with the proposed amendments to the Retail Business Holidays Act. These are: (1) the intent of the Retail Business Holidays Act; (2) the municipal option; (3) drugstore openings on Sundays; (4) enforcement of the legislation; and (5) the definition of a retail business.

On Monday, July 29, 1991, UFCW Canadian director Clifford Evans made a presentation to this committee in Toronto recommending certain changes to the amendments in each of the five areas listed above. I would like to state to the committee that we in northwestern Ontario fully support the recommendations made by Mr Evans to this committee. However, rather than reiterate each and every one of those recommendations, we have chosen to focus on the municipal option and tourist criteria and the concerns that we in northwestern Ontario have in that regard. The submission made by Mr Evans to this committee is available for anyone who wishes a copy.

This is contrary, I think, to what the mayor said a few minutes ago, but I believe the majority of people in northwestern Ontario, including retail employees and employers, prefer not to have Sunday and holiday openings. When the previous Liberal government introduced the municipal option, there was not a rush by municipalities to pass bylaws to allow for Sunday openings.

I should comment that recently the Thunder Bay council had a vote where it was defeated to implement the tourist exemption in Thunder Bay. I would also like to state to the committee that when the Thunder Bay and District Chamber of Commerce last year came out in favour of Sunday shopping, the retail members of the chamber of commerce were opposed to the chamber of commerce taking that stand.

The only town where we represent retail employees where this took place was in Kenora. I do not want to say a lot concerning the Kenora situation, as there are a number of presentations being made from individuals and groups from Kenora and the Kenora and District Labour Council will be dealing with the specifics of that situation in a later presentation. I would like to say, however, that I do not feel it will hurt the tourism industry in Kenora or create undue hardship for tourists in that area if large retail stores such as Safeway, Westfair Foods and Woolco, as a result of this legislation, are closed on Sundays and holidays.

When the Retail Business Holidays Act was struck down as being unconstitutional, many retailers who did not want to open were forced to open due to competitive reasons. Many employers in the northwest region contacted our office asking how they could assist us in trying to have the stores closed on Sundays and holidays. Under the proposed amendments to the act, are we going to have the same situation again?

I do not believe there is a community in northwestern Ontario that would not fall into at least two of the six proposed categories for the tourist exemption. As almost every municipality, if not all, would qualify for a bylaw exemption, what becomes a particular concern for us in the northwest are those retail businesses which on days other than holidays use the total area of 7,500 square feet and which have eight or more employees serving the public.

Subsection 2(2) of the tourism criteria states: "The retail business establishment,

"(a) shall be in an area that meets the tourism criteria set out in subsection 1(2);

"(b) shall provide services on holidays primarily for tourists; and

"(c) shall have at least one of the following characteristics:

"1. Is recognized for its historical features or distinctive architectural features.

"2. Features items of cultural or ethnic appeal.

"3. Provides specialized goods or services, such as heritage or handicraft items.

"4. Provides goods or services necessary to tourist activities in the area served by the establishment."

What then is the definition of a tourist? Is someone who lives in Texas and has a summer home on Lake of the Woods considered a tourist? If the large chains are able to establish that they "provide services on holidays primarily for tourists," will they then be able to get around the intent of clause 2(2)(c) by making capital investments in such things as distinctive architectural features or start to inventory items of cultural or ethnic appeal and/or open a new department for goods and services necessary to tourist activities?

I think this possibility should be of particular concern to the committee, especially the effect it would have on small retailers who do not have access to the financial resources that the large chains do. While the large chains could possibly operate on a loss-leader basis, I do not think independent retailers necessarily could. In this regard, it makes absolute sense to us that a committee should be established of government, retailers, unions and representatives of the tourist industry to determine properly what the criteria should be.

This would ensure that the amendments to the RBHA do not end up hurting small retailers or allow large chains to take advantage of loopholes that were not intended, as well as ensuring that legitimate tourist businesses are allowed to open to provide services. This committee should include representatives of the affected groups and should also ensure province-wide representation by including individuals from all regions of the province, including northwestern Ontario.

I would like to take a minute to address comments made by a representative of one of the large chain stores last week on the news. This was after the first committee hearings were held in Toronto. A representative of one of the larger Canadian retail chains stated that as a result of the introduction of legislation for a common pause day, the Ontario economy stands to lose $3 billion in sales. This claim is absolutely ludicrous. I ask the committee, if stores are open six or seven days, is that going to give Ontario consumers $3 billion more to spend?

I think the answer is quite clear: No. I believe the claim that billions of dollars are going to be lost because of the implementation of a common pause day is an extreme exaggeration. Should someone say that we in Ontario are losing sales to the United States because of cross-border shopping, of course everybody would agree that this is true. The exact amount is unknown, but I would like the committee to look at the question of Sunday shopping versus cross-border shopping.

In Fort Frances, a border town across the bridge from International Falls, Minnesota, you have had cross-border shopping for years. However, recently the Fort Frances town council in its wisdom saw fit to reject the bylaw allowing tourist exemptions for Sunday openings. The reason I mention that is because here you have a town council that has dealt for years and years with the question of cross-border shopping and still does not believe it is necessary to implement the tourist exemption for Fort Frances.

The whole question of cross-border shopping raises a host of problems, such as the level of the Canadian dollar vis-à-vis the US dollar, higher taxes in Canada, especially federal taxes and the implementation of the goods and services tax, and the fact that prices are much lower in the United States. These are to name just a few.

Let us not confuse the issue of a common pause day and cross-border shopping. In British Columbia, where Sunday shopping/working has existed for a number of years, the fact that Canadian stores are open has not slowed down cross-border shopping. The number of trips in British Columbia increased 400% between 1987 and 1991 in spite of wide-open Sunday shopping in that province. We absolutely agree that is is necessary to achieve a solution concerning cross-border shopping, but people who say that by allowing Sunday shopping we will get rid of the problem are simply not being realistic.

In conclusion, I would like to state that the United Food and Commercial Workers Union commends the government on its support for the implementation of a common pause day and asks this committee to ensure that we have a law that is going to work in the future. Let us ensure that the criteria make sense and work in the best interests of the employees, all retailers, the tourists and the tourist industry.

The Acting Chair: That leaves about six minutes each. Mr Poirier.

Mr Poirier: Can I refer you to page 3, please? As you see, page 3 is divided into two groups. The last sentence of the top part says, "I would like to say, however, that I do not feel it will hurt the tourism industry in Kenora or create undue hardship for tourists in that area if large retail stores, such as Safeway...as a result of this legislation are closed on Sundays and holidays."

You seem to make a distinction; in this sentence you only talk about the large retail stores, whereas elsewhere in your presentation you say you have also had the support of small retail stores to stay closed on Sunday. Can you explain the difference to me, why you would only look at the large ones here?

Mr Fraser: The small retailers in northwestern Ontario, in our experience, do not want to be open. The individual sitting beside me, Ed Ryma, works for Skafs Foods, which is a small, independent chain here in Thunder Bay. The owner has made it quite clear he does not want to open on Sundays and holidays. He supports legislation for a common pause day.

The reason I am focusing on the large chains is because the large chains came to negotiations approximately three and a half years ago saying they totally opposed Sunday shopping, but they wanted to change the provisions in the collective agreement concerning double time just in case somebody else decided to open.

Then, as soon as there was a possibility that the previous Liberal government was going to introduce changes to the Sunday legislation, the large chain stores said, "Oh, we're all in favour of it." The position they had taken in collective bargaining was totally opposite to what they were saying in public.

0950

Mr Poirier: Do some of the smaller retailers not want anything to be open in case the larger ones or other small ones may open and "force" them to open against their wish on Sundays? Is that your interpretation of what you have heard?

Mr Fraser: I am going to ask Dan Onichuk to address this question as well, but I think you have basically two situations. You have the small independent retailer who is forced to work seven days a week, and does not want to have to work seven days a week; he would like a day off. The second reason is the cost of doing business. If you are open seven days, then you have an extra day of overhead and, for the smaller independent chains and truly independent operators, that increases their fixed costs.

Mr Poirier: Does that necessarily mean that he is open seven days or does it mean --

Mr Fraser: They have to open seven days a week because, if Canada Safeway and A & P are going to be open seven days, then the other people who are competing with Canada Safeway and with A & P have to be open as well. And of course A & P and Canada Safeway, being multinational corporations, are in a much better position to spread those costs over seven days as opposed to six.

That is one of the concerns we have with the criteria set out for stores with over 7,500 square feet. Are the large chains going to have the advantage of being able to invest money that is not available to the small retailers? It is quite possible, because the large chains in Thunder Bay will operate certain departments on a loss-leader basis just to attract customers. They would do the same for Sundays.

Mr Daigeler: So far at these hearings the argument has been put forward quite forcefully by retailers and business owners that, especially in a time of recession when employment is hard to come by, employees are quite keen -- especially the younger ones, students -- to work on Sunday, to have that extra time to make some money. Is that your experience up here? How would you react to this argument?

Mr Fraser: No, I do not think that being open on Sundays creates any more employment. In our industry, which is unionized, it does not create employment because we are able to negotiate that hours of work are assigned by seniority. But in British Columbia, where we have had Sunday shopping for many years, our union has not seen any increased employment.

Mr Fraser: May I say one other thing on that issue? I think we also have to look at what kind of employment we are creating. The unemployment rate in northwestern Ontario is higher than the provincial average and the national average. If there were any jobs created they would only be part-time jobs, and I think that we should be looking at ways of creating full-time employment.

Mr Daigeler: You mentioned that Fort Frances turned down a request to be open on Sundays which, I guess, is different from Kenora and some other regions. What were the arguments there? I am not familiar with what happened. Was there quite a campaign, and why did the city council decide against opening on Sundays?

Mr Fraser: I am going to refer that question to Mr Onichuk, as he lives in Fort Frances.

Mr Onichuk: When the question was put to the council some time ago it was rejected. The question was again put to council recently. They were looking for clarification of the new legislation, and they wanted to wait until they understood what the legislation was going to mean.

Subsequent to that the vote was taken anyway and it was defeated. I believe at this time they are waiting for clarification of the law so that they understand some of the questions we are asking, particularly on the square footage and that sort of thing. Even for the brief period when Sunday shopping was wide open in Fort Frances the only retailer in town to open was the major one, Canada Safeway. No one else opened.

Mr Carr: I thank you very much for your presentation. My question relates to what will be happening in Thunder Bay. As we heard, they will probably take a vote of the people to learn what they would like to see. If that vote favours Sunday shopping, would your group support it or will you still be fighting it, presumably against council and so on?

Mr Fraser: Our union will continue to fight so that our members do not have to work on Sundays. I think Mr Fletcher was correct when he asked whether the plebiscite is also going to contain the question, "Are you in favour of Sunday work?" because it goes both ways. If there is a plebiscite then we will deal with it when we see the results. I personally believe the results are not going to be as the mayor seems to think.

Mr Carr: You are right, you know. If you ask me if I want to work on Sunday, the answer is no, but occasionally we have to anyway. One of the concerns I have is that when Mr Evans came before our committee in Toronto, as you know, he said he was not happy with the law because the tourist exemptions were too broad and they would allow municipalities to open, there was not enough protection, it did not go far enough. Is what you are saying basically reaffirming that you are not pleased with the law, that there is not enough protection for workers and that the tourism exemptions are too broad as it stands right now?

Mr Fraser: Yes and we are reaffirming that position.

Mr Carr: One of the other concerns that we had in some of the other examples, some of the other unions -- we were down in Collingwood and the question came up. There are unionized facilities that are open on Sundays in that area. I think LOF Glass was an example. What do you say to union workers when they say, "We want rights and protections not to have to work on Sunday but our brothers in whatever the union" -- whether it be auto workers or whatever -- "have to work." What would your comment be to your brothers and their unions that do not have protection and maybe would be working?

Mr Fraser: That is a good question. I am glad you asked it, because one of the things we have tried to negotiate with the chains and all retail stores over the last number of years is something called a Sunday/Monday, Saturday/Sunday combination, where we have a guarantee. In retail, the employers have agreed where possible that they will guarantee, once a month, that employees will get a Saturday/Sunday or Sunday/Monday combination -- that they will get two days off consecutively. We would like to have that happen more often. The problem is that in retail it is not like industry nor it is like a hotel.

We are in negotiations for a renewal of a collective agreement for this hotel right now. The question of employees working on Sunday is not a problem because full-time employees are working during the week. During the weekends it is the part-time employees who come in and relieve the full-time. You do not have that in retail. In retail, the full-time employees have to work on the weekends as well. It is not like industry where you can have your schedule and be able to work two weeks where you have to work on weekends, then be off for three or four because you have switched shifts.

In retail you are working every weekend, with a day off in the middle of the week or at the end at the week. It is not like working a shift and having a regular rotation, because the schedule is made up every week. If you work in a nursing home you have a schedule that is set for a period of five or six weeks, so people know for the next five or six weeks they are going to be working these hours and they can plan accordingly. Once they put in a certain shift that is not a favourite shift, the next time they know they go on days, and that is when they get their weekends and their consecutive days. In retail it does not happen.

Mr Carr: Of all the groups that have appeared before us -- the big retailers, the small shop owners and so on -- one that has been fairly conspicuous by its absence has been people like the A & Ps and the Loblaws and so on. I notice you said they agreed with you. Do you have any thoughts on why, with something that is of such fundamental importance to them as Sunday shopping, they have decided not to appear? It might just be a guess, you deal with them every day but --

Mr Fraser: If I had to guess it would probably be because they feel their credibility is on the line. It would be difficult for them to come here. They say to us at the negotiating table that they are going to do one thing and then the next thing you know they are telling politicians they want something else done. Halfway through all the mess when there was no law at all they were saying to us, "Yes, we should bring the law back in." We are not even sure where they are at now. Maybe they are just trying to get their own act together and figure out where they are at.

1000

Mr Fletcher: Good to see you, Mike.

Mr Fraser: Nice to see you, Derek.

Mr Fletcher: We have been hearing throughout the presentations that if we do not have Sunday shopping, no jobs; we are going to lose all kinds of jobs, part-time jobs and everything else. Your union has been doing a lot of work on it. What do you think?

Mr Fraser: We did not see any increase in jobs. The hours are just spread out over the rest of the week. As opposed to part-time employees getting 24 hours working Monday to Friday, they end up working Monday and they have Thursday and Friday off and they work Saturday and Sunday. The hours are just shifted. Gerry works for Canada Safeway here in town. He went through when there was no law and there was Sunday shopping here. Ed works at a store where they had Sunday shopping. I think they will concur that there was not this influx of employees as a result of their employers opening on Sunday.

Mr Fletcher: Let me go to Ed. What do you think of Sunday shopping, Sunday working? What is your personal opinion?

Mr Ryma: I personally do not like working on Sunday. Not only did it not increase the number of hours of work for part-timers, but it also did not increase the weekly sales for the store. Sales just got spread over seven days rather than six. I will be starting a family soon. I do not want to have to be working on Sunday. A lot of people I work with have families. They have children who are home on the weekends, not in school. They want to be with their children. We want a common pause day where we do not have to do anything, just spend our time with our families.

Mr Fletcher: If we had wide-open Sunday shopping, and Ed just brought it up, as far as the family is concerned, perhaps our children's lifestyles would have to change to accommodate the parents. Maybe city council would have to hold their meetings on Sundays or something. You do not see that part of it. All they want is for the stores to open and not the rest of society to change along with what is going on.

Mr Fraser: There definitely could be a domino effect, where if retail stores are open, I guess they can argue that the banks should be open and that politicians should be sitting in the Legislature on Sunday.

Interjections.

Mr Fletcher: Or city council.

Mr Fraser: That creates a lot of employment.

Mr Lessard: Mr Fraser, you mentioned that retail full-time employees would be expected to work on Sundays. Could you explain what the difference is, what is unique about the retail business that would require full-time staff to work on Sundays?

Mr Fraser: The nature of retail, the way it is operating now, is that you have full-time employees who are scheduled basically to supervise a number of part-time employees. The ratio of full-time employees to part-time in retail has been decreasing over the years. It is now probably on average 65% to 70% part-time and 35% to 30% full-time employees. So the full-time employees are there to supervise the part-time employees. Again, if there were any increase in employment, which has not been shown to be the case in places where they have Sunday shopping, if it is going to create any jobs, they are going to be part-time. One of the things that we are striving to do in retail is to create more full-time jobs.

Mr Lessard: You have also made mention of the store size criteria that are to be included in the regulations that will go along with Bill 115. I take it you are concerned about the ease with which stores that are over 7,500 square feet may fit within the tourist criteria as well. Can you give us some idea of the number of stores that would fit in that category of over 7,500 square feet in this area you represent? Which stores would those be, and how many?

Mr Fraser: Almost all of them that we represent. Almost all the retail food stores and department stores would fall into that category. We are concerned that they would be open because the majority of the employers we represent do not want to be open on Sundays or holidays. They have stated to us unequivocally that they do not want to open. They are forced to open because of the large chains. So you have a situation where maybe the large chains are benefiting, the small independent retailers are hurting because they do not want to be open, and the smaller, traditional mom-and-pop type stores are hurting because they are losing business to the large chains and the smaller independent retailers that are then open on Sundays.

The Acting Chair: Mr Mills, one minute.

Mr Mills: I thank you gentlemen for appearing here this morning and making this presentation. One of the key thrusts in this legislation is the quality of family life. I just would like to ask you briefly to give me some idea of how you think retail opening will affect the real quality of your family life and that of your members.

Mr Fraser: If an employee is forced to be available to work seven days a week, they are not going to end up working seven days a week. But because the schedules are done on a weekly basis, it is going to be Thursday at noon of each week before a retail employee finds out what day off he or she is going to have the next week. One week it is going to be Wednesday and one week Thursday. Maybe once every six weeks they might get a Saturday off or once every six or seven weeks they might get a Sunday off. Or they may end up working every Sunday; they may end up working every Saturday.

It is going to affect their family life because they are not going to be able to plan things. They are not going to be able to get into a regular routine. At least now they know that Sunday is one day when they can plan to be with their families.

The Acting Chair: On behalf of the committee, Mr Fraser, I thank you and your committee for your presentation.

NANCY LOEWEN

The Acting Chair: I call our next presenter, Alderman Nancy Loewen. Good morning. You will be allowed 15 minutes for your presentation. You can use the full 15 minutes for your presentation or give a shorter presentation and we will have questions and comments from each of the caucuses. Please identify yourself for the record and then proceed.

Ms Loewen: I am Alderman Nancy Loewen of the city of Thunder Bay. First of all, I would like to welcome the panel to the city of Thunder Bay. I have asked the visitors and convention bureau to prepare a tourism package for you. I hope you are going to stay a few days.

Mr Sorbara: We are going to leave many of the New Democratic Party members here as we carry on.

Ms Loewen: I will not make any comment until after I have heard your comments.

My format is mainly in the form of questions with a conclusion at the end:

1. Why do the tourism criteria have to be administered by the municipalities? As the province is making the rules on Sunday shopping, why is the province not enforcing the rules?

2. Why do the applications have to be supported by the chamber of commerce or convention and visitors bureau?

3. Why does city council have to hold public hearings?

4. Why is city council under no obligation to pass a bylaw granting tourism exemption even if the application meets all the criteria?

5. Why is there a large gap in the amount for first offence, $500, versus $2,000 for subsequent offences?

6. Who will be held liable for costs, etc, if the retailer appeals council's decision: the municipality or the province or both?

7. Are exemptions to the guidelines still being considered by the Solicitor General for those cities directly affected by cross-border shopping?

8. Did the province actually meet with the chamber of commerce prior to establishing guidelines to discuss the forthcoming role the chamber will be playing?

9. Did the province actually meet with the city mayors prior to establishing guidelines to discuss the forthcoming role the municipalities will be playing?

10. Why is city council given the option of limiting the number of applications that will be considered in any year? Will this move not create animosity between city council and private enterprise?

11. Would the province be willing to delay Sunday shopping legislation to give the municipalities the opportunity to put the question, "Are you in favour of Sunday shopping?" before the electorate on the plebiscite? If not, why not?

12. Who is paying for the processing of applications?

13. Why can private enterprise not decide for itself, based on the results of a municipal plebiscite polling citizens on Sunday shopping, with very strict protection for the employee and enforced by the province? Can the province consider this suggestion?

1010

I have before me a copy of a survey. I did everything I could to rush this to the Premier of Ontario. I will give you the results of the survey and then I will tell you what the Premier's response was.

First of all, this was a survey done by Victoriaville and conducted with 268 people. Overall, 74% were in favour of Sunday shopping; 26% were not in favour of Sunday shopping. Among working consumers, including professionals, clerical, sales and service, trade and craftsmen, military, technicians, labourers and officials, 78% were in favour of Sunday shopping, 21% were not in favour of Sunday shopping, and 1% were uncertain of their preference.

It is broken down. Among unemployed consumers -- that is, the unemployed, housewives and the disabled -- 84% were in favour of Sunday shopping; not in favour of Sunday shopping, 16%. Among retired consumers, 53% were in favour of Sunday shopping; 47% were not in favour of Sunday shopping. Students in favour of Sunday shopping, 85%; not in favour of Sunday shopping, 15%.

I am going to tell you what the Premier's response was to this survey.

"Dear Ms Loewen: I've read your letter, and its enclosed survey, about Sunday shopping. Our government supports a common pause day for Ontario workers and their families. We believe this strengthens family and community life, and protects small businesses and the rights of working people.

"The Retail Business Establishments Statute Law Amendment Act reaffirms our commitment to a common pause day, while improving protection for the rights of retail workers. The act provides province-wide criteria under which tourism-based businesses will be able to apply to open on Sundays and holidays. It also guarantees retail employees 36 hours of rest in every seven days of work and the right to refuse Sunday and holiday work.

"I appreciate being kept informed about the views of your constituents."

In this whole letter, the thing that bothered me the most was the last paragraph. I will repeat it, "I appreciate being kept informed about the views of your constituents." He completely ignored this letter and this survey. This survey was only 268 people in the community, but he completely ignored this letter and said, "I appreciate being kept informed about the views of your constituents."

In conclusion, from what little information I was given, it was rather difficult to have an opinion on this subject other than that the terminology is confusing and the statements vague and wide open to interpretation.

I am a new politician. I do not belong to any party. I do not wish to belong to any party. I do not have any idealism, values. I work for the city of Thunder Bay. As far as I am concerned, the constituents are my employers; I am their employee. I am replacing my dear friend, the late Mickey Hennessy. I am sure you knew Mickey very well. I miss him very much.

During my short term on city council -- I have only been a politician for four months -- I have seen good, well-prepared briefs, the real meat-and-potato type. I know you know what I am talking about. I have also seen other briefs which basically skirt around the issues.

The provincial tourism criteria skirt around the issue. It appears that while the intentions of the Premier, the Honourable Bob Rae, were good, he tried to appease the tourism-oriented business community while on the other hand he tried to appease the labour union of retail workers.

Because he was trying to please both the tourism industry and labour, he actually has weak criteria. The Premier to date is not making a full commitment to either group.

Again, I am not a politician. I am one by job description, but I am not a very political person. But I do have a lot of common sense and a really good perception of things, of ideas. I think there is one group that has been left out here, and I think it is the consumer. What does the consumer want? Was this group ever consulted on a large scale? I have no idea. Was it?

For family reasons, I am personally opposed to Sunday shopping, but I refuse to let this belief influence my business decisions in any way.

I voted for the question of Sunday shopping on the plebiscite. I am of the opinion that the community should be consulted on a large scale, such as a plebiscite, for major issues. I will repeat that because that is so important. The community should be consulted on a large scale, such as a plebiscite, for major issues. They are paying our wages -- my wages, your wages -- and I feel they should be consulted.

The results on Sunday shopping should be given to private enterprise, who can take it from there and apply common sense. If the majority of the community does not want Sunday shopping, it is doubtful private enterprise will open. Putting the Sunday shopping question before the electorate should be the only municipal intervention.

The only provincial intervention should be very strict protection for the employees. That is the only part you people should play. I repeat the words "very strict," because if the rules are not clear and strict, what is the point of having rules in the first place?

I have received many calls, believe me, about Sunday shopping, about my decision for a plebiscite. I received many from students, from parents of students, from seniors out there -- a lot of people threatening not to vote for me in the next election, basically, because I supported a plebiscite, because I believed the people should have a say.

I do not think Sunday shopping will give a large boost to the tourism industry, simply because our prices are high. It just does not make sense. I think the federal government has a responsibility to all constituents to start managing our money more effectively, to try to prevent cross-border shopping and try to prevent Sunday shopping from becoming almost a necessity for some people.

There are people in every community who have to ride the bus; they do not have a car. I do not know if you people can understand that, but there are some people in the community who have a really hard time. They are going through a lot of hardship. Maybe that extra time working on Sunday means a lot to them. I know from people who have talked to me, who have called me, it does mean a lot to them.

If the federal government handled our money properly, the province and municipalities would not be stuck trying to cope with all these problems we have.

When municipalities are given the responsibility of carrying out a certain task, then it is good common sense and fair that municipalities follow through on their own rules. I personally, as a city council member, do not appreciate the province coming in and acting as the boss and telling me what to do. My bosses are the city residents, and I only work for them. The municipality will be wasting time and money trying to implement this legislation. The business owner will also be wasting time and money.

Certain members of the public, municipal and business sector, should actually be sitting on any task force, and I would like to make a comment about your task force here. It is totally wrong. This is all made up of NDP, Conservatives and Liberals, and you should have equal representation from each government. I think you should also have representation from business and labour. I do not know if you have task forces that talk to you people, but I think the structure of this whole committee is wrong.

I am very much concerned about the employees. I would like to see some stronger legislation to help them. I really appreciate Gregory's friendly amendment, trying to get that through. It is really a crime that you people did not listen to him, because he was right on the ball. He really said it all. That is what I mean: Your structure is totally wrong.

Last, I am flying into Toronto in the morning. If you want to meet with me further and discuss this, I have no problem. I will be in Toronto for two weeks on business. Actually, I will be touring city hall about a project I have on the hearing-impaired, but I would be glad to meet with you.

1020

The Acting Chair: We have time for one quick question from each caucus.

Mr Sorbara: I want to say to Alderman Loewen that hers is a meat-and-potatoes brief, and well presented as well. I wonder whether the committee would be interested in taking 10 minutes now and allowing the parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General to answer the questions the alderman has raised, one by one, for the information of the committee. If we could get the answers to those questions before us in a way that allows us to discuss those questions through the rest of our hearings, we really will be doing something.

I suspect that the parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General is going to refuse to do that, and if we brought a motion the NDP members would vote it down. In the alternative, I would ask that the parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General, with the assistance of the Solicitor General's office, prepare written responses to those questions and have those transmitted to Alderman Loewen as soon as possible, with the same answers presented to us at this committee. Those questions are the very questions we are being asked over and over again in our communities, and we will hear deputants asking those questions over and over. So I would ask that the parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General do that.

I really do not have a question. I do have a request, however. I believe your survey is more or less reflective of public opinion and public sentiment around the province. Would you consider providing it to us, and our clerk could make copies of it for all of us.

Can we deal with the question of whether we can take 10 minutes for the Solicitor General to answer those questions one by one?

Mr Mills: I thank the alderman for her presentation. I must say it was a rapid-fire presentation which gave me less than the usual parameters to make any notes whatsoever. It was boom, boom, boom. To go one step further than that, I have to tell you that we are here to listen and give comments about the presentations. I would be very glad if you gave me all those questions, and I will certainly take them back with me to the minister and discuss them, but you can understand that it is very difficult for me to grasp one question, because I thought you a little wound up.

Mr Carr: The mayor has said he figures that when the people actually do get a chance to voice their opinions, there will be Sunday shopping. The last group, the United Food and Commercial Workers, said no, they believed there will not be. From listening to you, it is your impression that probably the majority of people in this community will be voting in favour of Sunday shopping. Is that correct?

Ms Loewen: I have only seen one poll. I have been told by the news media that there have been several polls. I have only seen one poll, the result of Victoriaville, and it overwhelmingly says people are in favour of Sunday shopping, so I would assume the plebiscite will indicate this.

I am asking the province to do one of two things. Either you incorporate the rules and regulations -- which is what you are doing; you are putting the rules and regulations on to the municipalities. If you are going to do that, then you handle it. Or you give it to the municipalities and we will handle it, we make up our own rules and we handle it. You do one or the other, but you do not go halfway between. That is what you are doing. You are coming up with the rules and regulations and you are telling the municipalities: "This is the way it's going to work. Like it or not, you've got it." You are passing the buck, and I do not like it. If we are going to do it, then let us make up the rules and the regulations. I am all for that, because this is a challenge for me.

Mr Morrow: I am looking for some clarification. You talked about a survey being done. I have a May 18 article from the Thunder Bay paper on a survey done by the chamber of commerce. The results of the survey are that 245 people out of 1,500 are clearly in favour of Sunday shopping. That says to me that it is not a majority. Can I get clarification from your survey to this survey?

Ms Loewen: The chamber of commerce surveyed only 24% of its people, and 68% of that 24% were in favour of Sunday shopping. But that was only 24% of their membership. They have a large membership.

Mr Morrow: But the base of that survey is fairly broad: 1,500 people, and 245 people are in favour of Sunday shopping. That would say to me that the majority of that poll would not be in favour of Sunday shopping. Is that not true?

Ms Loewen: Probably true, but I am not that keen on surveys. You can have as many surveys as you want, but I still do not think it is representative of the whole community. That is why I think there should be a plebiscite, because it would be representative of the whole community. You have one survey saying one thing, and you have another survey maybe saying something different. It usually is of a small percentage of the population, so I still maintain that on major issues there should be a plebiscite.

I really believe that is the problem of our country, that we are not listening to the majority of the people. That is where the plebiscite comes in. I think we should have more plebiscites throughout the country. I think that all levels of government should listen to results of the plebiscite, because then you would really know what the people want. These Gallup polls only survey 1,000 people. That is not the whole country. I am telling you that the way to go is the plebiscite. If you had more plebiscites on major issues, you would not have the problems you have today, because the people would have a strong say in how the government should be run.

Mr Daigeler: I want to indicate to the presenter that this is a legislative committee. You were wondering about the nature of this committee and why there are not business people represented. This is not a task force as such, but is a legislative committee of legislators who have been elected.

Ms Loewen: Except that if it is a legislative committee, it should have equal representation from all levels of government --

Mr Daigeler: The legislative committee functions under the Legislative Assembly Act, so there are certain requirements to be a member of the legislative committee.

Mr Jackson: On a point of clarification, Mr Chairman: I did not understand the parliamentary assistant. Has he agreed to undertake to respond to the 10 questions from the previous deputant in a written form to the committee?

Mr Mills: What I said was that we are here as a committee to listen and take back the concerns the alderwoman has raised to the ministry. I did in no way indicate that I would reply to those questions in a written form.

Mr Jackson: So you are refusing to respond to the questions? Thank you.

1030

THUNDER BAY AND DISTRICT LABOUR COUNCIL

Mr Powers: My name is Mark Powers, secretary-treasurer, Thunder Bay and District Labour Council. I bring you greetings.

For many years, all three levels of government, federal, provincial and municipal, along with business and labour, have been working together to clean up the inequities regarding employment of the handicapped, racial discrimination and equal pay for work of equal value. Much has been accomplished, but there is still a long way to go on all these issues.

However, the issue of Sunday shopping has not received a united effort during its existence. The Ontario government under David Peterson wanted to let the municipalities decide. The municipalities wanted the province to decide. So here we are today.

The issue of Sunday shopping must not be confused with cross-border shopping. Too many times, these two different issues are thought to be the same. Such is not the case. Sunday shopping will not prevent cross-border shopping. Even with Sunday shopping in Ontario, the southward flow of shoppers increased, not decreased, from last June.

The Thunder Bay and District Labour Council believes there are many improvements necessary to the current days of shopping, not Sunday shopping. Currently, shoppers in Thunder Bay are not able to obtain full services during the entire shopping hours: management staff, opticians, automotive mechanics.

Are the retailers in Thunder Bay really concerned about the needs of the shoppers? The hours of retail businesses are not uniform. Some shopping centres close totally at 6 pm, except on Fridays. At other shopping centres, the shoppers will find only some of the retailers open for business. Intercity, the major mall of Thunder Bay, closes at 6 pm on Saturdays.

The Thunder Bay and District Labour Council maintains that retailers must develop standard hours of operation for the consumers. This would see many retailers increasing their hours of operation over the current six-day business week. With all retailers operating during the same business hours, competition for sales could improve.

It is obvious that the retailers are able to make profits while operating on a reduced workweek or they would have already extended their hours of operation. Rather than eliminate the practice of a common pause day, retailers must also improve the levels of services offered to the shoppers.

Having reviewed the Retail Business Holidays Act and the proposed amendments, the Thunder Bay and District Labour Council must inform this committee of its concerns.

Proposed amendments to the RBHA are too open. To allow municipal councils to make the decisions about shopping on Sundays would only create confusion. Travelling across Ontario, shoppers would encounter communities with Sunday shopping and communities without Sunday shopping. There is no need to allow such confusion to begin when it can be prevented. Now is the time, by not allowing the municipalities of Ontario to decide. This committee must preserve Ontario's common pause day.

Drugstores: Currently, drug marts in Thunder Bay are open until midnight from Monday to Saturday, and on Sundays until 10 pm. The Thunder Bay and District Labour Council finds it necessary to suggest that these businesses be closed on Sunday. This would eliminate many problems and much confusion regarding the RHBA: (1) the need for a definition of a principal business; (2) legislation regarding those drugstores which would qualify for Sunday shopping, for example, square footage; (3) a formula or restrictions as to the number of employees allowed on the job on Sundays.

The employees' hours of work currently done on Sundays would be rescheduled to improve the level of service provided to the shoppers during the other business days.

Most of the prescriptions currently filled on Sundays could wait until Monday. After all, patients treated in hospital emergency departments and given prescriptions are dispensed dosages of the necessary medications. Prescriptions needing to be filled on Sunday should be available from the hospital pharmacy.

A review of prescriptions purchased by myself revealed dispensing fees of $9.99, February 1; $10.49, July 15; and $13.95, July 15. Total expenses for those purchases were $12.99, $13.49 and $37.63. Transfer payment shortfalls from the federal government have been estimated to cost Ontario approximately $1.6 billion in lost revenue in 1991-92. In addition, OHIP payments for out-of-country health services, primarily in the United States, cost $225 million in 1990-91. Being shareholders in Ontario, we must support Ontario, not private enterprise. Indirectly, the dispensing fees paid for prescriptions dispensed from a hospital pharmacy would be going to Ontario.

Tourist exemption: The legislation proposed leaves decisions to the municipalities. The Thunder Bay and District Labour Council again stresses that the province must decide, not municipalities.

Even with the high level of vacancies in Thunder Bay's current malls, there are plans for a Superstore, expansion of the McIntyre Mall and a new Sears store, with the current Sears store being renovated to make room for up to 70 more stores. Shoppers want the quality and the quantity of services improved. Retailers must be made to recognize the value of these services to the shoppers.

One third of Ontario's total workforce is employed in the retail sector. Sunday shopping would only place a demand on other services: public transportation, snow removal, police, warehouse staff, delivery persons, etc. Increased services equal higher taxes. Thunder Bay does not need that.

Say no to Sunday shopping. Thank you for this opportunity.

The Acting Chair: Thank you. I have allowed about seven minutes for each caucus.

Mr Sorbara: I am a little confused, to tell you the truth. The second to last paragraph of your submission states very clearly that Sunday shopping would only place a demand on other services, that is, public transportation, snow removal, police, warehouse staff, delivery persons. Yet your brothers in the NDP suggest that is not the case. They say that Sunday shopping will not increase employment at all.

When I read "public transportation," that means to me bus drivers having an opportunity to work and sometimes working overtime at double time or triple time. When I read "snow removal," that means to me CUPE workers getting an opportunity to clean the streets on Sunday. I do not know why you would suggest that in the absence of Sunday shopping they would not clean the streets. Police forces as well; there might be more time for police forces. Warehouse staff: Surely you are right there, that there would be some increased employment in warehouses, because sometimes the warehouse is open if the stores are open. With delivery persons, you might not be right on the money, because the delivery person, if he works in retail, would have an absolute right to refuse.

Do you see some increase in employment in these other sectors, bus drivers, plow operators, police officers, warehouse staff, if stores are allowed to open on Sunday?

Mr Powers: In terms of public transportation, Thunder Bay transit is not a profit-making enterprise.

Mr Sorbara: I am talking about jobs for people.

Mr Powers: There is no issue of jobs here. What would have to be done is that our city council, together with the transit department, would have to decide which routes to cancel or reschedule the hours and the pickup times so they would be at peak pickup times during the Sunday shopping, which varied in the past; some 10 to 4, some noon till 5. The snow removal --

Mr Sorbara: It is going to be done anyway.

Mr Powers: Right, the city department does it anyway. But for snow removal there is a private contractor who has the contract with the mall manager to remove it. He has to do it quicker.

Mr Sorbara: So that would be better for the workers who are working for the private contractor, in terms of employment opportunity?

Mr Powers: No. They would have to look at all the places they have contracts with. Obviously, if there were Sunday shopping the malls would have to receive priority during their hours of opening. The other businesses would be put on the back burner. Once the major malls were done, those businesses not opening till Monday morning could be plowed later.

Mr Sorbara: I have one other major problem, and that is your submission that rather than opening on Sunday you should expand the hours during the week. You were complaining that Intercity Mall closes at 6. You could have better service during the week, longer hours during the week, is that right?

Mr Powers: The longer hours refers to the Intercity on Saturday evening, but it refers basically to those merchants who are out there operating on a standard Monday to Friday, 9 to 5, hours of operation.

Mr Sorbara: So give us 9 till 9 at night, you are saying?

Mr Powers: Expand those hours. Open those businesses on Saturdays first before we even look at Sundays.

1040

Mr Sorbara: That is another one of my problems. Your friends on the other side of the room keep harping upon the fact that we have to be concerned about quality of life and family time and all of that. Well, I have six kids, and I do not mind if I have to go out to work on Sunday afternoon now and again. I see my kids in the morning, and that is not a terrible inconvenience. But if I have to work every night until 9 o'clock, that really hurts my family time. Most malls in Metropolitan Toronto, I should tell you, are open till 9:30 at night. While these guys are saying that you are hurting family life if the mall is open from 1 till 6 on Sunday, they forget that retail workers are also fathers and mothers during the week, and if they are not home for dinner, that is really hard on family life.

I cannot understand why you are arguing for greater hours if you are really supporting the notion that we should be concerned primarily about maintaining the high quality of family life. If you are consistent, should we not be getting all the stores closed down by about 4:30 or 5 o'clock so that father and mother can get home to be there at dinner with their kids?

Mr Powers: But if we close the stores down at 4:30 or 5 o'clock, where does that person who does have that perfect job of Monday to Friday, 9 to 5 or 8:30 to 4:30, go to do his business? Only on Saturday.

Mr Sorbara: My friend, I suggest that is the very reason 75% of the people are asking us to open the stores on Sunday, because that is the only time they and their children can go to the store and spend a little time together and get what they need at Canadian Tire or at Sears or whatever.

Mr Powers: Canadian Tire is open till 9:30 six evenings a week here.

Mr Carr: Thank you very much for your presentation. One of the questions I have relates to some of the other workers. Your concern is obviously paramount for the workers. But as you know, there are people who are in the restaurant business, the movie industry and so on. Would you like to see us go back to shutting them down? If not, what do you say to those people who are asking why the retail workers are different from the restaurant workers or the movie theatre workers or whatever? Is it just the case that they are unionized and the others are not? What do you say to those people?

Mr Powers: The workers in the theatres locally are unionized. If you want it taken on a provincial basis, I could not tell you how many of them are, but there must be a large majority. To close a theatre on Sunday -- that is family time, because I get to take my children, he gets to take his grandchildren. That is family time together. Right now 101 Dalmatians is playing and I think Sleeping Beauty is the other, so on Sunday afternoon you get to go to that. It being summertime, we are lucky enough to have that also run on the early show at 7 pm; the 9 o'clock show is an adult film. You get to take the children out then if you unfortunately have to be on the job or doing your running around on Saturday.

Mr Carr: The other question relates to the whole issue of cross-border shopping. The government side had said it is not part of the same issue. It was interesting. Last week one of the retailers that came in here said: "We can compete with the selling of our shirts. What we cannot compete with is people going across the border for three things: cheap gasoline, booze and cigarettes," all of which taxes were increased in the last provincial budget. So the big three items that people are going across for were substantially increased in the last provincial budget. They go across for those three items, and sometimes is it a matter of convenience. You do not see in any of the border communities, where you can drive to the United States on a daily basis, that in fact it does have to do with convenience, that I wake up Sunday morning and say: "Let's take the kids for a drive. Our stores are not open so we'll go to the States"? You do not see that happening?

Mr Powers: If they choose to do that on a Sunday, that is their form of recreation. To get to the border from Thunder Bay you are looking at 40 or 45 miles, so it is not a real border community. However, if you look at a map, there is nothing between us and the border, so we are a border community. The purchases made cross-border can be done, and if you look at a survey or chart as to purchases, you will see that shoppers are going now throughout the week, because there were peaks on the weekends and where you encountered the problem was returning into Canada at the border and the long lineups. So people, in planning, have even taken stats or vacation days during the week and done that type of cross-border shopping.

Mr Carr: The point I was trying to get at is that people throw out the statistics on the cross-border shopping forgetting that during that period we were increasing taxes significantly. That probably had more of an influence on it than some of the other factors. It is interesting to sit on the committee and see how people use statistics and pick out certain things -- not yourself, of course, but the government side -- to justify their position.

The final question I have got is about the protection of workers. As the legislation stands now, there are provisions in there basically, as the government has said, so that somebody who does not want to work on Sunday does not have to. If in fact -- and we have had debate here today -- communities do open up, do you think there is enough protection for the workers so that if, for example, some of your workers do not work, for either family time or religious reasons, do you think they can do that, or will the companies be able to force them to work if the legislation remains unchanged?

Mr Powers: The legislation, as it stands, is too open and confusing. I believe it reads that I may give my employer up to 48 hours' notice. If I have the seniority and, all of a sudden, discover that I have an event which is happening this weekend, I meet that 48-hour requirement, though that is not very much notice for the co-worker who is going to have to do those hours of work; whereas if I happen to fall down a set of stairs and end up in a hospital and somebody has to cover my sick time, that is much fairer. Although once again it is an act of God, the notice of 48 hours will squash all the plans of that other worker.

Mr Carr: Also, with regard to the tourism criteria, they are so broad that any municipality in the province could classify under them. I think it was made that way so that it will be up to the municipalities. Would you like to see the tourism criteria tightened up a little bit and made tougher so that the municipalities cannot, as they do now, say, "We want to stay open and we'll use these tourism criteria as our out"?

Mr Powers: Tourism needs to be defined in a provincial policy from the border of Manitoba to the Quebec border, so that the standards are the same. We cannot allow the city councils across Ontario to decide, because one city council will set the standards today, an election will happen in November and there will be amendments to those standards. Those standards will change. There will only be confusion.

Mr Carr: One of the things people see happening is a snowball effect. We will have municipalities that will open because they will say, "Our next-door neighbours are, and if they are open, business will go over there." If the legislation is not amended, is that what you see happening, the snowball effect that you will be open because Thunder Bay will say, "We have to be open because our neighbours are," and they will in turn say they have to be open and so on? Is that what you see happening if the legislation remains the same?

Mr Powers: The problem with the legislation is that before we compare municipalities, let's look at the stores inside a mall. You can walk in a mall on a Sunday and not all of the merchants are open. So why do they open the doors to the mall if you cannot go in and make a purchase at all of those stores? If the municipality is going to open certain businesses on Sunday, as you say or suggest, it could create competition or steal business from the next community, causing it to say, "We had better open." Then it would be a matter of the number of hours they are open on Sundays. You would have a contest to see who could stay open the longest on Sundays, who would open the earliest and who could stay open the latest.

Mr Fletcher: I have just a couple of things. We hear a lot about the opposition members saying there should be a choice. Do you agree that workers should have the choice to say no to Sunday working?

Mr Powers: When we look at Sunday work, though, I have to look at my own employment. Unfortunately, if I look at what a member of the United Food and Commercial Workers or somebody in one of the stores is entitled to, I have been cheated. I am entitled to back time. I say that because I, in my job as a hospital orderly, am the essential service. I am employed and work two out of three weekends. I have a hell of a lot of back time coming to me.

1050

Mr Fletcher: Yes, but you do not have the choice, and that is what I am saying.

Mr Powers: Let's talk equity. Never mind choice. If one guy is going to get it, everybody is going to get it.

Mr Fletcher: Right, and should workers have the choice to say yes or no? That is all I said. I am not talking retail or anything else; I am saying workers.

Mr Powers: But when we talk about choices, we have to look at essential services. Is a supermarket essential? A hospital is.

Mr Fletcher: That is a very good point. You also brought up the point about bus drivers, municipal workers and everything else. I just want to say something. I know Mr Sorbara was saying it would not cost that much, but in the city of Mississauga they reported that it cost them about $700,000 per year for more services to satisfy Sunday openings. That is a figure that is based on about 1988 dollars, so we are looking at substantially more. Where is that money coming from?

Mr Powers: When you refer to snow removal, it comes from the city taxes. Let's look at the senior citizens. The retirees are trying to hang on to their home, their nest egg, and they are losing it if you increase that. The bus fare rates recently went up in town. The rates would go up again even sooner.

Mr Fletcher: In other words, the cost is going to come from the taxpayer and the people who use the services, mostly from the taxpayer.

Mr Powers: But when it comes to the taxpayer, everybody pays, not only those who would be using the bus on Sunday.

Mr Fletcher: I know. That is right. Even people who do not agree with Sunday work and Sunday shopping would be paying for the services also. Their taxes go up.

Mr Powers: That is right. I would receive that bill. Even though I sit here today opposed to Sunday shopping, I would have to pay my share.

Mr Morrow: Welcome, brother. I thank you for taking the time to come down and talk to us.

Mr Carr talked briefly about how stats can be very misleading. We all know that 57% of people in Ontario want to shop on Sunday, but the other side of that poll states that 70% of people do not want to work on Sunday. I also understand that Thunder Bay is having a plebiscite on Sunday shopping. Do you think one question on that plebiscite should be, "Do you want to work on Sunday?"

Mr Powers: If we are going to talk about a plebiscite with the municipal election, it is only fair to the citizens and taxpayers of Ontario that it be a provincial standard question or questions. The questions per municipality will vary. They will not be the same. Those questions will be misinterpreted, misunderstood by the voters and therefore not be a true and honest survey. If it was a standard question in all of the municipal elections which could include both the Sunday shopping and the Sunday working, then we might have some fairness -- might.

Mr Morrow: I could not agree with you more. I would ask for you to qualify your comments on the relationship between Sunday shopping and cross-border shopping. Could you possibly do that for me?

Mr Powers: Sunday shopping is an option. It was an option in the past, but I should say, not all merchants under one roof opened. Cross-border shopping is where we go south of the 49th. That is a totally different issue. It is my own personal feeling that with the recent action as to the provincial sales tax and the collection of it at the border, if one sits down and looks at the sales between now and December 31, 1991, those cross-border figures will even increase, trying to beat the taxes which will come into effect in 1992.

Mr Morrow: Just for a point of clarification for myself, in the city of Thunder Bay how many actual workers does the labour council represent?

Mr Powers: More than 15,000.

Mr Morrow: That is quite a few.

The Acting Chair: On behalf of the committee, Mr Powers, I thank you for taking time out and giving your presentation this morning.

Mr Powers: You are welcome.

NORTH OF SUPERIOR TOURISM ASSOCIATION

The Acting Chair: I would like to now call upon the North of Superior Tourism Association, Mr John Beals. Thank you for being here this morning. You will be given a half-hour to give a presentation. You can either use the full half-hour for your presentation or you can give a shorter brief and then allow time for questions and comments from each of the caucuses. Could you please identify yourself and then proceed.

Mr Beals: My name is John Beals. I am the president of the North of Superior Tourism Association, which is one of the Ontario travel association programs in Ontario. I would like to state that the opinions I am giving today are not necessarily representative of each and every one of our members, but they are going to be my own feelings, both as the president of the tourism association here and also as a small business person who owns a restaurant in Thunder Bay that employs some 50 persons and a hotel in Thunder Bay that has just been renovated under loans through the Northern Ontario Development Corp and the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation and that will be employing somewhere in the neighbourhood of 100 people and also as the past owner of two fast food service restaurants in Thunder Bay, both of them in shopping centres.

I guess, in theory, a common day of pause is correct. In years gone by, when the family unit was what it was, people spent more time with their family, spent more time doing things on that day of pause. As we got into the age after the war, more and more people got into industry, which required products being produced on a continuous basis right through that common day of pause or Sunday and, for some reason, that common day of pause for everybody started to break down.

We are a community of paper mills, manufacturing, transportation, substantially a community of well-organized labour. Most of these large companies work shift work of 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and those families that have employees working those shifts do not have a common day of pause. It is perhaps wrong, but that is the way life is.

As a small business person having restaurants in shopping centres, I was very much against opening on Sundays. I was against it for a particular reason, and that was because I had to be part of that. I had to open my restaurant because the shopping centre was open. The restaurant really did not make any profit during that period of time, but it employed people. It employed schoolkids, high school students and university students, people to whom I could not give 28 hours a week or employ six days a week. They were very happy to work. They were very happy to supplement their family income by working those five hours on Sunday.

When the first few weeks and months started, I boycotted shopping on Sunday, but that is my day of pause, and I started to enjoy being able to walk through what I think everybody terms a community centre, a shopping centre, to be able to do my shopping during that period of time.

1100

Then I put my hat on as a tourism representative, and tourism is a faltering industry in Ontario. Our numbers are down and we have to find ways of bringing people to this province or keeping the dollars within the province. It frightens me when I hear a politician, the Attorney General, state that it does not matter what goes on at these meetings, that the common day of pause is not going to change, and it frightens me that somebody is going to define what a tourist is. You know what a tourist is? He is not a tire-kicker. He is not a gawker who walks around taking a look at the scenery. He is not somebody foreign to us who has come in from the United States. He is not somebody who has come in from Quebec or Manitoba to spend money in Ontario. I was just out at the Murillo fall fair yesterday, and the government of Ontario is spending $2 million to promote fairs and the enthusiasm of Ontario people staying in Ontario to spend their dollars in Ontario.

I put my hat on as a new hotelier in town, and my market is not Duluth, is not south of the border, is not Manitoba; my market is here in Thunder Bay. I am just outside of the city a little bit, but I am creating a retreat-seminar hotel, a getaway for people in Thunder Bay so that they can have their romantic holiday right within the city limits of Thunder Bay, not having to go and spend their money down across the border. Do I not have the privilege to call them tourists? They are spending money in Ontario. They are spending money on my property. They are creating employment. Without those people, we do not have a business.

Once that is successful and you see the amount of people coming to the hotel, people beget people; business begets business, and if you do not have anybody coming to your hotel, the parking lot is empty and nobody is going to come there because they do not like to be alone. Similarly, in a shopping centre, if the shopping centre is busy, people want to go to that shopping centre because they see other people. They want to intermingle. They will spend the dollars. They will create the employment, and we have to create our own employment. We cannot wait for somebody else to create it.

You, as politicians, want taxes. You have to create some jobs to collect the taxes. You have to allow private enterprise and private business to create jobs so that people can make money and pay taxes so that we can afford the social benefits we enjoy in Ontario.

I think it is important for people to have a quality of life that allows them to do and enjoy the things they want to do and enjoy, and things have to be equal. If everybody took a common day of pause and relaxed and enjoyed themselves on that common day of pause, I am sure we would have a fine place to live, and we would probably look inwardly at ourselves and enjoy and respect the other person, but in the reality, it is not that way.

All people work, and they want to work. They want to earn money. You cannot say to people working in the grain elevators: "You're allowed to work on Sunday. You're allowed to work on Sunday at Abitibi" -- if Abitibi stays open long enough for people to be working there -- "and at Canadian Forest Products you are allowed to work on Sunday. But your kid can't work in a shopping centre on Sunday because he's got a common day of pause" -- not with his father, who is working at Great Lakes but with his buddies someplace else. Is that a common day of pause? I do not think so.

It is a difficult thing to wrestle with with you people, but I think we have to have money generated in this province, and the more roadblocks we put up to generating that money, the more the consequences are going to be substantial.

This is a little off subject here. We see that Ontario Hydro is the largest producer of energy in Ontario, and because of gasoline prices and oil prices -- CP Rail has bought a railway between a place just south of Estevan and it goes all the way to Detroit, and then they have a link from Detroit to Windsor, and they are shipping all of the coal from Saskatchewan and Alberta through the US for Ontario Hydro -- to save what? To save us costs, at the expense of jobs of the railway, of the shipping people, of maintenance people? It does not make sense, and here we are arguing about whether we are going to have Sunday shopping and a common day of pause. My God, the way we are going, everybody is going to have a whole bunch of common days of pause.

I do ask you to think about the economics of it, and the economics of Ontario, and what we should be doing with that to encourage people to work, not encourage people to stay at home. Let's not put up roadblocks and excuses for people not to work and for government to have to pay them not to work. Let's find ways to employ them, and hopefully that thing we are lacking of enthusiasm within this province for wanting to work and wanting to produce and wanting to be self-sustaining -- nobody likes to be on the dole. Nobody likes to have to go to the government and ask for money. So let's find ways of keeping those people employed: university kids, families who need that second income.

The Acting Chair: Thank you. We have about five minutes for each caucus.

Mr Sorbara: Let me begin by saying that I think your presentation was well thought out and reflects very much what we have been hearing from employers and tourist associations and chambers of commerce and business organizations and both, as my colleague Mr Poirier points out, small and large businesses.

The government is trying to pretend that if we were to give people the freedom to choose what they wanted to do on Sunday, whether as consumers or employers or workers, it would not increase employment in the retail sector hardly at all. I want to ask you about your own experience. During the period when you were open on Sundays, did your payroll costs go up?

Mr Beals: Did my payroll costs go up in proportion to --

Mr Sorbara: Were you paying more?

Mr Beals: We were not paying double time or time and a half or anything like that.

Mr Sorbara: No, I am talking about overall. Let's say you paid $10,000 a week in wages and benefits and the like.

Mr Beals: Proportionately, no, they did not go up.

Mr Sorbara: So there was no more money earned.

Mr Beals: Oh, I say proportionately of income.

Mr Sorbara: Did more people work for you?

Mr Beals: No, but more people got more hours.

1110

Mr Sorbara: More people got more hours, so more was being paid out.

Mr Beals: My students in those places would work anywhere from 8 to 10 to 15 hours a week. Now they are able to work 10 to 15 to 18 hours a week. It gives them a little bit more.

Mr Sorbara: So overall it costs you more in salaries and wages?

Mr Beals: Yes, but proportionately to income it does not.

Mr Sorbara: Did you have any difficulty finding people who were anxious or willing to work on Sunday?

Mr Beals: No, not at all.

Mr Sorbara: Did you force anybody to work on Sunday against his will?

Mr Beals: I never force anybody to work. If they do not want to work, they will not work. No, they quite willingly wanted the extra hours.

Mr Sorbara: Now grant that all of us, if we could create a perfect world, would have a day when we could all stop what we were doing and have some sort of day together, although to tell you the truth, on my common pause day I would not mind going to a baseball game and people have to work to make sure that that happens, and I do not mind travelling and people have to maintain gas stations and the like for that to happen, and police have to police the highway. But grant that it would be nice if all of the stores would close down and then there would not be any competitive pressure. Is it realistic to choose between what is a business that is a tourist business and what is not?

In other words, in your fast-food stores, do you make a distinction when someone comes up to buy, I do not know, a felafel or a hamburger whether or not they are tourists or not tourists? Do you ask them? Do you say: "Look, we're just catering to tourists, and I have seen you around Thunder Bay a lot. You're not a tourist. I don't want your business." Do you differentiate in your business like that?

Mr Beals: No. I tried to explain a little bit earlier. A tourist is a person who wants to spend money in the hospitality industry or the service industry or whatever it is. If a person from Thunder Bay wants to spend money on Sunday, he can go down to Duluth and spend money. What good is that money being spent down in Duluth? What good does it do Thunder Bay? Give them the opportunity to spend the dollars in Thunder Bay.

Mr Sorbara: You said in your opening statement that originally you had been opposed to the notion that you might have to open your businesses on Sunday and you were, to quote you, "boycotting" Sunday shopping. Now you seem to have changed your mind, and if I understand the thrust of your submission, you would prefer if the provincial government just let individual businesses choose whether or not they would open on Sunday. Is that correct?

Mr Beals: I think that it should be up to the individual. It should be up to whoever is operating that business.

Mr Sorbara: The NDP has suggested that it is really trying to protect the small store owner by requiring most businesses to stay closed on Sunday. What is the mood among the business people you associate with, your colleagues the small retailers? Do they feel like they really want that protection given to them under this bill, or would they prefer to compete or not compete on Sunday, depending on what the market was like?

Mr Beals: I do not believe that anybody is forcing anybody to stay open on Sunday. In the two shopping centres that I was in, it was up to each individual store owner to open if he wanted to.

The government -- and I am not saying the NDP government or the Liberal or Conservative government or anybody -- feels as though it is the protector of the small person and the public, that large corporations can look after themselves and can fight and the small person is the one who has to be protected. But you know, when I hear the large unions standing up as soon as Sunday shopping was shut down and saying: "We won. We are the protectors of the small people who don't have a voice; we've given them the common day of pause that they need," I am saying: "You guys are out to lunch. All of you large union people are working seven days a week. You're not doing what you're saying you are doing for the small people. You can afford it because you're making $17 and $18 an hour." Saying to the young students that are making $5 and $6 an hour, "You've got to have the common day of pause," does not make sense.

Mr Carr: In the testimony of one of the small retailers who came in, she was saying that her feelings are that if she forces people to work Sunday and people come into the shop and see a surly clerk who is there against his or her will, it actually hurts them. She feels the same way. She does not try to force anybody to work, because ultimately it hurts herself by having somebody who does not want to be there, for whatever reason, because he or she had something else planned or what not. Is it your feeling as well that if you attempt to make people work on Sunday in the service industry, then it will ultimately hurt you?

Mr Beals: I have seen some surly clerks who do not work on Sundays. It is an attitude. My restaurant and bar, I refuse to open till 1 o'clock on a Sunday night. Somebody said somewhere along the line that you do not need to serve food on Sunday; you just have to have it available. You can drink now until 1 o'clock; you can work till 1 o'clock in a bar on Sunday. Where is the common pause day in my bar? I train all of my staff to be willingly nice to people.

Mr Carr: It was interesting when we talked about the last Solicitor General in these Sunday shopping hearings. Mike Farnan went around and said that giving the municipal option was the chicken way out. He brought a little chicken around with him to mock the Solicitor General of the day, Joan Smith. What he did in his day with the introduction of this bill is give the municipalities the same option.

One of the feelings out there is that what will happen is, we may have a patchwork; that one municipality will be open because it will have had a plebiscite that people want it or that they feel they are a tourist area. What would happen in your estimation, for example, to your businesses if a neighbouring municipality were to open? Would you see your businesses suffering as a result if somebody else had the Sunday option?

Mr Beals: We really do not have any neighbours; we are in northern Ontario.

The reeves and the mayors and the city council, they are ward heelers, and I guess all politicians are ward heelers. They have to look after their constituents and try and read what in the heck they really want and then say, "This is what my attitude is, and this is what the public want." I do not see where it is really anybody's business. I do not see that it is the municipality's business or the Ontario government's business whether we stay open. Once you allow one type of business to be open on Sunday, it behooves you to allow every type of business to be open on Sunday.

Mr Carr: I think what politicians do is, they have their idea of what they want to see done, and what happens is that they have 15 people come in and they will pick out the one who happens to agree with them and say, "Aha, see? Everybody agrees with me." That is what politicians and governments do, and I think that is what we are seeing with this legislation. What is your best guess in your area? Do you feel that as a result of the tourist exemption and the public pressure it will be enough that they will take the tourist exemption and open up, and do you see, when the legislation is in, being open in your area? Your best guess.

Mr Beals: My best guess is that it is going to stay exactly the way it is. It is nice to sit around and talk about it, but it is not going to change. We are not going to go back to where we were 10 months ago. The decision is already made. All we are trying to do is convince people that we have looked at it once again.

1120

Mr Carr: Mr Mills says he is listening, so it will be interesting to see if there are any changes.

The Acting Chair: I would like to remind you that you have five minutes.

Mr Morrow: Thank you for coming, sir. I really appreciate that. I just have a few questions.

First of all, I would like to know if you exercised your option under the Retail Business Holidays Act that came into effect January 1, 1976.

Mr Beals: Did I exercise my option?

Mr Morrow: Under that act.

Mr Beals: Would you explain what my option was? I am not quite sure what it was.

Mr Morrow: You did have options under that act to open or not. Right?

Mr Beals: It is pretty difficult for me to open a restaurant in a locked mall and to have anybody in it.

Mr Morrow: Does it make sense that we, as the government of Ontario, know what every local council is doing or thinking?

Mr Beals: No, I do not think you are able to and I do not think it is necessary for you to.

Mr Morrow: Do you agree then with the tourism criteria being set up by the province to help local councils?

Mr Beals: The tourism criteria. Do you mean they are going to redefine what a tourist is?

Mr Morrow: That is part of the amendments.

Mr Beals: The Ministry of Tourism and Recreation has worked very hard over the years to keep as broad a definition of a tourist as there can be so that we can move ahead and bring in as many people as we can and call them tourists. Are we now going to shrink that up so that it works to somebody's benefit, to close stuff up?

Mr Morrow: Should workers have the right to refuse to work on Sundays?

Mr Beals: They should have the right to not work any day if they so desire. If they do not want to work on Saturday or Friday, stay at home.

Mr Fletcher: Just on that point, most of us here agree that there should be some protection for workers to have the right to refuse to work on a Sunday if possible. All through this tour so far I have been hearing that retailers should also have the same right to either open or not open. I am flexible. I can understand where they are coming from because I know where I am coming from also.

I have a letter from Joy Haywood, who is part of Magic Cuts here in Thunder Bay. She said that they signed agreements with large malls before this stuff was starting up, the Sunday shopping, and it states that they are obligated to remain open when the department stores are open. So in reality they would not have a choice if they have signed that agreement. They would not have the choice to close up on Sunday if they wanted to close if the department store was open.

Should our legislation take into account that even they should have that right to say no and they should be able to get out of that agreement?

Mr Beals: I have a similar agreement in my lease. Back 20 years ago, when I signed them there was no thought of being open on Sundays. We had to be open the hours the mall was open, whether it was 9:30 in the morning or 10 o'clock in the morning. When the mall opened, the store had to open, and that is really what the idea was.

In both of the shopping centres my restaurants were in, it was up to the individual store owner. The landlord used no pressure or asking whether we would stay open or not. It was up to the individual and it was up to my staff whether they wanted to work.

Mr Fletcher: Okay, but if they really wanted to push it with the agreement you signed you would not have a choice. You would have to open when they opened. Even if you did not want to open on a Sunday you would have to open, according to the agreement, if they took it to the extent of the law, which they could.

Mr Beals: I do not know.

Mr Fletcher: It would be a good one to fight, would it not?

Mr Beals: Why fight? The reality is that it makes good economic sense. It creates employment.

Mr Fletcher: I know, but if you did not want to because you did not have that, you would still be obligated to open, according to that agreement.

Mr Beals: But there is a whole bunch of what-ifs out there too.

What if we did not have Sunday? What happened if we decided that our common day of pause was going to be Wednesdays?

Mr Fletcher: You would still have to open your store if that mall said you were going to open.

Mr Beals: At one point or another, retailers used to close on Wednesday afternoons because they worked on Saturdays. Remember that, or are you not old enough?

Mr Fletcher: Whether it is Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, what have you, according to the agreement signed with the mall you would have to open whether you wanted to or not.

Mr Beals: I do not know. I did not have to. Nobody held a gun to me. Nobody holds a gun to my head to stay in business. Maybe the government does because it needs its taxes, but nobody forces anybody to do anything against his will in Ontario. That is the way it is. We have the freedom to do things that we want to do. You have to maintain that. You cannot keep taking things away from individuals and expect them to want to continue to be progressive. That is no pun.

Mr Fletcher: It is a contradiction in terms when you talk about Progressive Conservative.

Mr Mills: We have a clarification about leases in malls. I am going to call on Paul Ceyssens, who is the legal representative from the Solicitor General's office, to clarify that at this point.

Mr Ceyssens: I just wanted to raise one issue and that relates to Mr Fletcher's remark about the provisions of leases in shopping centres. It is a very brief point but I think it is worth raising at this point.

I would urge members of the committee to take a quick look at section 5a of the Retail Business Holidays Act in its present form. I believe it is in the present form in the material that was provided to the members of the committee.

Section 5a is a very brief section and I will read it out:

"A provision in a lease or other agreement that has the effect of requiring a retail business to remain open on a holiday is of no effect even if the lease or agreement was made before the coming into force of this section."

I just wanted to underline that one section of the RBHA, which makes it very clear that no matter what the lease says the parties cannot essentially contract out of the legislation. I would be happy to answer any questions if there are any arising from that.

Mr Jackson: I have a point of clarification because I raised this question in the two previous rounds of committee discussions on this subject.

We have heard deputations that in spite of the clause that counsel just read to us -- thank you -- at lease renewal time, when the lease is a function of your profit margins, when the malls take part of their rental income as a function of their sales, there is no protection in Ontario that the lease is not dropped, and that it is a matter of time.

So the short answer is, yes, the legislation will protect you during the lifetime of your lease, but you are not guaranteed rates of renewal that will allow you to maintain. A representative from Cadillac Fairview and a representative from the Sears Corp, in my cross-examinations a year and a half ago, said, "Well, there's nothing that says we can't do it."

I just wanted to suggest that although I am acknowledging its presence, it should be put in context as to the way it operates out there. There is no legislation that protects small landlords in malls other than through the life of their current lease. I just wanted to put that on the record.

The Acting Chair: Do you have a response for that?

Mr Ceyssens: I have a very brief response. Mr Jackson is correct.

The Acting Chair: On behalf of the committee, I thank you for coming here this morning and giving your presentation.

1130

ONTARIO'S SUNSET COUNTRY TRAVEL ASSOCIATION

The Acting Chair: I would like to now call upon Ontario's Sunset Country Travel Association. You will be given a half hour to give a presentation. You can use the full half-hour for your presentation or you can make a shorter submisssion and allow time for questions and answers from each of the caucuses. Could you please identify yourself and then proceed.

Mr Duggan: My name is Mark Duggan. I am the executive director of Sunset Country Travel Association, and I would like to thank you all for the opportunity to address you. I guess I am the start of the out-of-town contingent from outside of the Thunder Bay area.

I would first of all like to explain to the committee what Sunset Country Travel Association is. Sunset Country Travel Association was incorporated under the laws of the province of Ontario as a non-profit corporation, effective April 1, 1974. The objects, which I think are important and are really relevant to why we are here today, are as follows:

To encourage the effective operation and development of the tourism industry throughout the area, for the economic benefit of residents, communities and business enterprises and for the recreational enrichment of residents and tourist visitors.

The association shall be operated in a manner so as to achieve its objective through a planned program of tourist promotion activities, within and outside its area, and tourism development projects in concert with the programs of the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation.

The association shall co-ordinate the tourist promotion activities of individuals and organizations holding membership in the association and liaise with and co-operate with other organizations within and outside its area whose objects for tourism promotion and development are compatible with those of the association.

The association is representative of tourist interests and organizations from within its area.

In furthering its objects, the association will undertake advertising programs on behalf of the area, prepare publications to inform visitors of attractions, operate visitor information facilities, encourage any facilities, events and attractions for visitors, sponsor meetings, seminars, tourism and otherwise further the promotion and the development of tourism throughout its area.

Sunset Country Travel Association's motto is to develop, promote, advertise through co-ordination, co-operation and communication with clients and organizations for the betterment of tourism in Sunset Country and in Ontario.

Why are we here today? It is these objects and motto that bring our association to Thunder Bay today to make this presentation to the standing committee on administration of justice.

For your information, the boundaries of Sunset Country Travel Association are as follows: on the west, the Manitoba-Ontario border; on the south, the Canadian-US border; to the east, English River, including Atikokan and Pickle Lake, and to the north, all the way to Hudson Bay. This would represent some 60,000 square miles.

We have a relationship with Tourism Ontario. Sunset Country Travel Association is a member of Tourism Ontario, as are the other 11 travel associations. We understand that Tourism Ontario has made a presentation to you in Toronto and I would like to highlight that brief, which is supported not just by Sunset Country Travel Association but by more than 7,000 member businesses who are in the commercial lodging, food service, hospitality, recreation, travel and transportation services that are available in the province.

I am most pleased that the standing committee has moved outside of Toronto for its hearings so that we can be present. As I said earlier, co-operation, co-ordination and communication are the three Cs that Sunset Country Travel Association lives by in our motto. I would ask this committee to remember what the three Cs stand for when the final legislation is passed on Bill 115, and how it relates to the people of Ontario and the millions of visitors who come to Ontario.

Attached is our list of directors of Sunset Country Travel Association. There are 18. You will see that they come from a variety of towns throughout northwestern Ontario, and also at the very bottom is my name and address and information.

I would like to talk now about the social and economic importance of Ontario tourism and the hospitality industry. The social and economic importance of the Ontario tourism and hospitality industry is very substantial indeed. It is the province's largest private sector employer, accounting for 160,000 person-years of employment in 1989 on a direct basis. It is responsible for the creation of a further 251,000 person-years of indirect and induced employment in 1989. It is responsible for the creation of 32 full-time jobs for every $1 million in tourism expenditures. It is Ontario's largest employer of women, youth, indigenous people and visible minorities, including thousands of permanent and upwardly mobile positions for full-time professional service staff and college and university-educated persons.

It is the province's third-largest industry, generating 1990 direct expenditures of $15.5 billion, estimated total income of $22.5 billion and an estimated total sales of $36.9 billion. It is one of the nation's largest generators of personal income and corporate, property, business and sales tax to all levels of government, including $1.85 billion to the province of Ontario, $2.5 billion to the federal government and $300 million to the municipal governments in 1989 alone.

It is the province's fourth-largest export industry and a substantial contributor of foreign exchange earnings, which generated an estimated $3.06 billion in 1989 from American and other foreign visitors. It is the gateway to Canada for a large percentage of foreign visitors, including 66.8% of all US visitors and 55.1% of all person-trips by overseas visitors to Canada in 1990.

It is the economic mainstay in the areas of the province wherein economic alternatives are few, are in a steep decline or are non-existent. It is the province's largest commercial consumer of Ontario-produced agricultural products. It is a sustainable, environmentally clean and renewable resource in an era of major public concern about the conservation, preservation and cleanup of our environment. It is the largest industry in the service sector, which now accounts for 70% of all new jobs.

Sunset Country Travel Association supports the Tourism Ontario Inc position. Like Tourism Ontario, Sunset Country Travel Association believes that in a free and democratic society, the public should have the unrestricted right and the freedom to choose whether and where they wish to shop any day of the week, at any time of the year. Thus, retail shopping should be permitted throughout Ontario where and when retail business establishments perceive the need to provide it. Similarly, Ontarians should have the unrestricted right to work, earn incomes and profit from the production and sale of goods and the provision of services any day of the week.

Retail shopping is an integral part of the tourism experience and represents a significant portion of the value of the tourism expenditures in Ontario. Most retail shopping, dining out, touring, sightseeing and recreation take place on weekends. Clearly the majority of Ontarians and visitors to Ontario favour unrestricted retail shopping on Sundays and holidays as part of a family activity.

Sunset Country Travel Association agrees with Tourism Ontario that unless and until the government of Ontario is prepared to recognize these fundamental rights, freedoms and marketplace realities by abolishing the Retail Business Holidays Act, Ontario is destined to continue to lose billions of dollars' worth of annual tourism and retail sales to bordering American jurisdictions which are wide open for retail businesses on Sunday and holidays.

Further, whereas we see some merit in Bill 115, the Retail Business Establishments Statute Law Amendment Act, 1991, and commend the Ontario government for endeavouring to recognize the value and importance of tourism in this legislation, in the end analysis we fear that it will result in costly, time-consuming administration burdens and litigation as municipalities, retail business establishments and organizations endeavour to interpret, comply with and apply the proposed provincial tourism criteria.

Regrettably, inconsistencies, confusion and conflicts outlined in the proposed amendments to the Retail Business Holidays Act and pursuant regulations may not result in the desired positive interface and co-operation between the public and private sectors to realize and capitalize on the tremendous economic and social benefits of retail shopping as an integral part of tourism throughout Ontario.

1140

We therefore respectfully request that members of the standing committee on administration of justice seriously consider the following changes which should be made to the proposed RBHA amendments and regulations in this regard:

1. Tourism area characteristics: The list of characteristics for a qualifying geographic area should be expanded to include the following tourism criteria: tourism in the area has historically been an important part of the local economy; provides goods or services necessary to tourist activities in the area.

2. Retail business restrictions: This whole section is redundant and blatantly discriminatory and should be removed from the proposed legislation. The number of persons serving the public and the floor space occupied by a qualifying retail business establishment should have no bearing on its ability to meet common tourist criteria.

3. Tourism season qualifier: These time periods will vary within a designated tourist area, as will the length of tourism season for various types of qualifying retail business establishments, for a wide variety of market-driven circumstances. Therefore, we recommend that this qualifier be removed from this section.

Tourism Ontario has stated its case to you and has taken the time to detail the concerns of its 7,000 members that belong to Tourism Ontario. The amendments are discussed in fine detail and have been presented to you relating to the Retail Business Holidays Act and the Employment Standards Act. I am going to highlight some of the points that Tourism Ontario made, starting off with a common pause day.

The concept of a common pause day in Ontario is outdated, unnatural and misplaced. In our contemporary society, tens of thousands of Ontarians must work at all hours of the day and night throughout the week in resource industries, in the processing, manufacturing, packaging and distribution of all manner of products and in the provision of a broad range of goods and services to our citizens and others. While some people rest, others conduct business and provide services.

The Ontario tourism and hospitality industry must provide value for dollar, quality products and experiences and good service on an uninterrupted basis to patrons and domestic and foreign markets seven days per week and 365 days per year, with some seasonal and geographic limitations. The market appeal of our industry is driven by the demand created for its products, experiences and services in an extremely competitive international market, and the supply of them by willing entrepreneurs, professional management and staff, and to a very substantial extent by various Ontario government ministries and agencies. We must provide these products, experiences and services to our patrons when they want them or risk losing them to other competing jurisdictions. Thus, the concept of a common pause day is totally alien to our industry and to many other segments and sectors in our economy.

Tourism is the direct supply of goods and services to facilitate business, pleasure and leisure activities away from the home environment. It covers a broad range of products and services, including transportation -- airline, auto, motor coach, rail and marine -- accommodation, food and beverage services, live and participatory entertainment -- festivals, events, culture and the arts, athletic competitions, business and social gatherings -- conventions, meetings, symposiums, amusement activities, such as leisure, recreational and educational, and to a significant extent retail shopping.

All manner of activities are encompassed by tourism, such as visiting friends and relatives, urban and country touring and sightseeing, soft wilderness and wilderness lodging, camping and leisure pursuits and historic and heritage sightseeing visitations.

The Ontario Ministry of Tourism and Recreation, with assistance and support from the private sector in tourism, has carefully segmented its substantial tourism marketing initiatives to create the greatest possible public awareness of and demand for the products, services and experiences offered by our industry in our target markets throughout the year.

Retail shopping is a major tourism activity in Ontario. In virtually all research which has been conducted of residents and foreign visitors travelling in Ontario, retail shopping constitutes one of the top three tourism-related activities. In 1988, for example, retail purchases represented $2.2 billion of all tourism expenditures in Ontario. Direct jobs in that year created by the retail sector amounted to the equivalent of 29,000 full-time jobs, or 14% of total direct employment in the tourism sector.

The total impact of tourism-related retail purchases in 1988 on tax revenues generated by the province was $366 million, $134 million for Ontario municipalities and $602 million for the federal government. The majority of all tourism-related activities, including retail shopping, takes place on weekends.

The provincial government actively promotes retail shopping and touring. The Ontario government, through the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation, invests a substantial portion of its multimillion-dollar annual tourism marketing budget in the active and aggressive promotion of retail shopping and touring in the province. Non-resident visitors are encouraged to shop and to stay in Ontario through a very productive program of provincial retail sales tax refunds for visitors to Ontario, which was established by the province in 1977.

The government must protect the tourism values. Both private and public sectors in Ontario tourism have made enormous investments in the planning, development and promotion of a broad and diverse range of tourism and hospitality products, services and experiences to service ever-changing contemporary consumer tastes and demands.

A good number of Ontario's tourism and hospitality enterprises are fully integrated retail business establishments which cater to the patrons' requirements by providing various retail services in addition to food service, lodging, entertainment, recreation and auto and/or boat fuelling, parking/storage and service facilities seven days a week. Said retail services include stores, shops and boutiques which supply all manner of sundries, groceries and outdoor provisions, clothing and travel services, vehicle and boat rentals, speciality gift shops, antiques, crafts and souvenirs. The provision of these retail services on Sundays and holidays represents upwards of 2% of the gross weekly sales for numerous tourism and hospitality enterprises, most of which are taxed by the province.

Key factors influencing tourism-related Sunday shopping: The extent to which tourism-related Sunday shopping is successful and attractive is dependent on three primary factors, those being (1) shipping convenience, (2) the variety of retail business establishments and (3) the variety of retail merchandise from which to choose. Service, quality, value and price are other important factors which influence buying decisions.

Our competition: Our largest market by far for non-resident visitors to Ontario is the United States -- 23.1 million person-visits in 1990 -- with the bordering states of Michigan, Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania and Minnesota accounting for the vast majority of said visitors. Conversely, all these states aggressively promote their tourism and hospitality products and services in Ontario. These states are non-blue-law states, with Sunday shopping acting as a magnet to lure Ontarians by the hundreds of thousands across the border every weekend to purchase all manner of retail merchandise.

We estimate that every Ontarian who visits the United States for 24 hours or less spends a minimum of $100 on retail purchases, fuel, meals and entertainment. According to Statistics Canada, between January and May 1991, 9.89 million Ontarians made same-day trips to the United States. Of these trips, 70% were on weekends and 40% took place on Sundays and holidays. Similar weekend percentages apply to another 2.2 million Ontarians who have travelled to the United States for one or more nights during the same period.

From a recent study of cross-border shopping in Kingston, Ontario, conducted by Ernst and Young, there is clear evidence that for every $1 which Canadians spend on cross-border shopping, they spend an equivalent amount on services such as food, fuel and entertainment.

1150

The government must adhere to its own legislation. The Ontario government and the municipal governments across the province are large employers of workers, both directly and indirectly, who must work on Sundays and holidays in retail businesses and retail business establishments which compete directly with the privately owned retail businesses and retail business establishments. Everything from gift shops in hospitals to numerous large and small attractions such as the Metropolitan Toronto Zoo, Ontario Place, the Ontario Science Centre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, Upper Canada Village, the Niagara Parks Commission, Science North, Old Fort William, provincial parks, conservation areas and municipally owned stadiums offer various forms of retail business services from concession stands and camping supplies to speciality boutiques and retail stores.

The crown, ie, the province of Ontario, is not bound by any provision in Bill 115 with respect to the crown-owned retail business establishments on Sundays or statutory holidays and can open then whenever it wishes. Municipalities can easily exempt their own retail business establishments under Bill 115. Surely this is no place for blatant hypocrisy and unfair competition in a province such as ours that prides itself on equality and rights and freedoms for all.

Legislated protection for retail workers: Governments of every level are constantly creating costly subsidized programs to train and employ our youth, to retrain and locate suitable employment for displaced workers and to provide entry-level employment opportunities for numerous inexperienced and unskilled persons. Most, if not all, of these persons are available to work, want to work and have the right to work wherever and whenever there is an opportunity to do so. Many of these people, and others, are or would be happy to work in retail businesses or retail business establishments on Sundays and holidays for personal or business experience or economic reasons.

We would reiterate that the Ontario tourism and hospitality industry must, with some seasonal business exceptions, provide an uninterrupted service to our many patrons, seven days a week, 365 days a year. Our employees willingly accept this fact as a precondition of employment in an industry which is totally dependent on good service, goodwill and professional hospitality.

Employees in our hospitality industry are treated with dignity and respect by employers whose businesses are so dependent on staff attitude. The vast majority of workers in Ontario, including retail business establishment employees, are protected under the Employment Standards Act. It is very costly for employers to hire and to train staff in our industry, and most others, and it is in their best economic interest to operate well within existing labour laws.

Any employee can be asked to work at any time by employers beyond normal working hours, and many are anxious and willing to do so. However, no employee can be discriminated against for not accepting work outside the normal working hours. Thus, there is no need to establish any new law to protect worker interests beyond that which already exists, particularly one which is totally biased and discriminatory in favour of the one class of worker.

In conclusion, Sunday and holiday shopping has become an economic necessity for many thousands of Ontarians as they struggle to balance working realities with personal and family responsibilities. It is also a prime tourism activity for families and individuals who travel to and within our province and who combine shopping with entertainment, sightseeing, touring, dining, recreational activities, festivals and events.

Ontario and all the municipalities in the province benefit directly and considerably from the tourism expenditures. Both levels of government are constantly searching for new and incremental sources of revenue to fund all manner of social services, enhanced and enriched education for our citizens, better health care, improved roads and affordable housing. Government recognition and protection of tourism values and the operational realities of our industry at both the provincial and the municipal level will enhance significantly the ability of the government to provide said services for our citizens.

While we commend the efforts of the Minister of Tourism and Recreation and the ministry to recognize the value and importance of tourism in Bill 115, we are very concerned that the full potential of our industry, as it relates to Sunday shopping as a major tourism activity, will not be realized unless significant amendments are made to the Retail Business Establishments Statute Law Amendment Act.

We respectfully recommend, therefore, that the standing committee on administration of justice and the government of Ontario seriously consider all the facts and recommendations which are rendered in this submission.

The Acting Chair: We have time for one comment from each caucus.

Mr Sorbara: Throughout these hearings the government has said there will be a number of beneficiaries of this bill. During the hearings, though, we have heard that retail workers are ready and willing and anxious to take up Sunday hours. We have heard small business people say they need the freedom to decide whether they are going to open on Sunday. We have heard about surveys here in Thunder Bay from consumers saying they would prefer to have the freedom of choice as to whether they and their families will go out shopping on Sunday.

Can I ask you to take the devil's advocate position? Do you see any group or any constituency or any community or any organization that is going to benefit from the policy thrust and the direction of the government's bill? Who is going to benefit from this, if the government passes this bill?

Mr Duggan: I am a firm believer in wide-open Sunday shopping.

Mr Sorbara: Do you see anybody benefiting from this?

Mr Duggan: I think the citizens of Ontario, the visitors to Ontario and, generally, a lot of people benefit from the ability to open, the ability to shop and buy products on Sunday.

Mr Sorbara: If the government passes this bill and requires only those businesses that have a tourism base to open, do you see any real benefit to the province or to any group in the province?

Mr Duggan: From the tourism sector, I see those people benefiting directly.

Mr Sorbara: To the detriment of the rest of the province?

Mr Duggan: I do not believe so. I believe in fair competition. I should have a right, as a citizen of Ontario or as a person who is running a business in Ontario, to be open or closed.

Mr Sorbara: As you choose?

Mr Duggan: As I choose.

Mr Sorbara: And everyone else should have that right?

Mr Duggan: You in the government and the municipality certainly charge us taxes based on a seven-day week.

Mr Jackson: Thank you for an excellent brief. I wanted to suggest to you, building on Mr Sorbara's point, that the one group which has persistently commented to me that it is adversely affected by the government's bill is university and community college students. I understand that on this northern trip -- we are in three northern communities which have between them five educational institutions -- we do not have any deputations from students. However, they are very badly affected by the legislation that has the effect of reducing employment opportunities, especially at a time when their tuition fees have gone up more this year than in any previous year of the decade. It is costing students more to go to university; we know it costs northern students in particular more because of the requirement of accommodation. Yet we are hearing that students make exceptionally good employees, that they work and are willing workers, which is something the labour movement always tells us, that we want willing workers.

Can you comment about how this would adversely affect the student community, especially in these times when they are so desperate to find employment? What effect would this bill have in terms of opportunities lost for students in this province?

Mr Duggan: A major economic strain to not only the students but the parents. We, as a travel association, hire over 40 travel counsellors to work in our information centres. We are hiring senior citizens over 65 years old who want to be part of the community, who are working Sundays, and students who work with these senior citizens who are working Sundays and holidays because they want to be part of the tourist industry.

In the tourist industry, there are no days of the week. A visitor is there to be helped and serviced, and we have an obligation to take care of those needs. Otherwise, we are not in the tourist business and we are not open for business. If that is the message that comes down under this new legislation, then that is what we will be promoting with the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation: "Visit us Monday to Saturday. We are not open Sundays."

Mr Fletcher: Your presentation is good, and some of your recommendations for tourism criteria are very good. I could support a couple of them, I think. I am sure of it.

You were saying workers already have enough protection under the employment standards. Bill 114 was the Liberal version of the employment standards to protect the workers. Let me quote what was said by then Liberal MPP, Rick Ferraro, the former member for Guelph, in March 1988 when this bill was coming through: "You have to work when the business is there. Employees are jeopardizing their jobs by refusing to work. An employer will eventually find someone who is willing to work on Sundays."

He was saying there was no protection for workers under the previous act, Bill 114. That is what this government wants to do, make sure we do have protection for workers so they have the right to refuse if they do not want to work. That goes for students, that goes for single parents, whoever, but we also do not want to hurt the tourist industry. That is why we have the criteria. That is why, as I said, I think your recommendations are very good and very positive, and we are very happy you are here putting this forward. This is what this committee is here for, to listen to what you have to say, and we have heard it before. It is a recurring theme from the tourist industry. From what we are hearing, we have some serious reading to do as far as the tourist criteria are concerned, and perhaps we will be changing them.

Mr Duggan: I live in a community called Kenora, which unfortunately you people did not get a chance to visit today, although you will hear this afternoon a number of people from Kenora who will show you samples of the Sunday shopping issue. You will also hear from the labour union, which will show you other samples.

We have tried it. We like it. The present legislation is not broken. It does not need to be fixed. The large chain stores that are open -- Safeway, Canadian Tire -- have a very good agreement with their employees. They are not forced to work. Mr Bishop, who is on at 1 o'clock, will explain how he communicated and worked with his employees.

There are lots of people out there looking for work and opportunities to better themselves. If I choose not to work on Sundays, there are 10 other people behind me who would like the opportunity. The operative word is "opportunity."

The Acting Chair: Mr Duggan, on behalf of the committee, I thank you for taking time and coming here to give us this presentation.

Mr Jackson: I wanted to wait until we were in the morning segment to put in a request. It is my understanding that we have not received a deputation from the Ontario Federation of Students. Given that these concerns are being expressed -- other people seem to be speaking on their behalf -- perhaps we could ask the clerk to contact the OFS and invite its comment on this legislation as it affects students in this province. I think that would be helpful not only to the government but to the members of this committee as well.

The Acting Chair: Does the committee agree? We are accepting written briefs.

Mr Jackson: If there is an opening, we could advise them and they could be slotted, but a written brief is fine.

The Acting Chair: Is that agreeable with the committee? Agreed.

Just a couple of announcements: Checkout time is 1 o'clock, for members of the committee. You can either leave your bags here or there is a room just off the checkout counter. Also, there is a buffet lunch for members of the committee and the ministry staff in the Icelandic Room. This committee will recess until 1 o'clock this afternoon.

The committee recessed at 1204.

AFTERNOON SITTING

The committee resumed at 1305.

KENORA AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

The Acting Chair (Mr Cooper): Good afternoon. You have half an hour to give your presentation. You can either use the full half hour for your presentation or you can make a shorter submission and allow time for questions and answers from each of the caucuses. Please identify yourselves and then proceed.

Mr Pote: My name is Chris Pote. I am the first vice-president of the Kenora and District Chamber of Commerce. I have come down to enlighten you on the chamber of commerce's position in Kenora. I am here today with Mr Doug Bishop, the manager and owner of the local Canadian Tire store. He was instrumental in our proposal, the proposal of the town council that amended the bylaw to allow for Sunday shopping in larger retailers. We can, I believe, present a bit of history that might be helpful to you in your deliberations on these issues.

The history of the Sunday shopping issue in the Kenora and District Chamber of Commerce began, as far as I was concerned, in 1989. At that time our retail committee determined that the issue was coming to the forefront and that we should poll our membership to find out the position of the members on the Sunday shopping issue.

At that time the retail chairman of our chamber of commerce prepared quite a lengthy questionnaire, which mentions wide-open Sunday shopping, in those words, a couple of times anyway. It concluded with a question as to the support of the members of the chamber on Sunday shopping. At that time we received an indication that it was split about 50-50. At that point we determined we could not, as a chamber, take a position on that issue at that time.

In 1990, Mr Bishop came to the chamber of commerce with a proposal that he was to take before town council. It was a quite well done proposal. It included his proposal, as well as economic and tourist rationales, and his personal rationale. It was very well done and presented to the director of the chamber of commerce at that time. During that meeting, after he had left, we determined we would in principle support that position when he took it to town council, but we would first poll our members once again to get their feeling before we could give our final approval.

At that point we conducted another survey. This time it was a single question. Our president asked the members to read the proposal, and I will read that proposal as it is stated: "It is proposed that the bylaw controlling Sunday shopping in Kenora be amended to encourage tourism in the summer as follows: Stores wishing to cater to tourism be allowed to open for limited hours on Sunday during the tourist season; the Sundays during the tourism season would include statutory holidays, if they happen to fall on a Sunday; and the Sunday shopping hours be limited to six hours between 12 pm and 6 pm."

The question to the members was: "Do you support the proposal? Yes, I do support; no, I do not support the proposal." At that point we had an indication from our membership that they supported the proposal by approximately 70% in favour, 30% opposed.

It has been a divisive issue in the directorship, but we now have a year's history with this Sunday shopping being allowed in the major retailers. It occurred to us at the time we were debating this issue that there were only six locations in Kenora that could not be open on Sunday. That included the Canadian Tire store, the two major grocery retailers -- Safeway and Extra Foods -- it included the SAAN store, a clothing store, and also a Woolco, or Woolworths. I believe it might have included Kenora Home Hardware. I am not sure if they fell into the parameter of square footage or not.

It also occurred to many of us that there were so many things being done on Sunday that the issue of a common day of rest was not really an issue because there were so many people having to work in so many functions, in the mill, on the railroad, in the hospital, truckers. It seemed like everything was open except these major retailers. To push for a common day of rest and single out these retailers seemed to us at the time -- to a majority of the directors and I think a majority of the membership at large -- to be discriminatory and not productive.

That, I believe, is the chamber of commerce's position to date. I believe you will still find that there would be that sort of split in the membership, yet we have not heard anything from our smaller retailers. Mr Waters spoke to us during lunch about something he noticed about retailers in his Muskoka region, the smaller ones being concerned about opening on Sundays, or that they would have to open. We have many small retailers on Main Street in Kenora in the business improvement area who are not open and we have had no complaints from them over this past year. Their president was made aware of this particular session here and chose not to attend to make a presentation in opposition. She herself has a personal opposition to it, a religious opposition.

I believe that our history in Kenora, from our perspective, has shown a great deal of success and has been satisfactory to all parties concerned.

I would like to turn the time over to Mr Bishop now to describe his experiences in the past year, and I would like to leave time for questions at the end. I would like to present some of my own personal views, if there is time, but I will make that decision when I find out how long Mr Bishop will take.

Mr Bishop: As Chris mentioned, I approached council in April a year ago and asked to have our bylaw in Kenora changed so that I could open my store on Sundays because I believed it would be very good for my store, for Kenora, and for the customers who visit Kenora. Almost a million people come through Kenora every summer as tourists. It is an astonishing quantity, compared to our small population of just 15,000 people.

In the handout I have presented here today, on the first page it indicates that Sunday has turned out now to be our single most productive day of the week. I have not made it that way, and the government has not made it that way. The customers have made it that way. The date shown on this page indicates that on Sunday the average sales rate in my store is $2,598 an hour, and that is higher than Saturday and higher than Friday -- higher than all other days of the week. It has really been quite astonishing. We were very pleased that we had such good results last summer, 1990, during the summer months. My sales in total increased 14%. This was a transfer of sales out of the US and out of Manitoba, I believe, and it was good for Ontario and good for Kenora.

I have to point out that this kind of achievement and expression of support by our customers is not consistent with the common pause day approach. My customers enjoy my store being open. Invariably they line up in front of the store every Sunday. I do not think there has been a Sunday yet this summer when there has not been five, 10 or 20 people, and on one occasion more than 50 people, lined up outside the front of my store before 12 o'clock waiting to get in. It is just amazing. The parking lot is always full all day Sunday.

I am sure our sales revenue on Sunday is new revenue in our market. I am not sure this would be the case in a metropolitan area like London or Kitchener or Toronto, but certainly in Kenora it is. We track that through credit card transactions, battery invoices where we have names and addresses, tire invoices, those kinds of things. The greatest bulk of all this activity is from out of Kenora.

There is no question that Kenora is a tourist town. Almost a million people travel through Kenora every year. They spend well over $230 million every year. That amounts to more than half of all the spending in Kenora. Half of all our jobs are dependent on those tourist dollars. Even worse, our winter is very short -- I am sorry; our summer is very short. I guess I should have just left it the first way. We have 189 days of frost in Kenora every year. Beyond that, we have 100 days of tough sledding and maybe a couple of days of summer, and last year they were both hot, and we have to make our hay when the sun shines. Literally 58% of all my business occurs in 27% of the time; in 100 days from May 20 to Labour Day we have to do 58% of all our business. It is tough. We have a pause day. It lasts from Labour Day till May 20, and it is not of our selection, our direction. It is just the way our market is.

It is fearsome to have you people here and anticipate that irrespective of what I might say or plead for, you are going to go home and put this thing into effect anyway, and it is fearsome when I read the proposed regulations that say that if a store is over 7,500 square feet, it cannot be open. I am over 7,500 square feet. I have the biggest ma-and-pa store in town; there is no question. I am there every Sunday, darn near. My wife is. We both work at it. It is a good business.

Would all Canadian Tire dealers say the same to you across Toronto? Of course not. They are the greatest bunch of individuals you have ever seen. Hardly any of us agree on anything. That is true, and I am sure the two dealers who are here in Thunder Bay do not want Sunday shopping. Maybe they do. I have no idea. I have not asked. But in my marketplace, for my store, I believe it is correct. Why? If you sit in my store on Sunday morning, the phones ring incessantly from dawn until 12 o'clock, and I got into the habit of just picking up the phone and saying, "The store'll be open at 12 o'clock." People say, "Thank you," and hang up. We have put an answering machine in now; it is easier.

Who comes in on Sunday? Mill workers, nurses, doctors, ambulance drivers, merchants, lawyers -- everybody. MPPs come. Town councillors come. The mayor comes. Government employees come -- moms, dads, kids, families. Sunday is actually family shopping and it supports what Mr Duggan was saying this morning: shopping is one of the three most popular activities for a family on Sundays. It is a reality in Kenora. Elsewhere, I do not know. That to me is not germane. I am worried mostly about my staff, my store and the viability of my business.

We have tourists of all kinds who come also: camp owners who need something for camp to fix it -- a package of screws, a new water heater, a screen-door hinge, whatever. We have campers who have been rained out, especially this summer -- they have been rained out all summer -- and need something dry for camp. We have travellers on the way through. They need a wheel or a tire for a trailer, or they have to replace a broken towrope for waterskiers or whatever. In the end, these customers have increased our sales 7% on an annual basis. It was 14% last summer, because we were only open on Sundays for half a year.

I want to be particularly careful to address the staff issue on Sunday work. Long before I went to town council, I sat with my staff several times and we discussed whether we should be open on Sunday, because I did not want to go to council, get approval to be open on Sunday and then not have anybody to work. I sat with the staff. We had proper paperwork drawn up and then we talked about the staff being able to sign, without prejudice, whether they wished to work or did not, and we were very careful to explain to them what "without prejudice" meant. It meant they could sign "I don't want to work Sunday" if they chose, without any prejudice from me whatever, without any risk or fear of having a backlash, getting canned, or without any force.

The bottom line, as I described to chamber when I approached it and to council, was that more than 90% of my staff signed on. They believed, like I did, that it would be good for our business, and that therefore, in as much as we have a substantial profit-sharing program in my store, as most Canadian Tire dealers do, it would be good for them on their bottom line. It certainly has proved to be that. Profit sharing went up 22% last year, a substantial amount of money.

My store on Sundays currently is directed, if you want to call it that, by one core staff, sometimes two. Beyond that, the store is operated totally by 11 or 12 students. They are good students. Do we have trouble getting kids or adults to work? No. There are lots of people who want to, and lots of people who do not want to. That is fine; they do not have to work. But there are lots of people who do want to work. I even have a minister's wife who works in my store on Sundays.

I do not accept rhetoric, especially old rhetoric, that this is going to degrade family values. I have not seen that in the families that work for me. I have not seen that in Kenora at all. I think the impetus for Kenora's economy of a vibrant Sunday provision for our tourists is that it has been a boon to our economy, rather than deleterious to it.

With increasing sensitivity about the environment around us, especially in places like Kenora, Thunder Bay and Sault Ste Marie, a lot of people are having trouble. Steel mills are having trouble. Paper mills are having trouble. The newsprint industry is no longer growing and vibrant and is no longer permanently ensconced in the fabric of northern Ontario. The writing is on the wall. Many mill towns in the north will not have a paper mill in the year 2000, and I pray to God that does not include Kenora, but it may. Boise Cascade is not vibrant. They are operating very tight-reined in our mill in Kenora. They certainly are not in a position where they can be optimistic and overly generous. Their budgets are extremely tight and they are operating their mill very close to the line. It is all too commonplace that industries shut down and leave little towns like ours to die. We do not want that to happen in Kenora.

1320

One of the best options we have in developing other industry and commerce is tourism. Many people are dedicated to that. We have an excellent Wintermission in the wintertime. It is all privately generated. On the July 1 weekend we have a fine Harbourfront Festival. It is a major tourist attraction. Thousands of people come there. The LOWISA is an annual water festival that starts on the long weekend of August; it just started this past weekend. LOWISA is the Lake of the Woods Sailing Association. It is a one-week sailing cruise all around our gorgeous lake. It attracts tons of people. They depend on us to be there when they start and when they finish, and they call us by radio on the lake all through the day, day and night. Kenora Bass International is a catch-and-release bass tournament that has been built over the last three years. It is now a $1-million event in Kenora. It operates on Saturday and Sunday. We have to be there Sundays.

These events are often spearheaded by business people concerned for tourism in Kenora, and they are aimed at offsetting Sunday shopping in the United States, GST-free shopping in the United States, Sunday shopping in Winnipeg and a new highway bypass that has impacted heavily on Kenora this summer.

Tourists attracted by events of this nature want Sunday shopping. It is part of the lifestyle. I am convinced of that. Indeed, shopping is now listed as one of the top three forms of individual and family entertainment.

In contrast, a common pause day, with everything closed except for the corner store, would be a sharp regression to what are bygone days. In Kenora, many part-time jobs would be eliminated, 12 in my store, and the economy would shrink in direct proportion. In the case of my Canadian Tire store in Kenora, the annual shrinkage would be in the order of 7%. The actual shrinkage in the summer would be 14%, because that is the share of annual sales occurring in my store on Sundays when we are open in the summertime. The equivalent sales revenue and the wages that result from those would migrate back to Winnipeg or International Falls or wherever they have come from.

I ask this committee to help us make sure you do not take away our Sundays. In a small town like ours it is critically important.

A common pause day has long been a plank in the NDP's platform. For Kenora in the 1990s, a mill town and a tourist town, restricted Sunday shopping has been a boon to the economy and the part-time workforce. The government's provision to allow some stores to stay open in some tourist areas, providing they are smaller than 7,500 square feet, is discriminatory. My store is bigger than 7,500 square feet. Over half of all my sales are to tourists. How in the world can you reconcile a provision like that in the regulations? I cannot.

I hope that down the road, as this all settles out, you gentlemen in your wisdom will make provision for areas like Kenora and that the people within the community who know what is going on best can make the decisions that are germane, that are good for the community. I believe these decisions should remain in the community.

Finally, before I make my recommendations, I would like to focus on one other issue. Often it is said: "Keep those big guys closed. They're the bad guys. Let the little guys open." It is not a big store-little store issue, gentlemen. It is a good merchant-poor merchant issue largely. On Saturday afternoon at 2 o'clock this past weekend I could not get a package of film copied into prints. The half-hour photo machine is not working on Saturdays. I cannot buy flowers on Friday night in Kenora unless I go to the Safeway store.

Lots of our small merchants do not wish to be open Friday nights, Saturdays and Sundays. So be it. I do not have any qualms with that, and I know full well, having been active in chambers and business inprovement areas over the course of 20 years, that there will never be unanimity in that regard. There does not have to be. Let the customers decide. In my store they have decided up front with their dollars and they have made Sunday the number one day in my store.

For recommendations, I would like to recommend that to regulate Sunday shopping should be an issue that remains within the community. I would like the government to provide the necessary umbrella protection to look after the workers to make sure they cannot be exploited. My staff all get time and a half on Sundays. The managers get a good bonus on Sundays. They get profit sharing. They do not get exploited. They do not have to work.

I suggest the government's focus should be on looking after the worker, not on regulating the initiative of the entrepreneurs in this province. I beg the government to leave the existing law alone. Let the communities decide. Focus instead on looking after the workers, not trying to regulate their lives.

Mr Daigeler: Thank you very much for your very interesting and quite forceful presentation. I guess I am right in concluding that you support the Liberal legislation and that we should stay with the wisdom of that legislation and leave it alone. Would that be correct?

Mr Pote: I would say the chamber of commerce would support that position.

Mr Daigeler: And Mr Bishop as well?

Mr Bishop: The law has worked well in Kenora in my view.

Mr Daigeler: The law is that it is a municipal option. If a municipality decides that is what its people want, it has that right. I think that is what you are arguing.

Mr Bishop: Yes, sir.

Mr Daigeler: Did you make a presentation at the time that legislation was put in place? It was very controversial then.

Mr Bishop: I am not sure if the legislation had been challenged at that point in April of last year. I made my initial presentation to town council on April 5, 1990. I am not sure if the legislation had been challenged or not.

Mr Daigeler: You were not involved at the time the Liberal government changed the Conservative legislation, so it is a relatively new involvement for you. Could I ask what it is that made you become involved now?

Mr Bishop: In April a year ago we had a new bypass being built on our highway around Kenora, and I was very concerned about the negative impact of that on our tourist trade. Coincidentally the economic development corporation of Kenora had just then published the results it had been collecting from two prior impact studies it had done on the highways on each side of Kenora. It was only published in late April of last year and it was only then quantified, using their data and new ministry models, that the tourism spending in Kenora was more than half of all the dollars. Nobody knew that.

When I discovered that, I took off like a rocket. I said, "This is incredible, scary, and we have to react to this." Nobody knew prior to early last year that more than half of all the tourist dollars came from tourists coming to and through Kenora. It had never been quantified before, I do not believe. That was the impression I got.

Mr Carr: Thank you, gentlemen, for your presentation. Mr Bishop, you said it is your belief -- you used the 7% for half a year -- that the revenue you are talking about is new revenue coming in that you would not otherwise have. What would you say to a government, and in fact to a Premier who I understand is going to be in this town today, which says it knows better than you about revenue and that it will only be extended over other days, that you are wrong, that it is not new revenue?

Mr Bishop: My store is open all the time and they are quite welcome to come and look at my information and data. It bears scrutiny.

Mr Carr: So that definitely is new revenue. You may be aware of the legislation saying that for the tourist exemption they have to have a letter from the chamber in support before they go to the municipal council, saying the chamber is in favour of it. What is the chamber's position on that? We heard from the Ontario Chamber of Commerce that it was not consulted, that in fact it does not want to do it. In some communities, they may be open to litigation regardless of what side. If somebody wants to open they will say, "You went to council against our wishes," and so on. What is the chamber's feeling about being involved and being thrust right in the middle of this when it goes to municipalities?

Mr Pote: I do not believe the chamber of commerce would have any problem with that, especially in Kenora. As I mentioned, there are only six locations we had to deal with anyway.

I just want to mention one thing about the SAAN store and how they have dealt with it. I talked to him before I came down. He came with Mr Bishop to make the presentation to the chamber originally. What he did was hire people specifically to work on Sunday. I am sorry, I am ex-topical here, but I thought it was important. He said that if this legislation changes, these five or six people who were hired specifically to work on Sunday, at new jobs, are worried now that they will lose their jobs. They are quite concerned about this legislation coming down, and that is how he dealt with getting people to work on Sunday. He hired specifically for that day.

1330

Mr Carr: With yours, I think you said 70% of the members want it now, according to surveys.

Mr Pote: Based on what we have from Mr Bishop's proposal of the 12 till 6, and town council voted to extend the whole year. Mr Bishop has elected to close his store on Sundays in the off-season, as I understand, but it is not required.

Mr Morrow: Mr Bishop, I would like to personally commend you for the way you have treated your staff on the Sunday shopping issue. I think that is fantastic. You should really be congratulated. Another comment I would like to make to you is, yes, we are listening, that's what this whole process is about, to help us make guidelines.

Last Wednesday the Ontario Chamber of Commerce presented a brief to us in Toronto. In that brief there is a line stating that the majority of surveyed retailers would prefer not to be open on Sundays. Are you telling me now that you are basically going against what your parent organization is saying?

Mr Pote: They are not our parent organization; we operate independently. We are a member of the Northwestern Ontario Associated Chambers of Commerce. But there are a lot of retailers, and I think that is probably the case in Kenora, who do not open on Sunday, and that is not the issue. The issue is the right to be open on Sunday.

Mr Morrow: You should also know that Collingwood just passed a bylaw allowing them to open on Sundays. We were there last Thursday, and I believe 35% to 40% of the retailers are open, which means 60% to 65% of the retailers are closed, so basically that says to me that 60% to 65% of the retailers would prefer not to open on Sunday.

Mr Pote: I would not doubt that is the case, but it is still an issue of the right to be open.

Mr Mills: Just a point of clarification under the tourism criteria: Mr Bishop, even though your store exceeds 7,500 square feet and exceeds eight employees, if you meet those criteria, notwithstanding everything else, you would still be allowed to open. I just want to clear up any misunderstanding you had that you thought you would not.

Mr Bishop: I did not hear what you said on the employee aspect, sir.

Mr Mills: If you meet the tourism criteria and your store exceeds 7,500 square feet and exceeds the eight employees, providing you meet those criteria and you made application to the municipality to be considered to open, then you will be open. I just wanted to remove that doubt, that you thought you would never be able to open. The provisions of the tourism criteria will allow you to open providing they are met.

Mr Sorbara: Just a point of clarification arising out of a question from Mr Morrow: I would not want the presenters here to be misled about what we heard in Collingwood. A number of businesses decided that they would not open on Sunday, but from what I heard in Collingwood, the vast majority of retailers said to us that notwithstanding that they themselves chose not to open on Sunday, they wanted the unrestricted freedom to be able to do that without interference from the provincial government. I do not think Mr Morrow should be telling our presenters that the majority of retailers in the Collingwood area supported this legislation. From what I heard, the majority of retailers and the majority of people were saying, "We will make the decision."

The Acting Chair: All he said was that they chose to stay closed. He was drawing his own assumptions from that.

Mr Pote, Mr Bishop, on behalf of the committee, thank you very much for coming here today.

BOB MEYERS

The Acting Chair: Our next presenter is Mr Bob Meyers from the town of Kenora. Thank you for appearing today. You will be given a half-hour for your presentation. You can either use the full half-hour for your presentation or else submit a shorter brief and then allow time for questions and comments from all three caucuses. Could you please identify yourself for the record and then proceed.

Mr Meyers: My name is Bob Meyers and I am the chief administrative officer for the town of Kenora. I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today and the fact that the committee has journeyed to northwestern Ontario, although not quite as far to the west as we would have liked, to hear the view of northerners.

I think it was Bob Dylan who wrote the words in a song, "The Times They Are A-Changin'," and as I look at the members of the committee I would say that all of you have been around to see the following changes which have occurred in Ontario in the last 30 to 40 years: Sports are now legal to be played in Ontario on Sunday, both professional and amateur. It is now possible to go to a movie theatre or to see a concert or a live production on a Sunday in Ontario. It is now possible to have liquor served with a meal in Ontario on Sunday. It is even possible to play bingo on a Sunday in Ontario. There was a time in Ontario when all of those activities were illegal, and it was not that long ago.

Business people like to talk about the global economy, about the external pressures that face the local business place in even the smallest of communities throughout Canada, and in particular, speaking to you today, in Ontario. In looking at neighbouring jurisdictions that border the province, I would say to you that Ontario can no longer isolate itself, nor its government think that by legislation it can isolate the Ontario marketplace from what is happening elsewhere in North America, and in particular from other jurisdictions that border on Ontario.

In the legislation that was in existence in 1985, section 2 said, "Every person carrying on a retail business establishment...shall ensure that no member of the public is admitted thereto and no goods or services are sold or offered for sale therein by retail on a holiday." In subsection 2(2) it said, "No person employed by or acting on behalf of a person carrying on a retail business in a retail business establishment shall, (a) sell or offer for sale any goods or services therein by retail; or (b) admit members of the public thereto, on a holiday."

I would ask you if you ever had occasion to call a local businessman after hours, on a Sunday or a holiday because of the need for materials to effect an emergency repair. In doing so, you were asking that retailer to break the law.

The act then went on in section 3 to provide a number of exemptions. When we looked at the town of Kenora and applied the exemptions, the majority of business establishments within the town had been exempted by legislation from having to remain closed on a Sunday or a holiday.

In 1987 the province made amendments to the Retail Business Holidays Act by way of chapter 36 of the statutes. The exemptions under section 3 were amended, and in looking at what was done, the major change was that the total selling area was increased from 2,400 square feet to 7,500 square feet when it dealt with foodstuffs, newspapers, antiques or handicrafts and from 5,000 to 7,500 square feet when dealing with pharmacies. These changes increased the number of businesses in the town of Kenora that could remain open on Sundays and holidays by virtue of the merchandise sold and square footage of their establishments.

However, it was not until 1989 that the substantial change was made in chapter 3 of the statutes, which now set out that a municipality by bylaw could permit retail business establishments to be open on holidays or require that they be closed on holidays. It set out some criteria which the municipality had to follow in establishing the bylaw.

1340

Kenora council was approached in April 1990 by a progressive, and, I would add, aggressive, businessman to implement a bylaw that would allow shopping on Sundays and holidays between the Victoria Day weekend and the Labour Day weekend, essentially for the summer season. In deliberating in committee as to what council was going to do in response to this request, it was decided that in line with our thinking that we have the potential to become a four-season tourist community, we should draft a bylaw that would permit opening on Sundays and holidays from 12 noon to 6 pm with the exception of three religious holidays: Christmas Day, Good Friday and Easter Sunday.

The criteria set out in the act were followed. The intent of the bylaw was advertised and the public meeting was advertised. We chose a venue that would be large enough to hold a substantial crowd of people and we also established some ground rules by which the meeting would be conducted. The councillors who were in town, plus the clerk, the deputy and myself, were on stage. The purpose of the meeting was announced by Acting Mayor Nancy Salmijarvi and the ground rules were announced. We would be willing to listen to speakers from both sides, from the pro and the con, in an alternate fashion and we were there to hear all who wished to speak.

It was an orderly meeting, unlike others that had been held in the past. I would attribute that to the fact that we had announced a set of guidelines for the conduct of the meeting and also stated that council was not there to debate the matter. Council was there to listen to the representations of the people who wished to speak to the issue.

In all honesty, I was not surprised that those speaking against the bylaw would not consider openings on any Sunday or holiday. To them, it had to be a complete ban. There was no willingness to concede to a limited opening or to a limited period of time for opening. Those speaking in favour were supportive of the position council had taken, even though it had extended beyond their original request.

The matter came back to council at a public meeting about two weeks later. There were delegations before council that night who knew the matter was on the agenda and who wished to address council on one more occasion and did so. The town of Kenora adopted a bylaw to permit openings on Sundays and all holidays with the exception of Christmas Day, Good Friday and Easter Sunday from the hours of 12 noon until 6 pm. The result is that a few more businesses are open now during the summer months. A few of the smaller businesses which used to be closed are opening because some of the larger businesses are open. The larger businesses are acting as a draw from which the smaller businesses are benefiting. There is no compulsion to be open. The bylaw does not say "shall." It says "may."

The businesses that have been opening on Sundays and holidays report that Sunday shopping has increased the amount of business they do on a weekly basis. What is now being sold on a Sunday is not detracting from sales on any other day of the week. They all reported that they have hired additional staff to be able to maintain Sunday openings.

I would note that last year when there was a question as to the legality of the bylaw by virtue of the court decision concerning the amendments to the Retail Business Holidays Act, the larger businesses and some of the smaller businesses approached me with respect to whether they had to conform to the municipal bylaw or if they could open as they pleased on the Sundays and holidays and disregard the limited opening we had set. When I advised them that council would not be pleased if they went beyond the conditions set out in the bylaw, they agreed to abide by the bylaw as it was passed. While stores of the chains were opened for longer periods in other communities close to us, in Kenora they abided by the conditions from 12 noon until 6 pm.

They did in one case ask if they could open for longer periods on the Sunday between Christmas and New Year's and I said no, the bylaw was specific from 12 noon to 6 pm and we would appreciate their adhering to the bylaw. When the lower court decision was overturned and we were back to a valid bylaw again, we continued on as we had in the past and continue to do so at this point in time.

The legislation and regulation that have been proposed will have little effect on the town of Kenora. I believe we can meet all six conditions set out in the regulations for characteristics. Therefore, by virtue of our tourism industry, we would be permitted to have Sunday and holiday shopping.

I believe, unfortunately, that the regulation in subsection 2(1) is attempting to curtail legitimate business activity by placing restrictive criteria in place, hoping that those areas that are now open because of the size of the business and the merchandise that is offered will not be able to be open. The regulation is imposing upon municipal councils an unwarranted responsibility to have to determine whether a merchant's activities meet one of the four criteria. It would be quite simple to circumvent the regulation by saying that all businesses qualify by virtue of paragraph 2(2)(c)4 "Provides goods or services necessary to tourist activities in the area served by the establishment."

As to whether the next council will be as forward-thinking as the present council in passing another implementing bylaw remains to be seen, because the proposed legislation does require that one year from the date of the passing of the legislation the current bylaw become null and void. I believe the experience we have had in Kenora, to this point in time, has been good. I believe all the gloom and doom predicted for the destruction of family life, the deterioration of church attendance and the imposition upon workers to give up what free time they have in the course of the week has failed to materialize. I do not expect that will change.

If the Legislature is serious about doing something about Sunday shopping, then I would suggest you do nothing. Leave the legislation as it is. I suggest to you that if you wish to do something of a positive note, you would do it in favour of protecting the rights of employees. That should be sufficient to determine whether a business is going to be able to remain open or be closed. If they are not able to get sufficient employees, then it will not be possible for them to remain open and provide service to the community that the buying public expects. The legislation proposes to do this with section 39e.

I believe you have to look at where Kenora is situated. Our competition comes from two sources. Kenora is two and a half hours out of the city of Winnipeg, which has limited Sunday shopping. We are two and a half hours away from the United States border and International Falls, five hours away from Duluth, seven hours away from Minneapolis and five hours away from Grand Forks. I can tell you that people are out shopping, and they are doing more of it now that Minnesota and North Dakota are open on Sundays.

I realize the government is under some pressure by virtue of an election promise. I would say to the members of the government party that you have a far greater breadth of knowledge at your disposal today upon which to make decisions than you did during the campaign. I would ask you to use that knowledge impartially and in the best interests of the residents of Ontario, in particular for the business community which is supporting this government, and municipal governments, through tax revenues.

I have also enclosed a copy of the bylaw that was implemented by the town of Kenora on May 28, 1990.

Mr Sorbara: Mr Meyers, first of all, your brief is succinct and to the point and we appreciate it. I should say that specifically on page 8 the middle paragraph describes the realities of what happened in Kenora subsequent to the passing of your bylaw. That has been repeated in community after community around the province, either by virtue of the passing of a bylaw or by virtue of the court decision which allowed a period of glasnost, if you like, for nine months, where store owners could decide on their own what they were going to do. It is also nice to see that you are using Bob Dylan as the opening authority in your document.

Interjection: He was born in Kenora.

Mr Sorbara: No, he was not born in Kenora.

Interjection: Minnesota.

Mr Sorbara: You are the chief administrative officer for the town of Kenora?

Mr Meyers: Correct.

Mr Sorbara: You have nothing riding on this in terms of a political career, do you?

Mr Meyers: Not at all.

Mr Sorbara: You are not a storekeeper?

Mr Meyers: No.

Mr Sorbara: Really you are an impartial commentator on what has happened in Kenora.

Mr Meyers: That is what I have attempted to be.

Mr Sorbara: If the government were simply to say, "We're going to put this legislation on hold, in fact we're going to repeal the bad old Liberal legislation and have no legislation at all," is it not the case that the town of Kenora, under the Municipal Act, would still have the authority to regulate hours of shopping on Sunday as it does on every other day?

Mr Meyers: We do not have the right to regulate hours of shopping on any other day. That has been attempted and most of that legislation has been overturned or court decisions have gone against municipalities on rulings of that nature by attempting to restrict hours of business.

Mr Sorbara: But is it not the case that you have some authority to deal with hours of business in your community? My understanding was that municipalities still have that authority.

Mr Meyers: They have attempted to, but it is permissive legislation. The working word is "may" rather than "shall." It would be nice if the business community would come to common hours and that they were all open at the same time.

Mr Sorbara: But the marketplace sometimes determines that.

Mr Meyers: That is correct.

1350

Mr Sorbara: If the bill we are considering passes, it will be the case that stores larger than 7,500 square feet are going to have significant hurdles in attempting to open in the town of Kenora. Is that not the case?

Mr Meyers: That is the case and I think I referred to the particular section that gives me problems, when I look at it. That is in the regulations. I think the government is trying to duck by doing this particular section by way of regulation rather than by way of legislation.

Mr Sorbara: Part of the draft regulation provides that a store that is larger than 7,500 square feet would have to get a letter of support from the local chamber of commerce or the local convention and tourism bureau, if there is one, prior to making an application to the municipalities in order to stay open. In your own experience, what kind of dilemma would that create for the local chamber of commerce or the local visitors' bureau?

Mr Meyers: In the case of the chamber, it supports the position council had taken a year ago, and I believe it would support it again by virtue of the evidence that is now in. Our publicity board supported it last year and I believe it would do so again.

Mr Sorbara: But if an application came from, say, the local Safeway or Loblaws or some other supermarket and the chamber of commerce for one reason or another denied support to that particular establishment, what do you expect would happen?

Mr Meyers: You are asking me to speak on a decision the council might make. That would be like asking one of your assistants to say how you would vote on a particular bill.

In the case of Kenora's experience last year, I think it was not unanimously passed by council. Council did deliberate on it and they did stand and state their position when the vote came. I think the members would have to look at the application as it came and make the decision on their own.

Mr Jackson: Maybe I could build on that. It is an area of concern I have. As I understand it, the difference between an improvement area and a chamber of commerce in the city of Kenora is that it is mandatory to be members of the improvement area, but it is not mandatory to be members of the chamber of commerce.

Mr Meyers: A business improvement area is one that has been set up by a group of businessmen who agree they are going to a tax levy to do promotion and improvements within their area. All businesses within it must belong, whereas a chamber is voluntary.

Mr Jackson: You agree with what I just said.

Mr Meyers: Correct, but I think you needed that explanation.

Mr Jackson: We are familiar with the legislation. I just wanted to establish that there is a distinction between a chamber of commerce and an improvement area in terms of the mandatory representation. In the associations in which I have been associated in my career prior to politics, governments from time to time have been very careful not to put organizations in a power position where there is a cost associated with membership.

I would certainly like to hear from legal counsel how a group can act in the best interests of the given jurisdiction when in fact it has membership that is voluntary. We are not even sure what their jurisdiction is as this legislation sets it out.

To be consistent, we should be saying that all businesses should be members of the chamber of commerce. Therefore, they are in no conflict of interest, because all members are members. This is where I am having trouble with this draconian approach which is fraught with abuse. We would not allow it in the labour sector. Why we are allowing it in the business sector is beyond me.

Mr Meyers: On that point, there are 48 municipalities in northwestern Ontario and I believe there are only 19 or 20 chambers of commerce. What a municipality would do in that particular case I am not sure.

Mr Jackson: We both have that question and perhaps legal counsel can straighten us out.

Mr Carr: Thank you very much for a fine presentation. As you may know, the government has said there are not any increased sales or additional people hired; it is just spread out. But I think I heard you say your experience has been (1) that there are increased sales that would not otherwise have been there, and (2) that there are additional people hired who otherwise would not have been hired. Is that what you were saying?

Mr Meyers: Yes. When Mr Bishop made the presentation today, he made that quite clear to you. The manager of the SAAN store called me just after Christmas to ask what the town was going to be doing or what I thought the province might be doing by way of legislation in light of the court decision that we were waiting for, because he had recommended to his management that they needed two additional full-time staff to be able to maintain Sunday shopping.

I said we were going to abide by the legislation, by whatever came down, but in the meantime that we were sticking to the Sundays and holidays from 12 to 6. On that basis, he hired two additional full-time people.

Mr Carr: One of the concerns that has been raised by the government -- and it is kind of ironic that it is worried about the taxpayers after introducing a budget that has saddled us with the biggest deficit in the history of this province, but none the less, it is concerned about the taxpayers -- is that the municipalities will have extra costs as a result of snow removal and bus services in the larger communities. How will you see that affecting you? Are there any additional costs you will be looking at? If so, would it be offset by the increased number of sales businesses would have? How do you see that working from a purely economic standpoint?

Mr Meyers: I do not see any additional cost related to snow removal. We have to remove the snow seven days a week to maintain bus routes, fire protection and ambulance routes to the hospital, just movement of traffic, so that is not going to change. Our buses are run on a reduced schedule on Sunday. We have had no request to increase that scheduling.

Mr Fletcher: Thank you for the excellent presentation. Just a question as far as the employees are concerned: You do not have a problem as far as Bill 115 is protecting the employees and their right to refuse work on Sunday.

Mr Meyers: Not at all. I think that is a right that has to be protected. I do not think any employer who is going to consider the impact on his business is going to want a disgruntled employee meeting customers. He is going to want somebody who is willing to be there.

Mr Fletcher: Right now, in Kenora, is the police force on a reduced work schedule on Sunday?

Mr Meyers: No, they are not.

Mr Mills: I have listened with a great deal of interest and would like to offer the suggestion that as per Sunday shopping, things in Kenora are not quite as rosy as portrayed here. I have some press in front of me. I am quite concerned about a couple of things.

At that meeting you held, the president of the labour council said, "It seems time and time again councils do not listen to the majority, so maybe we have to replace the councillors after the vote." What perturbs me is what you say in your presentation, as to whether the next council will be as forward-thinking. Is that meant to be that if there is labour representation on the council after November, it would not be as forward-thinking? Maybe you can help me. What do you mean here?

Mr Sorbara: No doubt about that whatever.

Mr Mills: I just want it on the record.

Mr Meyers: We have had labour representation on council before. In fact, one of the previous members who was a labour representative on council is now our federal member. He is actively promoting a young man to run in this coming November election.

On forward-thinking, I think we have to look beyond the Kenora of today. We have to look at the impact on Kenora of tomorrow. We want to establish ourselves as a four-season tourism destination point. Sunday shopping would be important to that goal.

Boise Cascade employs about 800 people in the mill. The paper industry is not going through the rosiest of times right now. We have to look at the future. The second thing we have to concern ourselves with is what we are going to be doing to sustain the town of Kenora if we were to lose that large segment of our labour force. Sunday shopping will not do it all, but we have to protect the large commercial-professional establishment we do have and benefit from in the town of Kenora.

Mr Mills: I see that the Woolco store does not believe in Sunday shopping. They have a store in Kenora. They say it is up to the head office to see if they will open. Safeway is in a bit of a bind because it does not want to pay a premium to work on Sunday.

I have heard the positive presentation from Mr Bishop from the Canadian Tire. Notwithstanding that, the press tells me that all in all people are not jumping for joy in Kenora about Sunday shopping. I wonder if you could, rather swiftly or succinctly perhaps, tell me if I am on the right track.

Mr Meyers: The only thing I can tell you is that the people who spoke against Sunday shopping at the public meeting and again at the council meeting -- I am surprised to greet them then in the stores I go into on Sunday to shop.

The Acting Chair: Thank you for taking the time to come and give us your presentation.

1400

LAKE OF THE WOODS TOURISM CENTRE

The Acting Chair: Our next presenter will be from the Lake of the Woods Tourism Centre. Good afternoon. You will be given a half-hour to do your presentation. You can use the full half-hour for your presentation or you can submit a shorter brief and then allow time for questions or comments from each of the caucuses. Please identify yourself for the record and then proceed.

Mr O'Flaherty: My name is John O'Flaherty. I am past chairman of the Lake of the Woods Tourism Centre. I speak to you today as a representative of the board of directors of the Lake of the Woods Tourism Centre of Kenora, Ontario. My comments today will be directed in support of seven-day shopping.

Our organization was formed some 40 years ago with the intention of promoting tourism and industry in Kenora and surrounding areas. We are a membership organization with over 140 businesses as partners in our endeavours. These businesses range from accommodation sector resorts, hotels, etc, to small and large retail businesses of every type.

In the last 10 years the Lake of the Woods Tourism Centre has been charged with the responsibility of co-ordinating and implementing local special events, such as July 1, and assisting in the promotion and implementation of many other events in Kenora in addition to our promotion-oriented activities. The last two years have seen us take on the responsibility of the Kenora harbourfront committee as well.

With our recent reorganization, the board has held two strategic planning sessions, in April 1989 and January 1991, in order to solidify our purpose and to set out the future direction as a guideline for us to follow.

I would like to read to you the mission statement developed, which is, in a nutshell, the essence of the Lake of the Woods Tourism Centre. Through our efforts, we hope to induce and increase tourist traffic throughout the area, thus increasing the local tourism-based economy as well as enhancing the lives of our residents.

"The purpose of the Lake of the Woods Tourism Centre is to increase the benefit of tourism to the area by: Marketing the physical and commercial assets of the tri-municipal and surrounding areas; fostering a working relationship among all partners; generating a positive attitude toward tourism with the communities; promoting tourism as a renewable resource, resulting in the creation and maintenance of jobs on a year-round basis; assisting in the development and implementation of community visitor-related events; encouraging forward thinking and planning in the tourism industry."

Once again, I want to reiterate that this is the summation of our purpose and establishes the reasons we exist.

When the issue of seven-day shopping in Kenora, and now in a broader sense with the province of Ontario, came to our board table, it was met with a certain amount of hesitation. Initially, the board felt that as a subcommittee of the town of Kenora, the final decision should have rested with council alone and that we should not take a position on the issue. Upon further discussion, it was decided that if we are to take our jobs seriously, we must discuss and present the board's view on this situation.

It is our contention that the various organizations that have representatives on our board -- namely, the Kenora District Campowners Association, the Kenora Innkeepers Association, the Kenora and District Chamber of Commerce -- together with the six town-appointed citizen-at-large representatives, have given us an important, critical responsibility. It is then our duty within this mandate to determine and oversee the promotion and marketing of tourism in Kenora.

I do not think I have to repeat all the available information which you will be receiving from the Lake of the Woods Economic Development Corp, but I wish to stress the importance of tourism to Kenora's economy. We play host to over one million tourists a year. Tourism supplies over 3,200 jobs in the area. Tourism generates approximately $154 million in wages, roughly four times that of Boise Cascade, our largest employer. Tourism generates over $200 million in visitor revenues and generates over $14 million in municipal taxes alone. There is no doubt that Kenora is the major service centre of the Lake of the Woods area. As such, we must promote ourselves as just that.

Given the preceding information, our board of directors once again refers to our mission statement:

"There is no doubt that allowing all retail businesses to remain open seven days a week would: (a) result in the creation and maintenance of jobs and (b) increase the economic impact of tourism and (c) would better serve the needs of our visitors and residents."

In Kenora, we have the history to prove that seven-day shopping is successful. You have already heard from one local business person and our chamber of commerce. It has clearly been proven in Kenora that Sunday shopping has been well utilized by both our visitors and our residents. Thus it stands to reason that extra sales mean jobs. Many communities in the north are currently facing job losses. In some cases, these losses are of traumatic proportions. We simply cannot stand by and allow jobs to decline and possible economic stimulus to not happen.

The town of Kenora council, after a great deal of consultation and consideration, made a tough decision and, we feel, a right one. They saw the value of seven-day shopping and made a decision based on that vision. That decision has benefited the entire community. It provided extra services to all our important visitors but at the same time provided convenience to our many residents who were able to take advantage of the extra service time provided to them by retail establishments being open for business seven days a week.

During the ongoing consultation process there were many many residents who supported opening for seven days and who, because of job orientation, religious pressure and so on, could not openly support. Now it is a fact that in our community it is widely supported by visitors and residents alike. It is imperative that these operations at a minimum continue with the status quo if not be allowed to expand their hours of operation.

The board of directors of the Lake of the Woods Tourism Centre wish this committee the best in its deliberations and are confident that it will see to it that the economic viability and stability of our area and the entire province continue to prosper.

I would just like to leave you with this little cliché which is typical of me, "If it ain't broke, why fix it?" I respectfully submit that to you.

Mr Sorbara: I will begin with a question that I would like to have asked Mr Meyers as chief executive officer of Kenora. He talked about the passing of the bylaw and the debate that went on leading up to the passing of the bylaw. Many communities, by the way, have undertaken those debates, and sometimes they are very painful, but the proof is really in the aftermath of the passing of that sort of bylaw. So I want to ask you whether in your own experience, subsequent to the passing of this bylaw, and stores that chose to open on Sunday have opened and have been available and have been doing business, has there been a strong reaction in Kenora? Are groups organizing to try to get these stores closed again? Is there evident strain on family life? Is there a deterioration in the quality of living in Kenora and the surrounding area?

Mr O'Flaherty: No.

Mr Sorbara: Has anyone complained?

Mr O'Flaherty: Not to me personally.

Mr Sorbara: Are there letters to the editor in the local newspapers about how terrible this is?

Mr O'Flaherty: From the usual people who send letters, yes, but I guess as a rule of thumb, not really. It seems to be going over quite well.

Mr Sorbara: Has there been any collective expression by working people, retail workers, who are upset that they sometimes work on Sunday?

Mr O'Flaherty: I have heard of some people, but again, those are the usual people who would complain about something like that. But as a rule, no. It seems to be going over quite well.

1410

Mr Sorbara: You are the past president of the Lake of the Woods Tourism Centre. In your view, has the decision that Kenora made to establish some Sunday shopping been of a benefit or of a detriment to tourism in Kenora?

Mr O'Flaherty: It is definitely a benefit to Kenora.

Mr Sorbara: Has it generated employment?

Mr O'Flaherty: Yes, personally. Not with myself, but I have family members who have been employed because of Sunday shopping.

Mr Sorbara: Are they working against their will?

Mr O'Flaherty: No, they are doing it voluntarily.

Mr Sorbara: Are businesses opening on Sunday finding it difficult to attract customers?

Mr O'Flaherty: No.

Mr Sorbara: So there is a vibrant Sunday market?

Mr O'Flaherty: I would say so, yes.

Mr Sorbara: Your letterhead describes the Lake of the Woods area as "Ontario's Vacation Paradise." I tend to agree with you in that assessment, and obviously Kenora is the centre of an important tourism area in the province. If Kenora were not a centre for tourism, do you think it would be inappropriate for your stores to be open on Sunday? In other words, should you have the right to open your stores on Sunday only because you are Ontario's vacation paradise?

Mr O'Flaherty: I think they should be given the right, yes. Kenora is in a unique situation geographically. We have Boise Cascade. As it was pointed out earlier, they are a pulp mill. If we do not attract the tourists, we are going to end up like Kapuskasing.

Mr Sorbara: Okay, let's take Kapuskasing. Kapuskasing is not Ontario's vacation paradise. It is a nice place, but it is not a major tourist destination. Do you think the government of Ontario should discriminate in such a way that allows Kenora to stay open on Sunday but requires Kapuskasing to keep its doors closed on Sunday?

Mr O'Flaherty: No.

Mr Sorbara: Why not?

Mr O'Flaherty: It should be wide open. As pointed out, I am a firm believer that everything should be all equal.

Mr Sorbara: Let's not use "wide open," because no other day is described as wide open, but it should be a matter of choice, should it not?

Mr O'Flaherty: Yes, it should be choice, but there are some discriminating laws in effect right now that have to be adjusted. But yes, I agree with you on that point.

I would also like to make a comment on that. It may be out of order; the Chairman can rule me out if it is. We are allowing Sunday shopping, or it is in effect right now with the municipalities, yet we are allowed wide-open trucking on Sundays. The only thing that is banned right now is overweight loads. I just happen to work in that particular area, not as a truck driver but as a regulator of that sort, and there are no restrictions on it. So if the trucking industry can operate on a Sunday, clearly, why cannot a business person have the option of opening?

Mr Carr: One of the questions I have is, what will happen to some of the areas that do open because of tourism? Do you think there will be any pressure for the ball to start rolling if your particular area opens because it is a tourist area, and even though it is a beautiful area and most people would come there on their own, there will be the competitive pressures for other areas that might not be as close to you but will be in the same vicinity and would say, "We want to attract tourists now. Kenora is open and the municipality is open," and so on? Do you see the snowball effect happening so that more of the Sundays will be open?

Mr O'Flaherty: In that effect, Kenora has worked very hard to become a destination location. If Kenora takes the ball and decides to go into Sunday shopping and works that into our destination location and the other communities feel that no, they cannot or they are not as vibrant an area as Kenora, then maybe there is a little discrimination in that effect. If the place is clearly not a tourist area and they want to be open, it will boil down to Kenora will probably get it. But then we all know what government works like -- policy supersedes law -- and maybe that small community can get it. But in my view, it boils down to they should be given the opportunity to open up.

Maybe an area that is not quite a tourist area could become one with the right stimulus from government and local business and private investment. Maybe it can become a tourist area, but they have to work at it. Kenora has worked at it for 100 years and we just happen to be in a unique location where we can work at it. I do not know what else to say.

Mr Carr: You have been successful.

Mr O'Flaherty: Yes.

Mr Jackson: I am surprised that we are not going to hear from native groups. I am maybe not that familiar with the kind of commercial activity that is occurring on reservation lands. Are you aware of it? I just asked legislative counsel, but the fact is that this law does apply to aboriginal peoples and their commercial activities. Were you aware of that?

Mr O'Flaherty: No, I thought they were a law unto themselves.

Mr Jackson: So did I until I asked the question, but we were led to believe that this government is treating them -- I guess you do a lot of your commercial interaction in your region with native business persons. How do you think they will react to the notion that the municipalities, as set apart from their band councils, will be making those kinds of decisions which affect their commercial activity?

Mr O'Flaherty: I am sure it is going to come up for some lively discussions, but with previous experience with the local natives in Kenora, they seem to be taking the ball and going with it. They do own some tourist operations and quite frankly they are viable; they are working at it. As far as having a local municipality try and tell them what to do, we have tried that for years and it has not worked, so I do not anticipate it is going to work in the future. It is hard to say. I would rather dance around that question, thank you.

Mr Jackson: Mr Chairman, if I might ask if perhaps this matter should be clarified in a little more detail. I am not aware that it has come up in the briefings or the discussions, but certainly the legislation appears to be silent on the matter and yet legal counsel indicates there are certain test cases which lead to the conclusion that perhaps the legislation is deficient in that it does not clearly state. Municipalities and in fact chambers of commerce may be in positions of saying no to aboriginal commercial interests in this province. I personally do not support that and would hope that somehow this legislation does not intentionally walk into difficulty because it is silent on that subject. So hopefully we will get back some information on this subject.

Mr Fletcher: As far as Bill 115 is concerned, exactly what is it that you disagree with?

Mr O'Flaherty: I think it is the fact that they are coming into making too many rules again. You are beginning to be too bureaucratic. I would like to say without prejudice, as I am a government employee, I deal --

Mr Fletcher: Yes, me too. I know what it is like.

Mr O'Flaherty: It is getting too much. It is a free country. If I have $100,000 where I can open up a store and go out and sell to people, I should be allowed to do whatever I want within the laws.

Mr Fletcher: I can understand your saying that we cannot allow jobs to decline and we have to keep the economy going and it is important. I look at the people your organization represents: hotels and resorts. Do they buy Ontario produce? Do they buy Ontario products? Are they keeping the economy going that way?

Mr O'Flaherty: Our members of our committee in the innkeepers' association, it may be just local, but they do buy local. Kenora does seem to have quite a bit of out-shopping, but that is a different subject for another hearing. The majority of our members do buy local.

Mr Fletcher: So they buy all their meats and everything locally. The economy should be booming then.

Mr O'Flaherty: Kenora's economy is suffering like all of them, but I do not sit and write the cheques for all of them so I cannot really speak for them on that.

Mr Fletcher: You are not 100% sure on that.

Mr O'Flaherty: But I would say the majority of the owners I know do buy local.

Mr Fletcher: But if they had the option of going across the border to get a cheaper price, they would probably go across the border for the cheaper price, like any consumer, when they become a consumer. I know, that is just speculation.

1420

Mr Morrow: That was a fine presentation. To the best of your knowledge, has there been any job loss since Sunday shopping was appealed through the courts and the courts upheld it?

Mr O'Flaherty: Not that I know of at first hand, no.

Mr Morrow: Which would lead me to my second question, then. Do you feel that by opening on Sunday there would be job increases?

Mr O'Flaherty: I would say yes. It has worked in my family, so I do know that my relatives have been hired strictly to work Sundays. That is what they agreed to, that is what they were hired on, because that happens to be the only other day they have open.

Mr Morrow: But we are not talking full-time employment.

Mr O'Flaherty: Oh, no; it would just be part-time.

Mr Morrow: Because I was just going to say you do realize that you are in direct contrast with what the United Food and Commercial Workers and the Canadian Auto Workers are saying on that point. Anyway, thank you very much.

Mr Mills: I am pleased to be here this afternoon to listen to your comments. I have said before and I will say again that we are here to listen and we are listening.

Mr Carr: That must be three times you have said that, Gord.

Mr Mills: I know, I am enforcing this because this is the process. It may not have been the process in the previous round of hearings on the same subject, but we are really listening. Having said that, I would just like to get some clarification of a statement that you made. I have before me a bit from the Daily Miner. It says, "Kenora -- Only one of the largest stores in Kenora has definite plans to take advantage of the new Sunday shopping bylaw this coming weekend." On page 7 of your presentation you say, "In Kenora we have the history to prove that seven-day shopping is successful." My question to you, sir, is, what sort of history do you have that has proven that it is successful when only one store has indicated it wants to open?

Mr O'Flaherty: What is the date on that article?

Mr Mills: It was after the bylaw was passed. Unfortunately the date is cut off.

Mr O'Flaherty: Okay, so I am going by memory right now. I would say that was probably before the May long weekend.

Mr Mills: No, this is June 3, apparently.

Mr O'Flaherty: What long weekend is on June 3?

Mr Mills: I do not know, but they said it will be open as of June 3, that one store, and the other stores would not be open on that date.

Mr O'Flaherty: I still think it is referring to the May long weekend, as of June 3. That is, I think, when Mr Bishop's store opened back up again. The May long weekend has historically been one of the busiest weekends, because that is when all the Manitobans come in to open up their cottages, come down to see how Kenora did for the winter.

I would not say -- and I am not saying it from an expert's point of view -- that would be a prosperous weekend for them just to open up on a Sunday, because they may be paying out more in wages than they are bringing in, because the only people who may benefit are stores like Canadian Tire or Safeway if they happen to open. The smaller stores along the waterfront do not open at this point. There is no point in opening those stores up until the kids come down or finish school, because you are not going to get the grey trade or the senior citizens coming through buying tie-dyed and fluorescent and pastel shirts and T-shirts and such. They are not going to buy them, so there is no point in opening up at that time. Anything opened up before the middle of June is going to lose money. So with that comment in the paper, I do not really know why they would make it, but if one opened up, there would have been a good reason for it.

I would just like to reiterate I stated that I work for the government. I also work at a tourist operation. I am the master of a tour boat in Kenora, and I do work Sundays the odd time, and I dock on the waterfront. There are stores that open on the waterfront, are busy on the waterfront, and it is proving itself. The people who come on the boat want to know what to do for Sunday. They do not want to go sit in a restaurant and a bar and drink and eat. They just want to shop around. As Mr Duggan pointed out, when you have a wife and two kids walking around with you, you want to find something for them to do on Sunday.

The Acting Chair: Mr O'Flaherty, thank you for taking the time out this afternoon and for your presentation.

LAKE OF THE WOODS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORP

The Acting Chair: Now I would like to call on somebody from the Lake of the Woods Economic Development Corp. Good afternoon. You will be given half an hour for your presentation. You can either make a full half-hour presentation or you can make a shorter presentation and allow time for questions and comments from each of the caucuses. Please identify yourself and then proceed.

Mr Treusch: My name is David Treusch and I am executive director of the Lake of the Woods Economic Development Corp.

At the outset I might mention that our organization has five members and we like to think our group is the distillation of all three levels of government as well as the private sector, both in the form of small business and large business.

I do express appreciation for this opportunity to address the issue of Sunday shopping. Our organization supports Sunday shopping and looks to as broad a definition of tourism criteria as possible for purposes of the act.

The two relevant elements of the corporation's mission statement are stimulating economic growth and creating and maintaining jobs, and encouraging proactive thinking and planning.

Tourism has been an important economic engine for our tri-municipal area since the first tourist of 1883. In spite of global predictions that tourism will be the largest single industry by the year 2000, we find the industry one of the least understood. Because of the importance of the industry to local community development and this lack of understanding, our corporation began undertaking relevant data collection in 1988.

The research was undertaken by the Economic Planning Group of Canada, a consulting firm specializing in the tourism industry. One of the financial modelling tools used was the FAIM program. FAIM is the acronym for tourism financial assessment and economic impact model, jointly developed for the Canadian-Ontario tourism development agreement by the Economic Planning Group and Econometric Research Ltd.

Due to the high number of approximately 1,500 surveys of tourists together with appropriate survey timing, the Economic Planning Group regards its data with a relatively high level of confidence. Their estimate of total visitation to the tri-municipal area in 1989 is 958,000. This number should be related to a base population figure of approximately 15,500. This visitation resulted in total visitor spending of $233.4 million.

In order to calculate economic impacts, this spending was discounted to an effective revenue of $185 million. Discounting was essentially in the areas of service station sales and business expenditures which do not generate economic benefits to the local economy. However, much of this difference would accrue to the benefit of the province as a whole.

Direct impacts of this revenue are $87 million in value added income, $75.6 million in wages and salaries, and 3,245 person-years of employment.

Without the contribution of tourism revenues to municipal taxes, each tri-municipal household would have to pay an additional $2,513 in property taxes to maintain the same level of services if the commercial-industrial sector did not assume this additional cost. Without Sunday shopping the commercial sector's ability to pay additional taxes would be eroded, leaving the burden for one remaining single industry, the local paper mill.

Recent developments in the retail industry such as the West Edmonton Mall demonstrate that shopping in itself has become a major tourism attraction. The Eaton Centre in Toronto is reported to attract more visitors than Disneyland.

Specific to the issue, 42.2% of all tri-municipal visitors include shopping as an activity. In fact, shopping ranks third in visitors' key activities. For almost one third of our visitors, 67% of their activity was shopping. In total, tourism rang up $130.6 million on our retail registers. Consequently, tourism represents over 51% of local retail sales.

Quoting from Whyte, Reynolds and Associates, who undertook the retail portion of the corporation's market analysis and research study, "...a minimum of 41 `other retail and specialty stores' accounting for approximately 40% of the total retail base interviewed reflects the importance of tourism and summer resident activity."

1430

This study further cites business' opinion that 16% to 30% of its source of customers is visitors, the percentage depending upon the nature of the business. Additionally, it was found that in excess of 700 individuals are directly employed by the retail sector, or 8.7% of our workforce. On average, two and a half times as many square feet of selling space are devoted to groceries and convenience goods in our tri-municipalities than the Ontario and Manitoba averages, again indicating the significance of tourism.

Many businesses will declare that summer tourism, in effect, represents their profit, justifying the very act of being in business.

A recent threat to our local economy is the new Trans-Canada Highway bypass of the communities which opened to traffic in November 1990. The tourism surveys found that 42% of summer pass-throughs would leave the bypass and enter the tri-municipal area to shop, buy groceries and eat. To be closed on Sundays is to lose 14% of potential pass-through purchasing.

From a provincial perspective, the theory that pass-through traffic would be captured the following day elsewhere in the province is not valid. Our highways lead east, west and south. In two of these three directions, a traveller will have left the province in half an hour to two and a half hours.

Third only to traffic conditions and public inebriation, early closing and unavailability of stores and restaurants were most frequently cited by tourists as a main dislike of our communities. This is not inconsistent with the results of the consumer survey of the market analysis and research study which found that only 52% of respondents were fully satisfied by hours of operation.

In short, Sunday shopping provides the potential of increasing annual tourism expenditures from $5.75 million if shopping were the only activity engaged to $41.5 million if that activity induced a day's stay. Roughly speaking, these additional expenditures would result in 31 to 227 new tri-municipal jobs, $723,000 to $25.3 million in wages and salaries, and at least $360,000 or $65 per household in municipal taxes. It should also be noted that in the parochial terms of a community's economic wellbeing, these are all export dollars, not import or recirculation moneys.

For our purposes, we have adopted the widely held definition of tourism, that is, anyone visiting the community from a distance of approximately 25 kilometres or more. In defining tourism for purposes of administering the act, we recommend that it too follow commonly accepted practice.

The experience of communities committed to religious participation indicates that Sunday shopping does not adversely affect church attendance. Sunday afternoon shopping is frequently found to be a family activity, and in fact is generally regarded as contributing to the overall quality of life.

Carefully weighing all factors in balance, the corporation's board of directors at its regular meeting of May 21, 1990 carried the following resolution:

"Be it resolved that the corporation does hereby support the concept of Sunday shopping as a mechanism to increase visitor and tourism expenditures and enhance job creation in the tri-municipal area."

The Acting Chair: That allows six minutes for each caucus.

Mr Daigeler: Is this the first time you or your organization are making a presentation on this question, or were you involved in the previous discussions on the Sunday shopping issue as well?

Mr Treusch: You heard our colleagues from the same community make reference to last summer's addressing of this whole issue, and we at that time gave a similar presentation.

Mr Daigeler: What about the previous provincial round? Were you involved in that at all?

Mr Treusch: I personally was not involved at that time, so I have no knowledge.

Mr Daigeler: I am asking this question because it seems to me that there has been quite a significant shift in public opinion. I represent the Liberal Party, and there was a fair amount of criticism of it and the government at the time. That is why it was an issue during the election, that a fair number of people seemed to think the proposal that the Liberals put forward was not the right thing, but this time around it sounds as if almost everyone has finally seen the wisdom of the Liberal legislation.

Where is that change coming from? Is it something you have seen through your experience, and you have now agreed that was the right thing to do?

Mr Treusch: I can only speculate. I think it is an emotional issue, and emotion always gives rise to strong positions, often extreme positions. I mentioned that tourism is not a well-understood industry. It is one of the reasons we have collected data. In terms of our own community, being aware of the true nature of that industry, the impact being open or not being open on Sunday might have on the community, being given the facts perhaps took it somewhat out of the emotional area and brought it more into where there could be some real deliberation and some thoughtful discussion.

Mr Daigeler: The earlier presenter said Sunday shopping is now available in the United States. Is that relatively recent in the border states, or has that always been the case?

Mr Treusch: Before my current position in Kenora, I spent five years in Minneapolis-St Paul, and in all the time I was there, there was Sunday shopping.

Mr Daigeler: So it is not a recent phenomenon?

Mr Treusch: Not to my knowledge. I am not sure of North Dakota.

Mr Sorbara: I think this was a very good presentation. You make the case that tourism is a crucial industry in Ontario, a crucial industry in your area, and the freedom for storekeepers to open when the tourist market is there is crucial to the success of tourism in your area. Is it your view that those stores which do not have a tourist market, or those communities which are not a tourist destination, ought to be forced to remain closed on Sunday?

Mr Treusch: They should have the option to do what they think is best. Speaking as an economic development officer, I would like to be equipped with all the tools or all the resources I could muster. I think any community should have the option of whether it be a tourist community or not.

Mr Sorbara: In your own community, as an economic development officer familiar with the labour market and the social and cultural and economic issues in your community, since Kenora and the area determined to allow people to make their own choices with respect to Sunday shopping, have you noticed any negative impact on family life, on the quality of the working environment, on the satisfaction of workers in tourism or in retail or anywhere, or any other negative impact on the community that would help this committee muster some support for this bill?

Mr Treusch: None has come to my attention. We still do receive some complaints that even on the current basis some things are still too restricted.

Mr Sorbara: In other words, they want more freedom?

Mr Treusch: More extended hours or more stores open.

Mr Sorbara: What about from the ministerial community, from the pastors of local churches, the rabbis of the local synagogue, those people who are charged with the spiritual care of the community? Have they objected? Have they been to see you or the mayor, or have they written letters to the newspaper? Are they unhappy about what is going on in Kenora?

Mr Treusch: I am not aware of any. It does not mean there was not any, but none has been brought to my attention. We certainly try to keep our ear to the ground on the issue. You will notice from our statement that we are also concerned with the quality of life. If we do not maintain the quality of life of our community, it is very difficult to perform our type of function.

Mr Sorbara: What about within the trade unions in the area, or the district labour council? Are they protesting vigorously this new openness in the community?

Mr Treusch: I have not seen any rallies or marches or placards or letters to the editor.

Mr Carr: Thank you for a good presentation. I must say that organizations like yours are very successful, because I think there probably would not have been even the tourism criteria there are had there not been a lot of pressure from groups in communities like yours, so I thank you for taking the time, because they do serve a purpose in getting the message out.

One of the questions relates to economic activity; on page 4 and 5 you put together a lot of statistics. The government seems to be saying that as a result of Sunday shopping there is no increase in economic activity. In fact, as was mentioned earlier, there are some who say it is going to be an added drain on communities because of bus services and so on.

It would seem to me from all the statistics on pages 4 and 5 that that is not the case, that there is more economic activity, that you are actually helping some municipalities with the increased taxes -- you put some of those in there. Is that the case? Maybe we could just sum it up as what you would say to a government that believes there is not any extra economic activity as a result of being open on Sunday in your community.

1440

Mr Treusch: In our particular case, and I have asked a couple of the operators to try and be certain, they declare that the increased business they do as a result of Sunday openings is new business; it is not just reshuffling the deck from midweek or Saturdays through to Sunday. For our community, then, that is increasing the total business within the community, and it would benefit the community. It would net out in job creation; the business would be able to expand. I would hate to think a successful business would be penalized because it expanded and then could no longer open on Sundays. Of course it would then be paying more municipal taxes, so it is a win-win type of situation.

Mr Carr: As you know, the legislation was put in with the number one criterion of protecting workers who do not want to work on Sunday, although, as has been mentioned, there are many workers who do and the retail workers would be the only ones who would have protection. What has been your experience of the actual workers? Have you had people complaining to you that they have had to work on Sunday? Does that seem to be a big problem in the community, that a company has opened a business saying, "We have to be open, so you're going to work"? Has that been expressed to you at all?

Mr Treusch: No, it has not. I have found, particularly in the case of the smaller owner-proprietor type of business, that because of personal reasons, that owner elects not to open on Sundays, and he does not. With the Kenora experience, they are not obliged to open, so that is their free choice. That is the closest I have come to hearing any dissenting voice to being required to work on Sunday.

Mr Carr: Sometimes, when we look at our circumstances, it is refreshing to come out into communities and see organizations like yours that are working to make this a better province, and for that I want to commend you. Mr Fletcher is laughing at it, but I sincerely believe there are people who are trying their very best, sometimes in spite of what we in government do.

Interjection.

Mr Carr: He laughed. I assume that is what he was laughing about. He looked at me and laughed.

When we come out and get a chance to hear communities like yours and what you are trying to do to make your community viable, as a legislator it makes me feel a lot better, because there are some tremendous people out there who are working to improve the community, so I commend you.

Mr Treusch: We appreciate the support we get from provincial government as well.

Mr Fletcher: I support what Mr Carr was saying, even if I do chuckle.

I am going to follow what Mr Carr was saying earlier in the day about statistics. On page 5, it says for 42.2% of all visitors, shopping was an activity. What was number one and two on the list, do you know?

Mr Treusch: In our area, it would have been outdoor recreation and pleasure, that type of thing, and visiting friends and relatives.

Mr Fletcher: Then it says: "Shopping ranks third in visitor's key activities. For almost one third of our visitors" -- which cuts it down a little more -- "67% of their activity was shopping." Statistics are statistics and I really do not want to get into --

Mr Treusch: It is slightly different ways of stating the same thing.

Mr Fletcher: Anyway, I have listened to a lot of presentations today from the Kenora and District Chamber of Commerce, the town of Kenora, Lake of the Woods -- that is Kenora -- and Lake of the Woods Economic Development Corp, which is part of Kenora. I still have a bit of a problem with why you are here, because you probably meet the tourism criteria more than anyone else in the province almost. From what I can read and from everything I have heard today, you would have Sunday opening. That is where I am getting a bit of a problem. If it is just that you want the absolute right to choose between wide-open Sunday shopping or partial Sunday shopping, I can understand that. But the way Bill 115 is with the tourism criteria, you meet the criteria, from everything I have heard in every presentation today. Going through it, you meet the criteria. You would have wide-open Sunday shopping. I am trying to get a grasp on exactly why you are here saying that the bill is no good.

Mr Treusch: I think with distance and time, we were made aware that the issue of Sunday shopping was coming up -- this proposed legislation. What the final form will be, we are uncertain. The government has been kind enough to take the issue out and hear representations like this. We thought it was worth while to let it be known what our experience has been and that we value it and that it be maintained.

We and I do not yet know, unfortunately, what the criteria are, and I was not able to be specific on the issue. The material I was issued talked about tourism criteria, but I do not know what those criteria are.

Mr Fletcher: Okay. I am going to make sure you get a copy of that.

Mr Treusch: Hopefully, it will be broad and not restrictive.

Mr Fletcher: Right. I know the town of Elora, which is close to my jurisdiction, loves this law. They think it was written just for them, and the town of Elora is strictly tourist.

Mr Treusch: I guess part of the problem, though, is -- and maybe next week I get transferred to another community -- maybe they do not even know how to spell the word tourism. But as we looked it over and began to analyse it, maybe tourism is an industry that can be developed there. Can we start Sunday shopping the day after? I do not know, and that is why to me non-restrictive legislation is so much easier to work with than something that is very narrow and confining.

Mr Fletcher: Yes. I know there is a problem with the municipal option, though. Municipalities were saying, "We don't want the burden."

Mr Treusch: Well, some municipalities may not,

Mr Fletcher: Now with the tourism criteria that are outlined by the Ontario government, with the government to be the overseer of it, I think it will work out well. I think this area is going to like the criteria. Thank you for your presentation. It was a very good presentation.

The Acting Chair: Mr Mills, you have about two minutes.

Mr Mills: I have listened to your brief with very open ears and I would like to comment to you that we talk about the economic engine being tourism, and I think our government recognizes that tourism is very important to this province. These regulations, which are draft regulations, are a process where we can hopefully refine or massage the criteria so they encourage tourism perhaps to an even greater degree than you perceive now.

Having said that, we talk about Sunday shopping. In British Columbia they have had wide-open Sunday shopping for the last four years and the statistical information is that during that four-year period -- and I go back to your resolution that you support "Sunday shopping as a mechanism to increase visitor and tourism expenditure" -- the experience in British Columbia over the last four years is that Sunday shopping has produced a growth of 1%. I just wonder if you would like to comment on what the 1% means when you have got the overheads, the costs. I do not see that being a very good argument for wide-open Sunday shopping and I would just like you to comment on that 1%. I am sure you would not be satisfied with that here.

Mr Treusch: It would be interesting. Again, you are summarizing; you throw out percentage rates of data, and so what does it really mean? You have to look behind it. I would suspect that probably the geography would have a lot to do with that. Here in Ontario, particularly where we are located, tourists are coming at us from three directions, and in a sense British Columbia is almost like an isolated cul-de-sac. If it is Canadian traffic, you are crossing the Rockies; other than that it is the one-way channels to south of the border. If you are going to try to take on the Americans strictly in the retail game, it is a pretty uphill battle. I would not expect the Ontario experience to be the same as British Columbia's.

Mr Mills: So you think the BC experience is unique to that province and not to be applied as a criterion for a similar experience here in Ontario?

Mr Treusch: That would be my initial reaction without seeing anything else.

1450

Mr Sorbara: If we are finished questioning the presenter, I wonder if I might get a clarification from the parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General. My problem arises because of some of the submissions that we have heard earlier today. The bill we are considering -- if I understand it correctly, I say to the parliamentary assistant -- provides in effect that all stores have to be closed on Sunday except -- now I am quoting from section 4 -- "for the maintenance or development of tourism." Is the government making an absolute distinction as between what is a tourist and what is not a tourist?

I will put this example before the parliamentary assistant. If I am a resident of Thunder Bay and on Sunday I am interested in buying some garden hose and perhaps a lawnmower and, I do not know, some plants, am I a tourist if I travel to Kenora to buy that whereas if I stay in Thunder Bay and look for a place to buy the same items in Thunder Bay I am not a tourist? How are we trying to distinguish between which shoppers in Ontario should have the right to shop on Sunday? What are the distinctions we are making as between my rights as a citizen and a resident of Ontario to shop in my local community or to shop in a community that is, say, I do not know, 100 or 200 kilometres away?

Mr Mills: I guess the definition of a tourist has been arrived at over broad consultation with the tourist industry and Tourism Ontario Inc. It is my understanding that the technical definition of a tourist is one who leaves his home and travels at least 40 kilometres to somewhere else and then he is a tourist.

Mr Sorbara: Is the object of the legislation then to encourage people to travel long distances to make their purchases? Is the object of the legislation to support businesses that can attract from a catchment area that is 40 kilometres or more away? If that is the case, why are we discriminating against the shopper who does not have the means to travel 40 kilometres or more to do his or her shopping? Why does that consumer not have the right to buy the very same products closer to home?

It seems to me that the government is not trying to encourage efficiency and discourage a lot of road travel and use of pollutants like gasoline. What is the basis upon which we are going to distinguish between whether or not I should have the right to buy things locally in my own community and perhaps travel to Kenora and buy the very same products? Why are we making that distinction?

Mr Mills: I suppose that in developing the tourism criteria, the ultimate part of those criteria must be who is a tourist. I think the strategy that was employed through consultation and getting it from Ontario tourism was that a tourist technically is one who travels 40 kilometres to another place to visit. Notwithstanding that, I do not see that if you live in Kenora you have to go somewhere else to shop if this is designated a tourist area. It might be very difficult to give an example of any particular area that will not have a particular tourism attraction. I do not think the intention is to make people travel but rather to uphold the criteria that are established here.

Mr Sorbara: Does the government take the position that if I am a resident of Thunder Bay, I am a tourist on Sunday if I drive to Duluth in order to do my grocery shopping?

Mr Mills: My interpretation of a tourist, and I will say it again, is one who travels at least 40 kilometres from where he lives. That for the purposes of the tourist criteria is a tourist.

The Acting Chair: Thank you very much. This is turning into a bit of a debate and I think this will be handled during clause-by-clause. Mr Treusch, on behalf of the committee, I would like to thank you for taking time out this afternoon and coming and giving your presentation.

FORT FRANCES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

The Acting Chair: Our next presenter is from the Fort Frances Chamber of Commerce. Good afternoon. You will be allowed half an hour for your presentation. You can either take the full half-hour for your presentation or you can make it shorter and allow time for questions and comments from each of the caucuses. Please identify yourself for the record and then proceed.

Mr Zaremba: My name is Paul Zaremba and I live in Fort Frances. I am a chamber member of the Fort Frances Chamber of Commerce and I am here on behalf of most of our chamber members, so I am not speaking for myself. I am going to try to speak for them.

We did a little survey before I came and we talked with them about Sunday shopping: "It is important to me because -- " What I am going to do is present some statements that I hope act as icons in your mind to give you an idea of the thoughts going through our business community. These are their statements, not necessarily mine. I am just going to go through it as per your directions in the summary sheet.

Heavy industry is not affected by the Sunday work rule. They have the freedom to plan and schedule work any day of the week.

The two most important industries, both in revenue and as major employers in Fort Frances, are Boise Cascade, which is the paper industry, and tourism.

Another statement is: Sunday shopping is one way for us to become more competitive. It is our right to choose when we will open our businesses. This is an antiquated law. It must be reviewed and updated.

We are amidst transition into free trade. When will the government stop tying our hands?

Fort Frances Canada Customs reports Fort Frances traffic is up 75% to 100%, while tourism and non-resident traffic is down or on the decline. Canada is becoming a bedroom/suburb community of the United States cities within 300 miles south of our border. Sunday shopping is a matter of business survival. Our competitors across the border are open on Sundays; Canadian businesses need every opportunity they can get;

In today's busy society, Sunday is the only day open for individuals and/or families to do relaxed shopping. Shopping is now a form of family entertainment.

Having stores open on Sunday is crucial to the tourism industry.

To declare Sunday a holy day -- the derivative, holiday -- is not separating religion from government. It also discriminates against people of other faiths. Churches offer many different options in regard to services and scheduling. They have gotten with the times, why do we not?

There are many people with alternative lifestyles who would like and/or need to work on Sunday. This is also their right.

Hopefully I presented some of the bullet points in the speech to reflect the feeling and the opinions and the frustrations of some of our business people, because we are having a tough time in Fort Frances.

During this meeting I would like to present a few reasons why Fort Frances business owners need to have the opportunity to open their business establishments on Sunday. Let me begin.

Fort Frances business owners strongly believe it is their right to choose to be open or closed on Sunday. It is our right to be open. We have the right to be taxed seven days of the week, we have the right to pay rent for seven days of the week, we have the right to be responsible for our business loans and mortgages seven days of the week, and we have the right to be responsible for making the payroll seven days of the week. Why do we not have the right to choose when and where we will conduct business?

1500

Not having the right to choose to be open on Sunday is one more example of government interference and overregulation of business. Upon the free trade agreement becoming fully operational, in approximately 1995-96, Fort Frances and all Canadian businesses will be thrust into an extremely competitive and new free market trading environment, an environment which has never been seen in Canada before -- simply put, a market which we really are not prepared for.

As I speak, we are already five to six years behind the times in implementing change and making the transition into the free trade agreement. When is government going to stop tying our hands and let us become more competitive and be the very best we can? When will government begin to assist business, halting the overregulation of business?

Allowing Sunday shopping is one of many such measures or tools we can use to level our playing field and make our businesses more competitive. As a tool, Sunday shopping will assist the business community to become more competitive and to make quick and necessary adjustments in the marketplace.

If we do not plan for change, the US vendors will change it for us, on their time frame and on their schedule. We will end up becoming bedroom communities or suburbs of all major US cities within 300 miles south of our border. Basically we will have some convenience stores and just a few stores to tide us over until we can make that big trip.

Do not think this is not happening, because it is. See for yourselves. By contacting any Canada Customs office, it only takes a matter of 10 minutes to see the trend. This is a large grass-roots movement and people are voting with their feet. Here is an example. After discussions with Fort Frances Canada Customs personnel, during all of fiscal year 1990-91 there was a total of 50,000 people who transacted business with Canada Customs in one way or another. They basically came in the door and paid a fee, a duty, a tariff or some sort of tax; 50,000 transactions happened in the last fiscal year.

Presently, Fort Frances Canada Customs has just entered into its second quarter of this fiscal year. Upon entering into this second quarter of fiscal year 1991-92, Canada Customs reported 28,000 people have already transacted business through its system, better than 100% already. Based upon a rough, conservative estimate, we have determined that by the end of fiscal year 1991-92 a minimum of 80,000 people, perhaps 100,000 people, will have transacted business with Fort Frances Canada Customs. Please note that while return resident traffic into Canada is increasing, we are experiencing a decline in tourism and/or non-resident traffic through Fort Frances Canada Customs.

In short, per-person business transactions at Fort Frances Canada Customs are up 75% to 100% over last year. This estimate reflects an increase in border traffic into Canada while experiencing a reduction in non-resident tourism traffic at Fort Frances Canada Customs. When Fort Frances Canada Customs personnel were queried, they indicated that Fort Frances border activity has increased significantly and noticeably. When queried regarding Sunday shopping or Sunday activity at the Fort Frances Canada Customs, it was mentioned that Sunday used to be a slack or slow day. Sunday is now just as busy as any other day of the week, and sometimes busier.

Our destination is 1995-96 and full implementation of the free trade agreement between Canada and the United States. We will need lead time to get ready for this. We have already gone five to six years and we are not on the ball. We need time. We need lead time for business planning, staff scheduling, identifying new target markets, financing, pricing, business cycles, and again, implementation time.

This last bullet point is extremely important. We need implementation and lead time to introduce Sunday shopping to our marketplace. It takes time to implement these things. Of course, if you have such economic imbalances in the United States and you are buying, you can get things that much cheaper. Well, they are going to vote a lot faster and you are going to change your market quickly. We do not have that, so we have to maintain a higher price level. But we need every day we can get, and Sunday is one of them. The six-month trial of the Sunday shopping, or the eight months or whatever it was, is no measure of whether this pilot was successful or not. It takes years to change buyer habits.

Ladies and gentlemen, these are the 1990s. We must become more progressive. We must take off our blinders. We cannot isolate ourselves and live in ignorance. All the while we are surrounded by change and growing regional, national and international markets.

The two largest revenue- and employment-generating industries in Fort Frances are (1) paper and (2) tourism. They are both revenue- and employment-generating, and it is in that order -- heavy industry and then tourism is second. We know the paper industry is on a decline. Everybody is taking a beating in the paper market, especially in Canada. I have a pretty good idea of that. I have been involved in the lumber industry and the forest industry myself in the past. Presently I am not, but I see some things that are going on there.

With tourism being such an important industry to Fort Frances, it stands to reason that we have an abundance, which is in decline, of incoming and outgoing non-residents on Sunday who are looking to -- okay, they are coming in on Sunday. They are coming in the rest of the week too, and they are doing these things. But here they are. They are coming in on Sunday and they cannot do these things, such as stock up on supplies for their vacation in the area or restock supplies for the next leg of their trip to the Arctic or to wherever, find a place to stay or purchase the last memento reminding them of their Canadian experience before they leave Canada. I think we are sending them home with the wrong mementoes. Also, people on vacation enjoy relaxing, be it Monday, Saturday or Sunday. They are here to relax and enjoy themselves, as we all do when we travel.

Fort Frances is a border town. Its economy is directly linked to whether we are open on Sunday or not. This is a plain and well-known fact. If our businesses are not open on Sunday, we have effectively handed the Canadian consumer and non-resident tourist destined for Canada over to US merchants without competition from us, the Canadian merchants.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your time. At this time, I will answer any questions.

Mr Sorbara: Mr Zaremba, that was a pretty powerful presentation. Do you believe, as Mr Mills believes, that the only businesses that should be allowed to be opened in Fort Frances are those that cater to customers who come from 40 kilometres or more away from Fort Frances?

Mr Zaremba: No, I believe all businesses should have the right to choose to be open on Sunday. That is what I believe.

Mr Mills: On a point of order, Mr Chair: I gave you the definition of a tourist arrived at by consultation with the tourist industry to say who is a tourist. In no way did I say, or did I want to be misinterpreted to say, that it bears some restriction on who should shop in Fort Frances. I just want to make that very clear.

Mr Sorbara: I appreciate that clarification. The point I am trying to make is that Mr Mills and the government have a definition of a tourist and the bill we are looking at says the only businesses that should be open on Sunday are the ones that maintain or promote tourism. I am just going from what the bill says to what Mr Mills and the government say are tourists, and the logical conclusion is inevitable; that is, the only stores that should be open in Fort Frances are the ones that cater to a market of customers who come from 40 kilometres or more.

Now, sir, about the only people who have come before this committee to support the government's position are district labour councils and the United Food and Commercial Workers. I take it that Boise Cascade in Fort Frances operates on Sunday?

Mr Zaremba: They operate any time they want, but they have to pay for it.

Mr Sorbara: I take it that the trade union movement in Fort Frances and the local union there are not lobbying to close down Boise Cascade on Sunday?

Mr Zaremba: No, I have never heard anything like that.

Mr Morrow: On a point of order, Mr Chair: I would like to clear something up with Mr Sorbara. I do believe those are trade unionists and they do have a negotiated contract.

The Acting Chair: Thank you for that piece of information. Please proceed.

1510

Mr Sorbara: I agree with my friend Mr Morrow that they do have negotiated contracts and they are able to work out with their employers, through negotiations, whether or not they are going to work on Sunday. I would love to see commercial workers and retail workers have those same rights, and we are giving them to them in this bill in a pretty forceful way.

Would you say, sir, it is rather an artificial distinction to identify and allow only stores that cater to or serve tourists to stay open in today's market?

Mr Zaremba: In today's market you need all the opportunity you can get to make your money. You have to. You are generating. You are responsible. I do not think it should be just segregated. I think anybody who is in business, who can find a target market, who is going to participate in generating revenue in his establishment should have the opportunity to be open. Granted that there are certain things set up so that there is a certain amount of protection for the employee.

Mr Sorbara: Would you be surprised if I told you these inconsistencies go back almost 100 years in Ontario history? If you go back to 1906, the law prohibited the sale of foreign newspapers. If you go back to 1938, Sunday movies were prohibited, except for armed service personnel. If you go back to 1943, we were prosecuting people for selling things at souvenir stands, at hot dog stands, and the rental of boats. Would that be tourism? Would you be surprised?

Mr Zaremba: It all depends on what they are hawking, sir.

Mr Jackson: Mr Sorbara is hawking right now.

Mr Sorbara: I have got a lot of things to hawk.

I just want to let you know that in 1945 we then prohibited armed service personnel from going to movies on Sunday and we thought we were being progressive. What are your predictions in Ontario? What do you think the law should be when this whole thing settles down?

Mr Zaremba: I think business should have the opportunity to be open, with provisos for the protection of the employees, to a certain extent. I myself used to work on Sunday. I am originally from the Chicago area. I grew up with Sundays. I shop on Sundays. I have worked on Sundays. There are a lot of people who might have somebody -- there might be parents around. They, either male or female, might want to work Sunday. That is their right. If you want to go to church, there are a number of different service options. If you are Catholic, you can go on Wednesdays or Saturday nights or Sundays. A number of other denominations serve their target market the same way. When it all finishes up, I would like to see businesses have the opportunity to be open on Sunday, because they are going to be facing the US in the free trade coming up in 1995-96.

Mr Sorbara: The Chairman says I have only one more question. I had a long series of questions on the role and responsibility of the chambers of commerce as identified in the draft regulations. The draft regulations say any store over 7,500 square feet that wishes to open on Sunday must in its application submit a letter from the local chamber of commerce saying the local chamber of commerce approves that applicant opening on Sunday. What is this going to do to a local chamber of commerce when it has to make choices between applicants who apply to open on Sunday and have to go through the local chamber?

Mr Zaremba: I do not know. I am not very familiar with that part of the chamber. All chambers are separate entities. The local chamber, the provincial chamber and the national chamber are set up very differently from the way they are set up around the world and in the United States. These might just be some bylaws they have created locally, and maybe the bylaws in another chamber are a little bit different.

Mr Sorbara: If you were the president of the chamber and had to make the decision, and in your wisdom decided that the local --

Mr Zaremba: I do not feel there should be any distinction. It is a business-civic organization. It is there to bring business together. There should not be any discrimination.

Mr Carr: Even the labour unions that have come before this committee are not happy with the legislation, for different reasons. They say it does not go far enough and protect the workers. But just to clear the record, nobody who has appeared before this committee is happy. They are saying there should be amendments, and even the labour unions are saying that.

I can understand where you are confused with this government attempting to help you. This new government says it is trying to help business, and yet, as I mentioned earlier, it adds taxes on gasoline -- and the vast majority of the price of gasoline is taxes -- on cigarettes and on liquor, the very products people are going across the border for. In the last budget they increased it and in fact heightened the problem.

What would you say to a government that says it understands more about the economic activity in Fort Frances and what needs to be done than your chamber and your members? What would you like to say to a Premier, who I understand is in the city, who says, "We will decide what is going to happen in Fort Frances and what we believe is best"? What would you say to a Premier who says he knows better?

Mr Zaremba: We would say: "Just get out of the way of business. Just get out of the way and let us do our thing. You do your government's thing and we'll do our other things. We'll generate the money and we'll live within certain guidelines, but just stay out of our way. Let us be the best we can be."

Let's stop being looked down on as second-rate business people compared to the United States. It is not true. If you can do business in Canada, it is easy to do business in the US because of all of the regulations; you have a line of inspectors of this ministry and that ministry by the time you even get your doors open. I would just like for government to stay out of business. It should let us do what we do best, and we are going to let it do what it does best. It is a thrust and parry of laws and regulations and protections. We can live with that, but you have to give us some room to move. Sunday is just one small part of the whole program.

Mr Carr: As you know, one of the reasons they have brought in legislation is that as a socialist party their concern is for the workers. What has been your feeling with regard to the chamber and its relationship with workers? If Sunday were to be a day of working, do you see that there would be problems in terms of worker-management relations, whether the owners are small, midsize or large? How do you think that relationship will work and do you in fact see the government being able to protect the workers? How would you see it operating?

Mr Zaremba: You have the Ministry of Labour. When I was an employer, a gentleman by the name of Marcel Castonguay was the first guy to call you and he would tell you what the facts of life were. If you have something available that people can go to that is going to cut through the red tape and really sort things out between the employer and the employee, that should be good enough, just a good representative in government.

Other than that, you can have your basic legislation that works through some of these, like the Ministry of Labour, and the employees and the employers can figure it out themselves. They can figure out their schedules and how they are going to do things. I really do not have a concrete answer on that, but I see it as the employer and the employee working together. I do not think it is really going to affect a lot of employees. Of course you are going to have employers who are going to abuse the system, but you are also going to have employers who are going to work with their staff.

The other thing you get going too is that a lot of businesses are not going to open on Sunday. They are not going to force opening because they do not want to work. They do not want to see their employees work, so they are not going to be open. But that does not mean they should not have the right to be open if the market changes in the area and they have the flexibility to start changing and testing. Maybe they will find that employee who wants to work on Sunday and the owner, a woman or man, will say: "If you'd like to try working that day and you think there's a market, if you think we'll have enough people coming in, yes, we'll open up. We'll give it a try." They should have that opportunity without going through a lot of paperwork and checking with different agencies. So yes, I think there are abuses. There are abuses for the employee too. Employees can call in and harass the employer if they want. But that goes with anything. I think they will work it out.

1520

Mr Morrow: Thank you for that very interesting presentation. Just a couple of really quick questions, if you do not mind. Neither the Retail Council of Canada nor any other organization has undertaken any study to permit it to come to a conclusion about the financial effects of Sunday shopping on retailers. Do you have any substantial surveys or studies in Fort Frances to give us any indication on that at all?

Mr Zaremba: No, I do not.

Mr Morrow: You talked a bit about the problems of a recession and Sunday shopping. We basically just went through the worst recession in Ontario since the Depression, and we had wide-open Sunday shopping. Can you please tell me, with my just giving you that information, how Sunday shopping would now help Fort Frances?

Mr Zaremba: First off, it is a right. I think they should have the right to be open. It is going to take time to change attitudes to get people used to shopping locally, and they should have the right to try it if they want. Right now a lot of people do not open on Sunday, and they did not open when Sunday shopping was legal anyway. So what is it really harming?

Mr Morrow: Should a worker have an absolute right to refuse working on Sunday in the retail sector?

Mr Zaremba: I think that should be worked out between the employer and the employee. I do not think somebody should be able to totally refuse. I think it has to be worked out between the two.

Mr Morrow: Now that you have raised that, do you agree with any form of a common pause day?

Mr Zaremba: "Pause day." I do not know what that means.

Mr Morrow: Thank you.

Mr Zaremba: Oh, common pause day. I have never heard of that. I do not know the terminology. Excuse me for my ignorance. I think you should be able to choose your pause days. I think you should be able to choose when you want your time off, whether it be consecutive -- if you have to have 36 consecutive hours, then work it out. You might be Seventh Day Adventists and you might want to have your time off during the week.

Mr Fletcher: As far as the cross-border shopping, price is the motivating factor for people crossing the border.

Mr Zaremba: I think so.

Mr Fletcher: Right, okay, so even if you are open Sunday, they are still going across the border because of the price.

Mr Zaremba: Maybe not; not necessarily; sometimes, yes.

Mr Fletcher: I have to take exception to what you said about government getting out of business. For far too long I have stood by and watched when other governments have allowed business to do what it wants to do, and I have seen a lot of employees who have come out with maimed limbs. The environment has been harmed over the years.

As far as I am concerned, the government does have a role to play in protecting certain things, especially when it comes to protecting the rights of employees to safety. When it comes to protecting the environment, governments do have to be involved with business and they have to be a partnership. I agree with that. But let's not say, "Let's get out of the way."

Obviously, the free trade agreement was a government action that tried to help business, and look at what has happened. In fact, as far as free trade is concerned, if you look at what has happened in the paper industry, MacMillan Bathurst, Domtar, Abitibi-Price now are buying all their inks in a converting part of the industry from the United States. They are not buying from the Canadian producers any more. The Canadian producers are out of work; they have closed down. If you look at the starches they use in the paper industry, they are coming from the United States also. If you look where the converting industry is buying its paper, it is from the southern states also. So you can see why the industry and the other industries connected with it are going down the tubes, because they are going across to the US.

If Canadian industry and business are that concerned about keeping business and money in Canada, why are we not buying Canadian-made products, and especially in Ontario, especially in the industry? How many stores in Kenora are owned by American subsidiaries?

Mr Zaremba: There is not that much Canadian product out there, nor is there US product; $80 billion of trade comes from Japan and is imported into California every year.

Mr Fletcher: And then it is coming into Canada.

Mr Zaremba: Canada could be buying it too; I do not know.

Mr Fletcher: Perhaps Canada should be buying its own products. If it is going to go through the whole system and you want your own people to stay at home and shop, then maybe it should be business that stays at home and shops also. That way we help each other out, and that way there probably would be a lot more money to go around to help businesses.

Mr Zaremba: That is a protectionist attitude and I do not agree with that, but we live in a free country, so you are entitled to your opinion on that. I believe business should be able to access the markets so that their dollar can buy the product. I think there should be protection --

Mr Fletcher: It is okay for business, as consumers, to go outside the country and spend its dollars and not spend them in Canada, but when it comes to the people, the consumers who have to buy the products in Canada, it is not okay for them to go outside.

Mr Zaremba: I am not debating that. I came here to talk on Sunday shopping.

Mr Fletcher: You talked a heck of a lot about cross-border shopping too.

Mr Zaremba: Well, we see it. We are in Fort Frances.

The Acting Chair: Mr Zaremba, thank you for having taken time out this afternoon to come and give your presentation.

KENORA-KEEWATIN AND DISTRICT LABOUR COUNCIL

The Acting Chair: Our next presenters have cancelled, so we will be moving up to the Kenora-Keewatin and District Labour Council. Gentlemen, welcome this afternoon. You will be given a half-hour to give your presentation. You can give either a half-hour presentation or else give a shorter submission and allow time for questions and comments from each of the caucuses. Please identify yourself for the record and then proceed.

Mr Canfield: Thank you very much. I am Dave Canfield from the Kenora-Keewatin and District Labour Council. I do believe that briefs should be brief, so I will be brief.

I have been president of the district labour council for approximately three years now. We represent approximately 3,000 unionized workers in Kenora, and with all the phone calls I get coming to my place from non-unionized workers, I have taken it upon myself to represent anybody who needs my help. We represent approximately 800 employees who are with the United Food and Commercial Workers in Kenora, not all in the retail industry; some are in the essential service industry and probably about 300 in the retail industry.

The Sunday shopping issue is not new for the Kenora labour council, and I do not imagine for a lot of other labour councils; it has been brought up before across the country. Our council has been making presentations back as far as the 1960s, the 1970s, into the 1980s and now the 1990s, the difference being that democracy prevailed for three decades and disappeared last spring in Kenora. As the greed of the 1980s and the power of the corporate agenda have taken over today's society, we find ourselves fighting a brick wall, time and time again. Last spring we ran into that wall in Kenora.

The issue of Sunday shopping came up and at the time we thought council made the right decision, to hold a public meeting. The meeting, we thought, would decide the issue democratically, but no such luck. After two months of interviews, press releases and then finally the public forum, Kenora council voted five to two in favour of Sunday shopping.

During the months of the debate, we basically dominated the issue. The local media did a poll. They did not publicize this poll very well because it did not go in favour of their beliefs. It did not go in the editor's comment, but the people, the public, the majority were against Sunday shopping. Our arguments fell on deaf ears, which I hope they do not here, because I do not like attending token meetings.

There were arguments put forward by Kenora council. Tourism was one of the arguments and, after listening to the briefs by my fellow people from Kenora today, I will even give some credibility to some of the things that were said. The thing is, I think, for any of you people who have been to Kenora, you would agree with me that living on the Lake of the Woods, the most beautiful inland lake in North America, possibly the world, people do not come to Kenora to go Sunday shopping. Being a tourist town, the small stores were allowed to open before; there are some very unique shops that did open. Now with the larger stores open, it is only natural that people are going to shop on Sunday, but I am sure they did not drive, as I said before, hundreds or even thousands of miles to come to Kenora to shop on Sunday.

1530

The opening of the bypass is another argument put forward: if we do not have Sunday shopping, people will go on the bypass. I do not particularly know what the bypass has to do with it, but if I see Sunday shopping, I will probably take the bypass, because I personally am dead against it.

At the council meeting, the Sunday shopping issue was passed. There were councillors who tried to answer the fears of the labour movement. One councillor said, "We'd keep a close eye on the larger stores and make sure they didn't force people to work." With all due respect to the councillor, I think she had better get out from under that mushroom. We in the labour movement have been trying for years to stop the manipulation of employees by employers, and we cannot control it yet. This councillor has been in business and, as I said, I have a lot of respect for the person. She was in business, I believe she said, for 32 years, and she worked Sundays and allowed her employees to be off. If all business people were this honest, this dedicated and this down to earth, there would be no need for a trade union movement in this country.

Another councillor stated -- and I am glad there is not a women's contingent here -- "We're not pulling the old ladies away from their stoves; the students will do the work." What happens when you cannot get students? In Kenora -- and I have talked to small businesses there too; my family is very much involved in the business community -- small businesses are having a hard time getting people to work now. The management of some of our larger stores told their employees in the retail trade industry, on a one-to-one basis with no witnesses, "You're going to work, like it or not."

There was another councillor who said the present bylaw discriminates against larger stores. He is right; it does. But it also ensures the survival of the corner store. This argument reminds me of deregulation and free trade. We know what that has done. When you are not on a level playing field, you cannot compete. The free trade deal has shown us only too much of that in the trade union movement by a loss of 250,000 jobs in this country. The corner store cannot compete against the superstores.

In Kenora, two stores basically had the big push on -- maybe one more than two, the presentation you heard today. But there were two that had the biggest push on. The others sat back and did not really say a lot. As you also heard, Woolco was opposed to it. They even asked their membership to get out and fight the issue because they did not want to open on Sunday but would be forced to do so. Within a couple of weeks of Sunday openings, six larger stores had opened, and I think on your briefs you are going to see seven; I found another one somewhere. I do not know where I came up with the seventh store, but I did correct it.

This in time will have a ripple effect, eventually having the service industry open, and there will no longer be a common pause day. When I say the "service industry," I do not just mean the service industry that is open now. The suggestion has been made today to let business run business; let everybody open. It is only a matter of time until our whole operation will be based on a seven-day week, not just in industry but in the retail trade, services, the town workers, everybody. When you have those many demands out there, you have to satisfy them, and it would only be a while and everybody would be working.

I am employed in the pulp-and-paper industry, where operating crews have to work on a seven-day week. Some of the greatest arguments for this, which have been brought up here today many times, are that it costs a heck of a lot more to shut down a paper mill than a retail store. You are talking about $200,000 per startup. In our last round of negotiations, we were forced to give up three of only five shutdown days we had a year. We now shut down, as of our last contract, only for Labour Day and Christmas. We already know, and they have told us in no uncertain terms, that in this decade the paper industry is going to run 365 days of the year. I ask this committee, where does this all end?

I have a few more comments. I jotted down a lot of stuff sitting here all day listening to presentations, including one presentation from the town council. I would like to inform the gentleman that I made a presentation at the council when it decided to go with Sunday shopping. I have never been in one of the stores that open on Sundays; I stay with the corner stores. So I suggest he go to the optometrist.

Another comment that was made here was, "Let business run business." Mr Carr and Mr Sorbara seem to think this is a really great idea. I will tell you something. You go out and tell those 400 people from Abitibi between 40 and 60 years old who cannot go anywhere that business running business is the right way to do things in this country. Tell the other thousands of people who are going to lose their jobs in the paper industry because the paper industry mismanaged the industry. The employees did not mismanage that industry. They even had enough to say in negotiations. For the last year, we negotiated with Boise Cascade, who admitted, "Yes, we mismanaged our industry," and they were not regulated before. I suggest that maybe we need a little more regulation in industry and in business.

I am open for comments.

Mr Sorbara: I am sorry I left you with the wrong impression. I do not support the notion that we should just let business run business. In fact, I disagree with the position that you take in your paper where you say in effect that we have to have the trade union movement and the labour movement because of manipulation by employers. My own view is that a good employer has a good relationship with a strong and vital trade union in its place of business. It is the lousy employers who fight the workers' right to organize and, if the workplace is organized, fight the trade unions' responsibility to negotiate a good collective agreement. I think healthy labour relations require both a reasonable employer and good representation on the part of the workers.

Our problem here is that the world has changed dramatically over the past seven or eight years. You say you hope this committee listens. I put it to you that, collectively, about 75% or 80% of the people of this province -- workers, trade union and non-union workers, people who are out of the workforce entirely, people who work a few days a week, all sorts of people -- now support the notion that stores should be allowed to open on Sunday if they want to open on Sunday. If we are really listening, should we not be saying to the government, "Look, that's the will of the people"? What is wrong with that? If in your union you voted 80% to accept a collective agreement, should the 20% who say they disagree with the terms of the collective agreement prevail and the contract not be signed? Who is it that is not listening?

Mr Canfield: To answer that, if we vote 80% in favour of a collective agreement, that collective agreement entails the people who were voting on it. We heard a lot about referenda today, and you are saying that 75% of the people are in favour of Sunday shopping, yet I heard 70% of workers do not want to work on Sunday.

Mr Sorbara: That is simply not so.

Mr Canfield: So whose voice are we hearing?

Mr Sorbara: Okay, let's say that 100% of the workers do not want to work on Sunday. That is not a problem because the government, in its wisdom, has allowed every single worker who would prefer not to work on Sunday to phone in with 48 hours' notice and not have to work, with no recrimination whatever. I suggest to you that you do not have that right at Boise Cascade or at Abitibi, to absolutely refuse without any justification whatever. We are protecting the workers, so we do not have to worry about that 70%.

That aside, 75% of the people, not just in Kenora but right around Ontario, would prefer to allow stores to open. Businesses would prefer to remain open. Some would prefer to remain closed, and they have the right to do that. Why is it undemocratic to allow that to take place?

1540

Mr Canfield: There are a lot of things in the Labour Relations Act. If you for one minute believe that business people stick to that book like a Bible, you are under an awful big mushroom too. I can tell you there are a lot of people out there who manipulate that Labour Relations Act like you would not believe. I hear from people every day who do not get paid for holidays, and I am not talking odd cases; I am talking in Kenora about hundreds of cases.

Mr Sorbara: I am aware of that because as an MPP I have people coming to my offices complaining when that happens. I am aware of it because for two years I was Minister of Labour. In all that time, I have never had a retail worker come to my constituency office or come to me as Minister of Labour to tell me that his or her employer has been jacking him around or forcing her to work on Sunday when he or she did not want to work on Sunday. That has been all the evidence before this committee, that it is just not happening out there. Maybe it is because there are not many jobs around. I agree that on health and safety, and on a whole bunch of other things, there are a lot of bad actors out there. But on this issue, if we have heard anything before this committee, it is that this is not really happening.

Again, 75% of the people want Sunday shopping. The workers are fully protected, and those who do not get protection do not seem to care enough to complain to the people to whom they should complain. How many complaints have you had in your labour council from retail workers who have been forced to work on Sunday against their will?

Mr Canfield: You better remember something --

Mr Sorbara: Answer my question.

Mr Canfield: I have not had any complaints from anybody who was forced to work, but to further answer your question, you better remember something. This is very new. Do you think people who have just pushed to get a law pushed through so they can open their stores are going to manipulate the thing the first year it is imposed? Wait for three or four years down the road and see what happens.

Mr Sorbara: I have taken too much time and Mr Poirier had a question or two.

Mr Poirier: This is exactly what I wanted you to expand upon. In your presentation, you mentioned that you had had some indications that people on a one-to-one basis were being intimidated and told that they will have to work. Does that mean that they were forced -- "You work or you are fired" -- or what? What have you heard about this? You are the first one in my week of hearings who is bringing this up. I would like you to expand on that.

Mr Canfield: These were comments made before the Sunday shopping bylaw was changed in Kenora. I would imagine and hope that these people went to their union, which would be the UFCW union. That is their first course to go through, their own union. Nobody has come to me at this time and stated that he or she was forced to work.

Mr Poirier: All of us have indicated that we feel a government law should strongly protect any worker so that he or she is not forced to work on a Sunday. That is not just the NDP. All of us believe this, and that is why the law should be damned strong. If you have any cases of that, please make sure you come forward.

Mr Canfield: Another side of the coin is that there are a lot of people, especially in the retail industry, who are working -- maybe housewives, maybe single mothers -- who are scared to come forward even to their own union. They are manipulated and they are scared to come forward. This is a fact. That is human nature. You tell me.

Mr Jackson: I am increasingly uneasy about the three labour movement representatives talking about women not having any representation here. Hopefully the situation in other parts of the north will be different.

I am trying to get a sense from your brief of what parts of this legislation you find good and which parts you do not. I am saying that very straight up with you because, on the one hand, you do acknowledge that tourism is an important part of the economy in your region and that there are jobs. By the same token, do you support that this legislation offers worker protection? As I listen to you carefully, I am getting a sense that you think the experience is that government cannot do the proper policing to ensure that there are not the kinds of intimidation.

I am just trying to understand if this brief means just that you are against Sunday shopping, period, end of sentence, or if we are talking more in terms of the details of what parts of this legislation you actually support and do not support.

Mr Canfield: If we did not have Sunday shopping, we would not have to worry about it, would we?

Mr Jackson: Your rhetorical response does not help the committee get a sense of where your labour sector stands on this issue. I will give you a couple of direct questions.

Is there anything in the legislation, or do you have concerns about layoffs that are directly related to those stores that previously were engaged in Sunday shopping and then find they are not able to under this legislation? Have you concerns about those layoffs and lost wages with respect to people who are no longer working as a result of that? I do. I am not part of the labour movement, but I have concerns about that.

Mr Canfield: To answer your visit question, yes, our labour council is opposed to Sunday shopping, period. As to these people who are employed, yes it is going to be a problem. Once you have got it in, it is like anything else, it is hard to get out.

In the instance of Kenora having Sunday shopping for the last year, mind you, in the summer not in the winter, where was the employer in the wintertime? If he wants to create all these jobs, why did he not stay open in the wintertime? Let us get to the bottom line. The bottom line is profit. It is not being Mr Nice Guy and employing people.

Mr Jackson: The bottom line is traffic.

Mr Canfield: The bottom line is profit.

Mr Jackson: It is traffic as well, which is defined by profit. Boise Cascade would not run extra shifts if there was not the market for the paper, and neither did Algoma when there was not the market for steel. That is traffic. That is the amount of inventory they can move, and the retail industry is very sensitive to that as well.

I am still not getting a sense whether you do or do not support this legislation. If you do not support the legislation I wish you would say so, and if you do support it tell us what aspect of it you do support. For example, with your statements about the role of business, do you support the concept that businesses can proceed to the approval stages at council once they get approval from their local chamber of commerce?

Mr Canfield: I agree with certain businesses being allowed to be open.

Mr Jackson: That is not what I asked you.

Mr Canfield: I am getting to that. I do not agree with the square footage regulations. I think they are too high. Anything under 7,500 square feet: I believe these are too high. I believe they should be reduced.

Mr Jackson: My question is not about the square footage, because no one has a consensus on that. My question is, if it was the square footage that you wanted, do you support the principle of a precondition of approval, being that the chamber of commerce in its wisdom decides whether or not that business should proceed? This is a legitimate question for the labour movement. Should the labour council be given permission? Is that not the balance in the partnership arrangement? I am just thinking out loud here. Why are you fully supportive that the chamber of commerce as an entity will make decisions and recommendations that are in the best interests of the workers?

Mr Canfield: It is a two-way street. You have to have input from labour and from the chamber of commerce. There is no doubt about that. If we had had a balanced council with the meetings we had last spring in Kenora, we would not have Sunday shopping today.

Mr Jackson: You have established in your presentation that council lacks balance. There are two bodies that are going to decide that these larger stores get permission to open: the council, which you have already indicted, and the second group is the chamber. I am trying to get you to answer, for our clarification, if you support the chamber having that power of decision-making as part of that stage.

Mr Canfield: I would support a three-way partnership in power but not just the council and chamber of commerce, no.

Mr Jackson: So as it stands it is insufficient in your eyes.

Mr Canfield: That is right, because you are dealing with three parties: business, labour and government.

Mr Jackson: You may have been present earlier today for one of the presumably larger stores that you are referencing, the Canadian Tire store. Do you have any difficulty with the manner in which the Canadian Tire store, as an independent proprietor-owned store, conducted its discussions with employees? That was shared with us in some detail.

Mr Canfield: That is a hard question to answer. You heard one side of how they conducted things with their employees. If Mr Bishop is on the up and up, I think he did a great job, but unfortunately I talked to a lot of people -- I will not get into names of businesses or anything -- and sometimes with these business people who are on the up and up and are so honest and down to earth, sometimes you get a different story from the people who work for them.

Mr Jackson: Let's be careful now, because you are here on the public record. You are not talking about Mr Bishop's approach.

Mr Canfield: No, I am not. I am generalizing.

1550

Mr Jackson: I asked you specifically about the elements of Mr Bishop's approach. I have done a lot of labour negotiating, have been to the labour board and I am familiar with the processes and protocol. I thought he had a sensitive approach in terms of consultation. It was in writing -- God knows, that is an important element to workers -- the stated guarantees of non-reprisal. I thought he had all the elements that you would require. Your unhealthy, perhaps, scepticism of human nature you are entitled to, but at least in that case have you cases in Kenora that you can point to?

Obviously no one at the Canadian Tire store complained to you. Have you received other complaints? When we asked the Ministry of Labour staff of this province how many complaints they had received when we had wide-open, unfettered Sunday shopping in this province, for the entire province they said between 15 and 18 cases. Were there a lot of those in Kenora of the 15 or 18 that were reported? There would probably be more; I will give you that benefit of the doubt.

Mr Canfield: I will not state whether anybody from Canadian Tire store reported anything or not; I do not think that is appropriate here. But in comparison it is amazing how unpopular the GST is and yet hardly anybody complains about that to the government.

Mr Sorbara: Come to my constituency office.

Mr Canfield: According to the media on the amount of people that have made complaints.

Mr Fletcher: You were talking about the erosion of collective agreements and what you have gone through as far as giving up the stat holidays is concerned. Being a member of the Canadian Paperworkers Union I know what is going on there. I look at what happened out west when Sunday shopping came in. Employees out there were getting double time for working Sundays, and as Sunday shopping came in it got knocked down to a premium and then got knocked down even more. I had a feeling, as you were talking, that this is one of the things you foresee, the erosion of the rights that employees have gained over the years through the collective agreement. Is that right?

Mr Canfield: That is right. I was going to get to that point before, the things that were done at the Canadian Tire store -- as I say, I have no reason not to believe it is on the up and up -- by giving the employees premium time. We know that in the foreseeable future, if Sunday shopping does come in, whether it be under tourism and then whatever the excuse is after that, in a matter of time we are going to have wide-open Sunday shopping, we are going to have wide-open services seven days a week in this country, and when we have that we are going to have the same thing that is happening in the United States right now: The premium time is disappearing. Year by year the people in the US are losing the premium time on Sunday, and the exact same thing will happen here. As one of the speakers said, we are five years behind; well, we are catching up rapidly.

Mr Fletcher: Is that the kind of social system we are looking forward to?

Mr Canfield: That is not the kind of social system the people I represent are looking for.

Mr Fletcher: Just another point, and this is more of a point when we are talking about what happens to employees and that no one is hearing what happens to employees: There were two staff who were suspended from a Steinberg's store in Kanata for wearing the button you are wearing, "Say no to Sunday shopping." They lost their pay and that went through the grievance procedure. Perhaps that is why the Ministry of Labour does not hear much, because it is going through the internal grievance procedure before it gets anywhere else and cases are probably getting solved at that juncture. Why is the labour council, and this is my last question, backing UFCW in this?

Mr Canfield: We are backing them for the same reason that the chamber of commerce is backing the Canadian Tire store, Safeway or anyone else.

Mr O'Connor: Unfortunately, time does not allow all of us an opportunity to speak and question every witness. I would just like to clarify one thing for the record. I believe one of the members opposite posed this question to the chamber of commerce: "Do you feel the Premier and the government of Ontario know your area better than you do?" I would just like to express, from the government's side, that we do not feel we know your area any better than you do. In writing the legislation over 60 groups were consulted. We are going around the province, and that is why we are coming and asking you for some input. I would like to clarify that. It might have sent a wrong message out that does not need to be sent out, especially in these difficult times.

Do you believe we are striking that balance between the rights of the worker and the tourist criteria concerns? The business community that had been voicing its concerns to us has been talking as retail operators in the tourist area. Do you believe we have struck that balance with this legislation or do you think there are areas that should be addressed?

Mr Canfield: I think this government has come a lot closer than the last government. At least they made a decision.

Mr O'Connor: I thank you for that. Perhaps you have to approach some of these chambers and work together with them, which should be very challenging for you. It seems to me that part of their problem is the bypass there, the tourist business that they are trying to bring, and they are confusing that. You have spoken on seven-day shopping and the tourist. If the road goes around the town, perhaps they need to come up with a better plan of attracting those tourists.

Mr Canfield: To help you out on that, as a matter of fact we did work together with the chamber of commerce on the bypass issue and did give our support on the concerns it had at the time, and also voiced some concerns we had at the time. So even though it was not unanimous with our labour council that we climb into bed, as they say, with the chamber of commerce, we did work co-operatively.

Mr Morrow: We know that 70% of the workers in Ontario really do not want to work on a Sunday. Does that concur with your membership or is that actually higher with your actual membership?

Mr Canfield: I would have a hard time with that. Our labour council is united as far as the Sunday shopping issue goes. We have never had anybody at a meeting who disagreed. There are people on the shop floor, we all know that. Nobody in our labour council has disagreed. We were unanimous in our efforts against Sunday shopping, unlike the chamber of commerce. They were not unanimous.

The Acting Chair: Mr Canfield, thank you for taking time out this afternoon for your presentation.

ONTARIO HOTEL AND MOTEL ASSOCIATION

The Acting Chair: I would like to call our next presenter, Mr Don Johnson from the Ontario Hotel and Motel Association. You will be allowed 30 minutes for your presentation. You can either do a 30-minute presentation or else do a shorter presentation to allow time for questions and answers from members of the committee. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed.

Mr Johnson: I am Don Johnson. I am president of the Thunder Bay District Hospitality Association, which is under the ring of the Ontario Hotel and Motel Association. I am sorry I have not been here all day, but I just arrived in town from doing Sunday shopping in Duluth. I was shopping, of course, and there were more people shopping there on Sundays than there have been every other day of the week.

I have a written thing. I just found out about this so I will read what I have and take questions from there.

The Ontario Hotel and Motel Association has been incorporated since 1925. The objectives of the association are to represent the hotel, motel and food and beverage industry in government and legislative matters; to provide means for members to exchange information on problems and new ideas; to review industry trends and develop forecasts; to provide guidelines for professional conduct in the industry; to provide educational programs and services; to provide guidelines for accommodation and operating standards in the industry, and to act as a focal point for organizing joint efforts among members for solutions of industry problems.

The Ontario Hotel and Motel Association represents over 1,200 members who own and/or operate large and small businesses in the hospitality industry, such as hotels, motels, taverns, restaurants, resorts and lodges throughout the province. The association's membership represents over 51,000 bedrooms, 150,000 licensed dining and lounge seats, employing over 45,000 people, which increases during holiday seasons.

We respectfully request that members of the standing committee on administration of justice consider the following: that Ontario encourage tourists and visitors by having unrestricted retail shopping on Sundays and holidays, in all areas throughout the province, as the market dictates, without any restrictions.

1600

The Ontario Hotel and Motel Association is in favour of unrestricted Sunday and holiday shopping. We feel that unrestricted Sunday and holiday shopping is vital to our economy and the tourist industry throughout the province.

In a market-driven economy such as ours, consumers should be allowed the freedom of choice to decide which retail businesses and establishments they wish to patronize. The open and free market should be the final arbiter whether or not retail businesses function on Sundays and holidays, while still respecting the employment standards. Unfair and inequitable legislated restrictions are the worst form of economic blackmail in a free market economy.

As well, Ontarians deserve the right to work, earn incomes and profit from the production and sale of goods or the provision of services any day of the week. Economic prosperity generated in a free and unrestricted economy would benefit all Ontarians and their quality of life.

Retail shopping is an integral part of the tourism experience and represents a significant portion of the value of all tourism expenditures in Ontario. Most retail shopping, dining out, touring, sightseeing and recreation takes place on weekends. Shopping has become a family outing, and the majority of Ontarians and visitors favour retail shopping on Sundays and holidays. The popularity of cross-border shopping shows that Canadians will travel to the south, not only because they perceive the products to be cheaper, but also because of the ease of access to these goods.

This industry is the largest private sector employer, and the service sector accounts for 70% of all new jobs. Tourism is responsible for the creation of 32 full-time jobs for every $1 million in tourism expenditure. We employ professionals, skilled and unskilled, and are the largest employer of women, youths, indigenous people and visible minorities. There is no other employer that is capable of this range of employment opportunities for permanent or part-time employees of professional service staff whose educational achievements vary from elementary through to college or university background.

Tourism generated in 1990 direct expenditures of $15.5 billion, with estimated total income of $22.5 billion and estimated total sales of $36.9 billion. It is one of the nation's largest generators of personal income, corporate, property, business and sales taxes to all levels of government, including $1.85 billion to the province of Ontario, $2.5 billion to the federal government and $300 million to municipal governments in 1989 alone.

The closure of retail businesses on Sundays has meant job losses to many, especially students who rely on this income for their schooling. Our members throughout the province are reporting a large drop in business. They strongly feel that the availability of Sunday shopping will alleviate slightly the slumping economy. Of our members surveyed, 75% have said that closing the stores on Sunday has meant a decrease in revenue. We recognize that other factors have also contributed to the decrease in revenue, but feel that the freedom of choice to open and work at retail businesses on Sundays and holidays is a means to reverse this problem. This revenue, to quite a few, means survival, and unless retail shops are allowed to open on Sundays to draw tourists and visitors to their respective areas, many will have to close their businesses.

Obviously the hardest-hit areas are the border cities. Ontario will remain uncompetitive and continue to lose billions of dollars worth of annual tourism sales unless we change and allow unrestricted Sunday and holiday shopping.

The hospitality industry is faced today with many obstacles and increased operating costs. In order to remain competitive and recapture some of the lost business from our neighbours to the south, we must have the ability to compete on a level playing field. Bordering American cities are wide open for retail business on Sundays and holidays.

Bill 115 does have some merit, and we appreciate the Ontario government's recognition of the value and importance of tourism in this legislation. We do, however, feel that interpretation of the tourism criteria would create a lot of confusion, not to mention an administration nightmare in time and cost. To limit the timing for municipalities to declare themselves as tourist areas is also too restricting, as circumstances could, and most likely would, change at a later date.

The concept of a common pause day in Ontario is outdated and discriminatory. Multicultural Ontario in the 1990s is populated with every religion and ethnic background, and to allow one faith, belief or ethnic custom to dictate the lifestyles of everyone is wrong. Our contemporary society shows that Ontarians work at all hours of the day and night throughout the week. Hotels, hospitals, transportation, to name just a few, all must work on a 24-hour, seven day a week basis. While some people rest, others conduct business and provide services. Their professions are a necessity to any community, and I do not believe their quality of life is diminished by their work schedules. We must provide these products, experiences and services to our customers when they want them or risk losing them to other competing jurisdictions.

We appreciate that the proposed amendments to part XI-B of the Employment Standards Act recognize the operating realities of our industry. It is most important that all employers retain the right to schedule work and dictate work schedules. It has been reported that out of more than 10,000 inquiries and complaints registered with the employment standards branch of the Ontario Ministry of Labour in 1990, fewer than 15 were related to the right of retail workers to refuse to work on Sundays and holidays.

In closing, I ask that you bring Ontario forward and that we become once again the province to lead. We have a tendency to live in the past, remembering how mother was home in the kitchen and the smell of fresh baking greeted us as we returned home from school. But we all know times have changed, and we must also change, not only to keep up with the times but to take the leadership role in this changing society. We always remember the good things in the past, but we also remember that change is good, and change is what keeps us alive.

What happened when stores were allowed to open on Sundays? Has the public been asked, both workers and shoppers? We have to grow up. We always want what our memories think is best, but does that mean we hold back progress? We are constantly being told that we live in a free world where we have the freedom of choice. The freedom of choice to open retail outlets on Sunday is not a luxury but a necessity, because to many it will mean survival.

Mr Sorbara: Mr Johnson, I want to ask you a question about the workers in the area you represent in the hotel and motel business and retail workers generally, because after all, as the government puts it, the entire thrust of this legislation is to afford a measure of protection to working people, and that is, by the way, a very important and good objective in the minds of most of the people on this committee. After all, if we are not concerned about our working people, what are we concerned about? In fact, the government has stated that this bill is designed to provide additional rights to retail workers.

When the current Minister of Labour, the member for Hamilton East, Bob Mackenzie, was in opposition, his position was very much like the position of the labour council from which we just heard; that is to say, that retail workers will inevitably be exploited and the only way to protect them and to give them the right not to work on Sunday is to keep the stores closed. In fact, when our government introduced a bill to give strong protection to retail workers, he said that bill was not worth the powder to blow it to hell. The only way, he said, to protect retail workers is to close the stores, and I guess that is a valid point of view. In fact, the labour council right around the province is still advocating that view, although Mr Mackenzie and the NDP in government have taken a different position. They no longer are arguing to protect retail workers by way of keeping the stores closed, at least in those stores that might be of some interest to tourists, who of course are the rich people who can travel more than 40 kilometres in order to do their shopping.

I guess what I want to hear from you is whether, in your own experience and in the experience of your members, there is an underlying exploitation of workers, forcing them to work when they do not want to work and, in particular, forcing them into the stores and into the workplaces on Sunday when they would prefer not to be there.

1610

Mr Johnson: I do not see how you can force anybody in to work on a Sunday, a Monday, a Tuesday, any day of the week. A Sunday is no longer a religious day, and calling it a common pause day -- a Sunday is no different day than any other day of the week.

Mr Sorbara: That has a kind of new age connotation to it, does it not, common pause day?

Mr Johnson: Yes, common pause day.

Mr Sorbara: They do not even know about that in Chicago.

Mr Johnson: Let's have the common pause day on Tuesday. Having a store close, what does that create? It certainly does not create income. If I close my business down one day a week, what happens when it becomes two days a week? I do not make any money on that one day.

Mr Sorbara: Hold on a second. You have to appreciate my problem. My problem is that the whole thrust of this legislation, and we have heard it from the parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General and the government members and the other ministers, is to protect retail workers, not to further religion. They do get a common pause day, but, by the way, this is not a common pause day for workers at Boise Cascade; it is a common pause day for retail workers and retail workers only, because they are being exploited. If the government did not protect them, they would have no protection.

Are workers being exploited out there? Are they forced to work against their will? If they are not being exploited, then the very purpose of the bill is meaningless. If there is no exploitation, why have the bill? If we can determine in these public hearings whether or not retail workers are being forced to work or, say, motel workers or hotel workers are being forced to work against their will, then we should have a bill, I agree. If there is no exploitation, we can pack up and go home. So what about it? Is there exploitation or not?

Mr Johnson: There is no exploitation of the workers. I do not know of anybody in Ontario who is legislated or anyone who has to work more than a 40-hour week unless he chose to do so to earn extra income, whether it be in my industry or in another industry.

Plus, saying that you are closed is not exploiting the worker; it is also taking a job away from another sector that needs that employment, the person who works at Great Lakes who needs that second job to make ends meet because he wants that colour TV, so he goes out and works in my industry and earns that extra money. You are exploiting him. You are not allowing him that chance to do that, because you are taking a whole day of that earning power away.

No one has to work more than 40 hours a week and no one is asked to work more than 40 hours a week.

Mr Daigeler: Before we go home, I do have a question that I thought perhaps the government members would have asked a long time ago, because the tourism representatives have very strongly made the argument that the common pause day is outdated. Would you go so far as to say that really all sectors of society should work on Sundays? You are very strongly arguing that you have the right to work and therefore you should be provided the opportunity. Should that therefore not also include the schools, government, us as well, and we really should go away from that idea of not working on Sunday at all?

Mr Johnson: You mean leave Sunday closed for --

Mr Daigeler: That is correct, yes.

Mr Johnson: I think that would be an impossibility, but I do believe that there should not be a Sunday closing day of anything. There should be a seven-day week of operation. It does not mean a seven-day week of an employee having to work that seven days.

Mr Daigeler: Right, but you would say that city hall, for example, should be open seven days a week.

Mr Johnson: Very much so. I have all kinds of things I need done on a Sunday that I cannot possibly do, and come along Monday, when they are open, I am working or I have to do something else.

Mr Carr: Thank you very much for your presentation. One of the questions I have, one of the feelings that have been put forward, is that as a result of this legislation, we will have certain areas that will meet the tourist criteria and they will open up. You obviously are familiar with some of the people who would be in that industry. Do you think that would give one region a certain advantage over another region for the people in your industry? As a result, do you think what we will probably see is that different municipalities will say, "Our neighbours are open, so we have to be"? Do you see it happening as a snowball effect with the tourism criteria?

Mr Johnson: No. A barber shop is closed on Monday, yet there are other salons that are open on Monday. I do not see forcing other barbers to open on that particular day. Usually they work alone. If Thunder Bay chooses to be open on Sunday, I do not believe Kenora will feel it has to open on Sunday or on a common pause day, be it Sunday or Tuesday. I do not see any effect on that, but I do not believe it should be delegated to just one area in the province, because I believe tourism affects the whole province.

Let's face it, I just came back from Duluth, like I said when I started. One common practice is that I can shop. I am not there to shop. I do not personally go down there to shop; I go down to get away. If I need a necessity and that store is open or I need something or I find something that I would like to purchase, I am capable of doing it there. Duluth is very much an area exactly like Thunder Bay except it has Sunday shopping.

Thunder Bay retail business relies a lot on Armstrong, Manitouwadge, Longlac, Nipigon, Red Rock, Ignace, people who live outside what we call a big metropolis, which is Thunder Bay. They cannot get the items we provide. They have to come here. A lot of them work and can only get away on a Saturday and Sunday. We are restricting them to that Saturday to do their shopping, and that Sunday to do whatever else. Maybe they would like to do that on Sunday. We are like Duluth. They have a lot of Sunday shopping, but not because the people of Duluth go out and shop; a lot of people from outside come in. There are a lot of small towns around Duluth too that do the same thing.

Mr Carr: One of the feelings that have been put forward is that a lot of the people who are interested in having Sunday shopping are big corporations, and the word "greed" has been kicked around and so on. It would seem, listening to you, that a lot of your members are not greed-motivated, they are survival-motivated. I wanted to see how your organization would see handling relations with your people on working on Sunday, how you would work it out. My feeling is that unfortunately this has happened. In the modern society, we have to work. Workers and the people who run businesses have to have better co-operation. As one lady said earlier, "If I have people who are working for me who are unhappy and they've got their face down to the floor, it's going to cost me business." How does your industry see working it out so we protect the workers while ensuring that you can survive?

Mr Johnson: The retail business as a whole, the mainstay of it, including the hotel business, the part I know of, a lot of it is part-time labour, a lot of it is unionized, a lot of it is very small. Most of my colleagues in the business operate on the premise of who is available. My schedule, personally speaking, is completely open, and that does not include just Sunday, that includes every day of the week. Who is available? This is how we cover it. Nobody is chastised because "I'm going away this weekend and I cannot make it," or "I won't be in town Monday, so I can't make work." I do not restrict those people and I do not know of very many people in this industry or the retail sector, where it is a small clothing store, any shopping stores at Intercity Plaza or anywhere like that, where they demand you be here on this day. They work themselves around it. All employees may request on the basis that they are leaving, their husbands are going or their wives are leaving and they are going with them, and I have very seldom turned them down..

1620

Mr Carr: This is maybe a product of the day and age, but one of the presenters -- it was a small shop owner in a small part of Toronto -- said he had a list of 200 people who wanted to work Sunday and he did not take time to argue with the one on the list. He just went to the next person because that person was more than willing. As you see it then, there would not be a problem getting people to work on Sundays in the area?

Mr Johnson: There would never be a problem getting people to work, not in this day and age. I mean, in my industry, especially for part-time people who are looking for extra money, this is when they are doing it, after hours, and they would prefer to do it on their days off because that affords them more time.

Mr Morrow: Just to make something very clear before we start, I think what we are talking about here is an overall quality of life, basically getting out of the rat race. The elimination, as I see it, of the common pause day will have a ripple effect on our society. We will see changes and spinoff effects in such things as day care, policing, busing. Where does it stop?

You have something that I think we all want here, and you mentioned it. Neither the Retail Council of Canada nor any other organization has done any studies or surveys on the financial effects of Sunday shopping, and you said you had done that. Can you please give that to us? Would that be possible?

Mr Johnson: Sunday shopping in our industry is survival. We are not looking for extra money to line our pockets with. All we are looking for is to pay our mortgages, to pay our taxes, to pay our employees. When we are not open, we make no income. So we cannot derive money from these closed days. When we are open, we can make income, and it helps us sustain ourselves. To be a small businessman in Ontario in these times -- some may say the recession is over; I have not felt it yet. But if you are holding on to a large mortgage, employing 40 people and only making so much money personally, another day of opening is another day you are going to survive in this community.

Mr Morrow: You talked about section 11b, which is basically the Employment Standards Act, if I can think back on it. Do you agree with the worker's absolute right to refuse work on Sunday?

Mr Johnson: I agree with the worker's absolute right not to work on a particular day, not necessarily just Sunday. If somebody had a religious belief on a Sunday, that is a particular right. I would not steal that away from anybody. I would not steal the person's right to religious belief who celebrated on Saturday.

Mr Morrow: Just one last thing. I am going to answer a question you asked. The question you asked is what happened when stores were allowed to open on Sundays. The obvious answer for that is we had the worst damned recession this province ever saw.

Mr Jackson: Oh, for God's sake. How far did you get in school?

Mr Morrow: That's not very nice.

Mr O'Connor: I want to thank you for coming here today. Perhaps for some of the other members I could share one thing with them. Legislative research has provided us with some information, and in 1986 the Progressive Conservative Party had a task force going around the province. In fact, they went to 11 different centres and had over 130 oral presentations. Two of the main recommendations they came up with at that point were that the principle of a common pause day should be maintained and that employees not be required to work as a condition of their employment. I just wanted to share that with the committee.

One thing I would be curious for some input from you on: During that period that Sunday shopping was open, did your members in this area find you had an increase in demand for the service you provide? Do you have stats on that?

Mr Johnson: Not with me, but yes, we did have an increase in demand. As a matter of fact, why this Bill 115 affects our business in one part is that it is closing us, and we are open. If I go by my own scenario of my lounge, my lounge does better in eight hours on a Sunday than it does in 14 hours on a Monday or a Tuesday.

Mr O'Connor: Perhaps we could get some clarification on that point, because I do not believe you are correct in that. Could I just ask for some clarification on one point, whether in fact your business will be closed down on a Sunday?

Mr Johnson: It is now.

Mr O'Connor: Yes, okay. So it is not affected. We have heard from your parent organization, the Ontario Hotel Association, down in Toronto. They have shared with us that they felt that the biggest problems they are facing right now are the GST, the recession, high prices, which are forcing people to go across the border, the high dollar. We heard that from the Toronto people. Perhaps you could share some of your feelings on that, because you are perhaps a little closer to the border.

Mr Johnson: The GST of course affects. The high dollar, all those things, of course they affect us here. But as I am saying, for retail businesses to be open -- the fact that they are closed on Sunday does not bring any tourists galloping towards our area. I mean, for one, we are fighting the cost of gas, the cost of alcohol, the cost of cigarettes as compared to travelling, which is what a tourist does. If you are an American and we are trying to bring you into our area of the country and you are paying so much more for gas, you are going to tend to stay south or go somewhere else. And to top off all these prices, to top all that off, you cannot shop on Sunday here anyway, or if there is some necessity that you have to get, you cannot get it here because the store is closed, or you have to hunt around town for a pharmaceutical that is open. You are at pretty much of a loss. If you are thinking of bacon and eggs for the Monday breakfast, you cannot get that here.

The Acting Chair: Mr Johnson, thank you for taking time out in your busy schedule to come in this afternoon.

Mr Sorbara: Mr Chairman, can I get one point of clarification from the parliamentary assistant?

Mr Mills: Is it 42 kilometres?

Mr Sorbara: No, it is not a kilometre question. It arises out of the questioning of Mr Morrow of the last witness. I have reviewed the various statements of Mr Mills and the Solicitor General himself, or actually the former Solicitor General, and the other statements that have been made by the government. My understanding was that the purpose of this bill was to create a common pause day, obviously for retail workers, because they are the only ones that were affected, and to promote tourism. I extract these from the very speech that the parliamentary assistant for the Attorney General gave in the Legislature.

What I get from Mr Morrow is that there are other purposes to this bill, and if that is the case, I think they should be put on the table. He suggested in this questioning (1) that the purpose of this bill was, to quote him, "getting out of the rat race"; and (2) that the purpose of the bill was a sort of an anti-recessionary measure, that this bill was going to come to grips with the recession, or at least he suggested that by saying Sunday shopping had something to do with bringing about the recession. Are these part of the policy objectives of the government in bringing forward this legislation?

1630

Mr Mills: The policy objective of this bill is, first of all, to protect and perhaps enshrine the common pause day.

Mr Sorbara: Is that for retail workers or for everybody?

Mr Mills: For retail workers.

Mr Sorbara: Only?

Mr Mills: Yes, to promote tourism and to put a sense of purpose and values into the quality of family life in Ontario through those measures.

Mr Morrow: On a point of order, Mr Chair: Do I not have the right as a member to ask any question that I feel fit to ask?

The Acting Chair: Nobody is questioning that.

Mr Jackson: But, for the record, he made an outlandish and stupid statement. I would not have jumped on his right to ask a question, but he did not ask the member a question. He answered it for him. He said that --

The Acting Chair: We are allowed to make comments also at this committee.

Mr Jackson: -- we had a recession when we had open Sunday shopping and he rested his case that we no longer have it.

Mr Morrow: Can I ask for an apology, Mr Chair, please?

Mr Jackson: You made a stupid statement.

The Acting Chair: I beg your pardon?

Mr Morrow: Can I ask for an apology from the member for Burlington South?

Mr Jackson: You can ask all you want.

The Acting Chair: I do not think that was appropriate.

THUNDER BAY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

The Acting Chair: Can we call the next presenters, the Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce. You will be given 30 minutes for your presentation. You can either take the full 30 minutes or you can submit a shorter brief and then allow time for questions and answers from the committee. For the record, please identify yourself, and then proceed.

Mr Ringius: I am Dave Ringius, president of the Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce. Our executive director is Rebecca Johnson, and our first vice-president of policy is Dick Dolphin.

Thank you for allowing us to meet with the all-party committee. I can recognize an all-party committee by the comments that were made. We have been through a one-party committee and it is a little more amicable.

Our presentation will be based on the articles we have given you in the kits. We will speak to the information as representatives of our business community.

The Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce is made up of almost 1,000 businesses -- 900 plus -- in Thunder Bay, and we represent the independent business community. The majority of our members are small with fewer than 10 employees, and a lot of them are in the retail and hospitality sector.

Our most recent survey indicates that our membership is in favour of Sunday shopping. More than 24% of our members responded to a mail survey. In questioning its validity, we have talked to survey experts and they say that a 24% response is above normal. On a mail survey, you can expect a 10% to 12% response, so we feel this is a valid survey of our members. It changed somewhat from our 1988 survey, prior to Sunday opening and free trade. At that time, our membership was not in favour of Sunday shopping. It was very close, like 47% to 53% at that time. Now 68% are in favour. However, our retail sector still does not support Sunday shopping. In 1988 they were adamantly against it. It is fairly close now, but the retail sector is still negative. We as a chamber have to represent our whole constituency, so our membership does favour Sunday shopping.

Also, there is a variance between the large and small retailers. The large retailers are against Sunday shopping. They feel that perhaps, being open seven days, the service will slide, that they are not going to employ more people, that they will give less service in order to support the Sunday shopping. Our local, smaller retailers, the independents, want the opportunity to add more value to their businesses; they look at the bottom line.

We have also included in our kits some articles from the various local newspapers. It will give you an idea of the local flavour of the issue at this time.

One thing we wanted to learn from our community was what and who should make the decision on Sunday shopping, or shopping at all. The membership indicated that the marketplace should dictate the times of opening, that they should not be dictated by government.

If there were a choice of which government should do it, if the marketplace does not, the survey indicated that the province should do it, that it should not be a responsibility of the municipality, that we should have one law for the whole province and not have different laws at the municipal level. But private business would like to dictate its own times of opening and let the marketplace settle the question.

The Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce also conducted a survey at its annual trade show, which attracts more than 45,000 visitors and more than 300 exhibitors from the various business sectors in northwestern Ontario. That survey was similar to our business survey, the difference being that a number of people at the show would have been consumers, not just business people. They also indicated that the Thunder Bay community was in favour of Sunday shopping, and they also indicated that the marketplace should dictate the times of opening, not government.

We also have in the kit the Victoriaville survey. You have probably received it from some other presenters today. A mall in Thunder Bay did its own survey made up of retailers and service people in the area, and consumers. It also supported Sunday shopping. The retail sector there supported it more than our own survey showed.

The chamber will agree to its responsibility to affirm the tourism designation if the decision is kept at the municipal level, and to assign the tourist designation. The chamber would support anyone looking for that designation.

You have heard a lot about cross-border shopping. The Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce was one of the first chambers in the country to recognize the magnitude of the problem. It was not a micro problem in Thunder Bay; it was macro. It has passed beyond our jurisdiction. At this point it rests with the governments to see what kind of level playing field we can make for our people in Canada, bearing in mind our standard of living and lifestyles here. There is a price to pay for that.

I am not sure anyone has any concrete data to indicate that Sunday shopping would stop cross-border shopping. However, during the trial period, during a recessionary time, a number of our members have indicated that it was a benefit, but they do not yet know the bottom line for the year.

One area the chamber agrees with is the 36-hour employee pause period in a seven-day week, but not necessarily on Sunday, because many of our members already work on Sunday. There is a small percentage who do not, so we certainly are in favour of that type of common pause day for the employee, guaranteeing time off in a seven-day period. North American culture is changing, and we are now in a traditional shopping mode. A lot of people shop in their own leisure time. Not everyone works a 40-hour week any more, and in a double-income family unit they do not always have the same days off.

Thunder Bay is the hub of northwestern Ontario. It is a major centre and a number of our mall outlets have indicated that since the Supreme Court ruling their trade has dropped. We are a draw for northwestern Ontario. A number of people come here. They leave their own smaller communities to come to Thunder Bay, and so from that point of view, Thunder Bay could be viewed as a destination point for weekend shopping. People from communities within 100 kilometres of Thunder Bay are now driving through Thunder Bay to do their shopping in Duluth, which is a three-and-a-half-hour drive anyway, so what is four and a half hours? It is no big deal when you are going that far. That is a concern to our operators in northwestern Ontario, and in Thunder Bay in particular.

In the multicultural society not everyone celebrates the same religious holidays, so we do not see that as an issue on Sunday.

Our data are based on our membership survey. At this time I would like to ask a question. There was a quote attributed to Mr Rae in the Globe and Mail of July 30. It said, "The arguments for Sunday shopping are familiar and will not change the government's plans," so I am concerned why there is an all-party committee on Sunday shopping if we are not going to be listened to.

1640

Mr Mills: Can I jump in here? The policy of the government is that the common pause day is not on the bargaining table. That will not change. We are committed to providing a common pause day to retail workers in Ontario.

Having said that, we are here to listen to what you have to say about the tourist criteria, and I must say that what we are doing here is unique. Usually a government presents a bill and the regulations come afterwards. They do not even come before the Legislature. They are just put in place alongside the bill. What we are doing here is very open, and it demonstrates the type of open government we are trying to put forth. We are putting the regulations out into the open for discussion, and for input from people like you to see if we can define and refine and make this Bill 115 work better.

The common pause day is the law of Ontario. It is constitutionally sound. It has been challenged through the courts, and I am afraid that it is here. We are here to listen to you about refining the tourist criteria and how we can best promote tourism in Ontario, which we recognize as a very big industry. We have no intention of cramping your style, believe me; that is why we are listening.

The Acting Chair: Are you done with your submission now?

Mr Ringius: Yes, we are. We are open to questions.

Mr Sorbara: I want to congratulate you on your survey, and I want to suggest that the results you have garnered in your own survey seem to be replicated right across the province. Generally about 75% of ordinary Ontarians favour a more open approach to Sunday shopping, while 25%, and shrinking, are opposed to any form of Sunday shopping.

I was interested in the results you had in respect of large retailers and small retailers. The reason I am interested is because the submissions that have been made to the government members, to this committee, and sometimes by the government, claim it is the mean, greedy, large retailers, who are out to capture more of the market, who are driving the Sunday shopping debate. You are telling us, I think, that in your own survey, the large retailers were more generally opposed and the smaller retailers were more generally in favour of a more open policy in respect of Sunday shopping.

Mr Ringius: Yes, and again we do not have all the larger retailers here. We are not that large a community. We have Eaton's, Sears and Canadian Tire. We were not able to distinguish the large from the small. We are going on verbal communication and meetings with them. After we published the results of our survey, they called us to express their concerns. That is what we have heard from those sectors.

We also are very active in our retail committee. We have a number of small independent businesses involved, and we also have differences of opinions at those meetings. Some are totally against it and some are for it. The results of our survey do not surprise me, because our membership is made up primarily of small independent businesses.

Mr Sorbara: Now I want to take you to the draft regulations my friend Mr Mills was referring to, specifically to paragraph 3(1)4 of the draft regulations. That is the paragraph that requires any business that operates a store over 7,500 square feet to have included in its application for an exemption a letter of endorsement from the local chamber of commerce or visitors' bureau saying in effect that the chamber of commerce supports that retail business being open in that area on Sundays. Are you telling this committee that the Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce is willing to take on that responsibility?

Mr Ringius: The chamber of commerce is willing to give a letter of endorsement to any member who wishes to seek that criterion.

Mr Sorbara: So you are not going to exercise any kind of function of reviewing the application? If someone applies, you will endorse it.

Mr Ringius: No, it has to be a member. If it is a member of the chamber of commerce, then we will endorse the application.

Mr Sorbara: What happens if the business is a non-member of the chamber of commerce? Just for purposes of argument, let's take the local Sears store, which is not up to date in its membership and applies to you for a letter of endorsement so it can complete its application to open on Sunday.

Mr Ringius: Our primary responsibility is to our membership. I do not know of any time we would go outside of that parameter. I do not have that mandate at this point in time. We act for our membership.

Mr Sorbara: I should tell you that the thrust of these draft regulations is for the chamber to exercise some sort of discretion, identifying what businesses in its view should and should not stay open. If you were to simply endorse every application from each of your members and reject every application from each of your non-members, you would be subject to a court challenge because you are not doing what the law requires you to do.

Mr Ringius: Certainly we would not want to be involved in any court challenge. That was not my understanding at this point, that they would have to get either an endorsement from the chamber or the visitors and tourist bureau, of which I do not believe you have to be a member to do that. We are here on behalf of the chamber members. That is whom we would support in an application. We do not have, I believe, the expertise to verify whether they should be open or should not be open at any point in time. I do not see where our jurisdiction would come into that.

Mr Sorbara: I want to suggest to you that in the example I presented, if Sears is not a member and seeks your approval and you reject it arbitrarily, you would certainly be subject to an application before the courts to require you to perform your function. How are you going to support and pay for that court challenge?

Mr Ringius: Our executive director indicates that what would happen would be reviewed by the policy committee. Then it may or may not be endorsed by the executive, depending on the criteria we would enter into. If I seem a bit vague here, it is because of some of the wording in the law and, I believe, some of the grey areas. If we get into the designations of tourism and who is going to validate that, I guess by your questions, Mr Sorbara, you are indicating that the chamber may be involved in making those decisions.

Mr Sorbara: The draft regulations require the chamber to make those decisions. If they do not do them judiciously, I can tell you as a lawyer that you will find yourself in court in pretty short order.

Mr Daigeler: Obviously this is a very important subject that Mr Sorbara brought up. I am sure you will want to look into that closely. We as a committee will be looking at that as well when we come to amendments to the bill.

First of all, I really appreciate the package you put together for us. You are the first one who has actually put together clippings from the local papers. I just skimmed through it and it is very interesting, very useful, because we get a feeling of what the broad community is saying. Thank you very much for doing that.

You also included -- there was reference to it earlier -- the results of a survey entitled Victoriaville. What is this? It does not really give any explanation and I just wonder, what is this Victoriaville and where is that coming from?

Mr Ringius: Victoriaville is a local mall. It is called Victoriaville because it is on a former street called Victoria Avenue, which the city built over into a mall.

Mr Daigeler: And the survey is?

Mr Ringius: The survey was conducted there, at a gathering place in the mall, among the shoppers and the business people who work there.

1650

Mr Jackson: I am reminded of the old expression that there are two things people should never watch. One is the making of sausages and the other is the making of laws. I guess we are being somewhat exposed to that today. It is quite apt.

On that point, I want to delve a little deeper because we have waited to talk to the chambers about this very sensitive point Mr Sorbara has raised. Perhaps I can direct my question to the legal counsel who is here from the Solicitor General's office. For the benefit of the chamber as well, do you concur with the statement that the chamber would be obligated to process all applications, and does the legislation refer to any time frame for the regulations?

Mr Ceyssens: The draft regulation requires four things. The first three of them are not really relevant to the discussion here. The fourth one I will read out for the benefit of those who do not have the material in front of them. It reads as follows:

"If there is a chamber of commerce, a convention and visitors bureau or a similar organization serving the area being considered, a letter indicating that the organization, or if there is more than one of them, one of those organizations, supports the opening of the retail business establishments in that area on a holiday."

That is one element of what is required for an application. If there is none of the organizations named in paragraph 4, then the person applying does not have to resort to paragraph 4. If there is any one of those organizations available -- for example, if there is not a chamber of commerce but there is a convention and visitors bureau, then the applicant would have to go to the convention and visitors bureau. In brief, to summarize, the applicant would have to resort to that provision unless there are no organizations available to the applicant in the community.

The second part of Mr Jackson's question relates to a time frame. There is no provision.

Mr Jackson: I was fearful of that because I have had an experience in this very delicate area recently with a microbrewery that wanted to be open on Sundays for public tours. We had the local convention bureau's support. We went to the chamber to get support, but when we got to council it said, "The legislation is such that it gives us options here to proceed," so what we had was a Mexican standoff. Ultimately the microbrewery went bankrupt, but the point I want to stress here is that we found a flaw in that legislation. It was not time-sensitive; it did not say. So if a non-member approached the chamber or the convention and visitors bureau -- in my view, there is a greater risk associated with the convention and visitors bureau proceeding, because it is not at arm's length from city hall and regional funding whereas the chamber is totally at arm's length from the municipality -- you could simply just delay the process because it does not say when you have to process the application. I certainly want that matter resolved in the regulations.

I apologize to the chamber that I am asking questions of staff, but if I do not ask them while we have time I may not get answers.

The other question has to do with if you have received or given a written legal opinion to the Solicitor General with respect to the legal implications of passing authority to each of those named groups. As I raised in my point earlier, the chamber is at arm's length of the municipality but some of our convention and visitors bureaus get some of their funding directly from their regional or municipal governments. In one sense, they are not at arm's length. Was that aspect of it looked at? Aside from the overall legal question which was raised about liability by Mr Sorbara, I also have some concerns about the inappropriateness of a convention and visitors bureau which receives municipal funding giving those kinds of recommendations. That question is for legal counsel as well to determine what legal advice was given to the Solicitor General in this sensitive area.

Mr Mills: I do not think this is the appropriate time to get into that detail. When we get to clause-by-clause, it will be a very good and opportune moment. I do not really feel we should put legal counsel on the spot here in this forum to answer that sort of question.

Mr Jackson: Why have we paid a considerable amount of money to bring four or five staff members along on this road trip with us if not to respond to the concerns in the presence of people who have legitimate concerns about that aspect? I also remind the parliamentary assistant that we will not be doing clause-by-clause on regulations. This will not come up in clause-by-clause because the regulations are being dealt with separately. I do feel it is appropriate. You are censoring your staff. That is fine. But it is not out of place to request clarification on legal advice that was or was not given.

The Acting Chair: I think we have had it clarified enough now. Basically what you are doing is just delving into more minor details on that. Could you proceed with your questioning? It has been brought up now.

Mr Jackson: No, I asked a very specific question. It was not in general conversation. I asked a specific question of the legal counsel. I raised the question earlier about if these restrictions covered native peoples in Ontario. Legal counsel was kind enough to give me a straight, specific answer and direct me to a legal case by which he guided the minister in his recommendations. I am asking him the same question now with respect to matters dealing with the regulation.

The Acting Chair: The parliamentary assistant has answered to the best of his ability at the moment, and that is as far as he chooses to go.

Mr Jackson: You have the censoring of a staff member and I think it is absurd. We can get it under freedom of information, but that is ridiculous.

Mr Sorbara: Just to be helpful, we might get, for the benefit of the chamber, at least a legal clarification from counsel as to what the legal implication of this section is in the event that the Thunder Bay chamber decides arbitrarily to support applications of members of the chamber and arbitrarily reject application of applicants who are not members of the chamber. Would it be okay for legal counsel to answer that? After all, you have put them in the legislation. They need to know what the legal ramifications might be.

Mr Ceyssens: I am comfortable with answering that question. The short answer to that question is that there would likely be a motion for judicial review of the decision.

Mr Sorbara: Just for the help of the committee members and the chamber, a motion for judicial review means that the applicant would apply to the Ontario Court (General Division) and bring probably the president, the executive director of the chamber to court to force them to exercise reasonable discretion and not arbitrarily make choices. That will cost you money.

Mr Jackson: And timely.

The Acting Chair: Thank you for that clarification, Mr Sorbara. Thank you, Mr Jackson. Mr Fletcher.

Mr Fletcher: We have heard from chambers that the chambers are saying, "We don't want to do this." Suppose we take it out of the draft legislation? That is a possibility and that is what we are listening for. That is why we are here, to hear what you have to say. If you do not like it, then we can take it out. That is what the committee is going to do, so do not get upset right now, because there are no judicial reviews or anything. Exactly where do you see the chambers of commerce? Do you see a role for the chambers of commerce throughout Ontario as far as this legislation is concerned, as far as Sunday shopping is concerned? Do you see a role?

Mr Ringius: The role of the chamber is according to our survey, which indicated that they did not want any government involvement in stating when they should be open and should not be open. So if the short answer is, "Yes, we don't want to be involved in that," we think our members should determine when they should be open.

Mr Fletcher: Fair answer.

Mr Dolphin: I think part of the point here is that we as a chamber of commerce, and it has been stated in the Ontario chamber as well, are a little bit unhappy, in fact very unhappy, with the fact that things are being foisted on the business populace which has not had any input from any of the business people they are affecting.

Mr Fletcher: Oh, I agree with you.

1700

Mr Dolphin: This is another type of situation where I believe we would be against having something for which we would have to give an action, for which we had no input as to how to determine, as a gentleman put it, the time frame in which we had to act or the impact it could have. As our president has stated very clearly, we feel we only have the mandate from our own members, basically. I think we are saying here that we are being put in a position where we have nothing to say about being put there.

Mr Fletcher: I agree with what you are saying and perhaps somewhere down the road we will get into that mode where we can say, "How can you help us out?" That is fair.

You said that back before, when Sunday shopping was an issue, the membership was split on it. What about when free trade came in? What was the position of the chamber of commerce on free trade and the GST across the province? I know what it was in my area. On free trade and the GST, there was not a big approach from the chambers on them.

Mr Ringius: The approach the Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce took was to educate its members on the effects. We did not take a position one way or the other because there was controversy on both of those. Generally. I think the business community was in support of the free trade agreement. We ran seminars on opportunities under the free trade agreement and we brought in experts from across the country and exposed them to people not only in Thunder Bay, but we had facilitators in from the United States as well. We made it an opportunity. If it was inevitable, then we would go with it.

We took the same approach on the GST. We provided forums for our members and again, because we represent a fairly independent group of small members, they would all have access to high-priced tax lawyers and tax accountants. Our local firms here took their tax people and gave them free of charge for two seminars and we ran that. We had two sold-right-out venues to do that. We took an educational approach and we did not take a stance, one way or another, outside of supporting both the Canadian and Ontario chambers on their deliberations.

Mr Fletcher: Cross-border shopping has been blamed on the Canadian dollar, the GST and the effects of free trade. The one thing I remember you saying about Sunday shopping is, "Let the marketplace determine it." When the marketplace is determining where people are shopping now, why should ee try to do anything about cross-border shopping?

Mr Ringius: I think we have to look at the tourism aspect of the Sunday shopping thing for attracting tourists here, and it gets into a border issue as well. We are into a number of areas and the out-shopping thing is not for Thunder Bay to decide. It is the unlevelled playing field that we have from a tax standpoint and as an education process on the consumer.

Mr Fletcher: So even though the marketplace and the consumers are saying, "We want lower prices," and they like the lower prices, and the GST and free trade were part of the problem, and you took a non-issue stand on something like Sunday shopping and it is not going to have that much of an effect on cross-border shopping, you have taken that stand.

Mr Ringius: I concur. We do not have any concrete data that would indicate Sunday shopping at this point would have any curtailment of out-shopping. We do not know that at this point. There are no data.

Mr Mills: Thank you for appearing here this afternoon. I have said it over and over again and I really mean it: We are here to listen and take into consideration all the things you have said.

I would like to change my direction at this time. I have heard here that we live in a time of changes. The other presenter said we are in a shopping mode, I believe. It is charge everywhere, shop, shop, shop. We cannot leave anything unturned, and notwithstanding the fact that we shop six days a week, we really have to shop seven. A long time ago when I went to school we learned a poem. I believe it was by Tennyson and it says:

What is life if, full of care,

WE HAVE NO TIME TO STAND AND STARE?

I think that really is what the Premier was saying in his speech from the throne. We really should look at the quality of life and what all this does for Ontarians as a whole.

Apart from those of one or two of the labour organizations, I am rather disappointed at all the presentations I have heard from business and the presentations of the chambers and the tourist and hotel industries. No one has come to grips with what it means to Ontarians and the quality of life has been left out. I am disappointed at that. I thought we all had a vital interest in the quality of life here in Ontario as opposed to the quality of life in the United States. Some people say we are five years behind the times. If that is catching up, I hope personally we do not catch up for a long time because there is more to shopping and there is more to this than the eternal shop, shop, shop. There is another dimension. The Premier touched on this and I would just like to raise that today. I hope that as we go around the province, other people are going to address that issue of vital concern as we listen to people who seem to be neglected.

Mr Fletcher: Point of order, Mr Chair: Are we not allotted a certain amount of time? Our time has not been used for comment or anything else.

Mr Jackson: We are in committee now.

Mr Fletcher: Is that correct? They are still at the table.

The Acting Chair: Yes, they are.

Mr Fletcher: That is where Mr Mills was directing his comments?

The Acting Chair: That is right.

Mr Fletcher: Are we finished with these witnesses?

The Acting Chair: Yes.

Mr Fletcher: Are they going to be excused before any more comments?

The Acting Chair: We have to hear what Mr Sorbara's comment is.

Mr Fletcher: Are we going through each party to do another comment?

Mr Jackson: Maybe if you wait you will find out. Incidentally you do not have to apologize.

The Acting Chair: We do not know what Mr Sorbara had to say.

Mr Sorbara: I did want to make a comment following upon the comments of Mr Mills which, I regret to say, I found somewhat regrettable and unfortunate. If my friend the member for Guelph prefers that the presenters step back from the table, I am certainly willing to defer until that happens. You may rule that there is no more time for anyone to say anything.

My point, and it is a quick point, is that I do not think any of the people who presented to us today are advocating that we simply cede our values to American values. I think all the presenters, both those who were for Sunday shopping and against Sunday shopping, were genuinely trying to help this committee come to grips with an issue that it seems Ontario must consider in a public fashion every few years. I say to the parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General that he should not misinterpret either the comments of the chamber or those of any other of the presenters. They simply presented to us the commercial problems they confront in their communities.

If we take the attitude that we are somehow trying to denigrate our quality of life -- I know that the chamber has at the centre of its values a high quality of life in Thunder Bay.

The world is with us late in Sault,

GETTING AND SPENDING WE LAY WASTE OUR POWERS, LITTLE WE SEE IN NATURE THAT IS OURS.

That is another poem and it was written when no one could buy anything on Sunday in Ontario.

We have always been concerned about those things, and all of us here are concerned about a high quality of life. Those who ask this committee to take a different view and consider the possibility of opening up the hours on Sunday ought not to be accused in a public forum of somehow reducing the quality of life of our citizens. I reject the comment and I do not think it is appropriate after the comments of the chamber.

The Acting Chair: Thank you, Mr Sorbara. I believe the chamber was about to make its own response to Mr Mills's comment. Please go ahead.

Ms Johnson: Yes, I was. I guess I take exception that we are not concerned about the quality of life, not only within our chamber of commerce, but certainly within our community of Thunder Bay. We are very concerned about that. Did we bring in that quotation to this table? No, we did not, sir. But I would say we are looking at what we feel is best for our community.

Our community has changed in the last few years and in fact our survey has changed, as our president has already noted to you. There is a change in our environment, not only in Thunder Bay but in Ontario. If you would check with what your provincial government looked like approximately two years ago, you would see that Sunday shopping was a non-issue. People did not even want to discuss it. It has circled completely. In fact people, not only within our chamber of commerce but in the province, have said they want Sunday shopping. I think that is what you have to look at, what the people in this community want. It is a changed environment. We are very concerned about what is happening in our province and it is not only on this issue, but on everything. I would like you to be aware of that. Thank you very much, Mr Sorbara.

The Acting Chair: Thank you for your presentation this afternoon.

The committee will be meeting outside the door right after we adjourn. We will be taking off right away. I would like to thank the city of Thunder Bay for hosting this today. We will adjourn now until 10 am, Wednesday, August 7, at the Sudbury Senator Hotel.

The committee adjourned at 1710.