CONTENTS
Thursday 19 May 1994
Land Lease Statute Law Amendment Act, 1993, Bill 21,Mr Wessenger / Loi de 1993 modifiant des lois en ce qui concerne les terrains à bail, projet de loi 21, M. Wessenger
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT
*Chair / Président: Brown, Michael A. (Algoma-Manitoulin L)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Président: Daigeler, Hans (Nepean L)
*Arnott, Ted (Wellington PC)
Dadamo, George (Windsor-Sandwich ND)
Grandmaître, Bernard (Ottawa East/-Est L)
Johnson, David (Don Mills PC)
Mammoliti, George (Yorkview ND)
*Mills, Gordon (Durham East/-Est ND)
Morrow, Mark (Wentworth East/-Est ND)
*Sorbara, Gregory S. (York Centre L)
*Wessenger, Paul (Simcoe Centre ND)
*White, Drummond (Durham Centre ND)
*In attendance / présents
Substitutions present / Membres remplaçants présents:
Carter, Jenny (Peterborough ND) for Mr Dadamo
Eddy, Ron (Brant-Haldimand L) for Mr Daigeler
Hansen, Ron (Lincoln ND) for Mr Mammoliti
Mathyssen, Irene (Middlesex ND) for Mr Morrow
Also taking part / Autres participants et participantes:
Ministry of Housing:
Lyle, Michael, legal counsel
Morris, Noah, policy adviser, existing housing stock, housing policy branch
Clerk / Greffier: Carrozza, Franco
Staff / Personnel: Filion, Sibylle, legislative counsel
The committee met at 1036 in room 228.
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
The Chair (Mr Michael A. Brown): The standing committee on general government will come to order. I believe all members have a copy of the subcommittee report. It reads:
"That the committee cancel the meeting of Thursday, May 19, 1994, and reschedule this meeting to Thursday, June 9, 1994, to permit the proponent of Bill 21 to meet with interested parties on Tuesday, June 7, 1994."
That's the report of the subcommittee. That was not a consensus report.
Mr Paul Wessenger (Simcoe Centre): I would move that the recommendation be replaced in the subcommittee report as follows:
I move that --
The Chair: But we haven't actually moved the subcommittee report.
Mr Ron Eddy (Brant-Haldimand): We've previously had the explanation of why the subcommittee is presenting this motion and --
The Chair: Mr Eddy, would you like to just make the motion? Then we can talk about it. Just move the subcommittee report.
Mr Eddy: Yes, I would.
The Chair: Mr Eddy moves the subcommittee report. You have an amendment, Mr Wessenger.
Mr Wessenger: Yes. I move that the committee report be amended to provide as follows:
I move that the committee recommence clause-by-clause consideration of Bill 21 on May 19, 1994, and continue with consideration thereafter, with the intention that clause-by-clause consideration be completed not later than June 16, 1994.
The Chair: I would think that amendment is out of order. We could deal with the main motion and then you could put a motion of your own, but it seems to me this totally negates the sense of the subcommittee motion. We'll deal with this. I think it's more than a minor amendment. It changes the sense dramatically of what the subcommittee reported.
Do we have any discussion on the subcommittee report? If not, all those in favour of the subcommittee report? Opposed? The subcommittee report is lost.
Mr Wessenger: I move that the committee recommence clause-by-clause consideration of Bill 21 on May 19, 1994, and continue with consideration thereafter, with the intention that clause-by-clause consideration be completed not later than June 16, 1994.
If I might indicate the reason for the June 16, 1994, continuation date, it was a suggestion made in subcommittee discussions that that would be an appropriate time to complete clause-by-clause. There are three substantial areas that we would like to have meetings with stakeholders on with respect to the bill. My intention is to stand down those areas of substantial items so they'd be dealt with starting on June 9, 1994.
Those substantial items, I might indicate, are the questions that have been raised through the hearings, the three areas that were raised with respect to the original provisions of Bill 21. One related to the first-right-of-refusal provisions, the second one related to the sign provisions, and the third one related to the reserve funds, although we might be able to deal with the reserve funds. I think we probably could, because I'll be recommending that we vote against the reserve funds so they'll be deleted. But we could stand it down if you wanted to. I think we've met all the objections by deleting the reserve funds. So there are two items anyway, and there may be a couple of other items that arise during the discussions which we may wish to stand down. Certainly, I'd be prepared to look at those. They are matters of substance; certainly, I'm quite prepared to consider standing them down. But I think it's important that we proceed because there are a lot of technical amendments and I think it's important we get the technical work done so we can deal with the substance.
Mr Eddy: The only concern I would have is that you're going to stand certain clauses down, but what happens if a clause that's stood down and is subsequently dealt with and changed affects some other clause that we've already dealt with and approved? Can we revisit that clause then, if it's affected? I don't know whether that would happen or not. It might.
Mr Wessenger: If any of the technical clauses deal with a matter of substance -- there is one I'll be asking to be stood down in one of the technical items in the first eight amendments. Well, one of them has been passed. Up to number 8 they're all technical, but one of those will have to be stood down.
The Chair: Mr Wessenger's motion, as I understand it, is one that gives direction but doesn't bind the committee to anything. So while Mr Wessenger's explaining that he would like and thinks the way we should proceed is to stand down whatever we want, that can only happen with unanimous consent of the committee. If a stood-down clause is altered in some way, any section that it might impact on needs unanimous consent to be reopened. Mr Arnott, did you have some comments?
Mr Ted Arnott (Wellington): Unfortunately, I'm not aware of what the subcommittee discussed. I would like a copy of Mr Wessenger's motion, actually. Could I get that from the clerk?
Clerk of the Committee (Mr Franco Carrozza): I can have it Xeroxed.
The Chair: If I might be able to précis the motion, really, the motion just says we will begin clause-by-clause immediately and we hope to have it done by June 16 -- strong on the word "hope."
All in favour of Mr Wessenger's motion? Carried.
That was easier than the subcommittee meeting.
Mr Wessenger: Yes, it was; much easier.
LAND LEASE STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1993 / LOI DE 1993 MODIFIANT DES LOIS EN CE QUI CONCERNE LES TERRAINS À BAIL
Consideration of Bill 21, An Act to amend certain Acts with respect to Land Leases / Projet de loi 21, Loi modifiant certaines lois en ce qui concerne les terrains à bail.
The Chair: Now we will commence the consideration of Bill 21, An Act to amend certain Acts with respect to Land Leases.
All members, I believe, now have a package of the proposed amendments and a copy of the proposed bill. When we last were considering this bill, we were speaking to an amendment to subsection 1(2). The clerk has numbered that, just for information purposes, 2 in your yellow sheets so that we're all starting in the same place.
Mr Wessenger: Maybe I should just review the purpose of the amendment.
The Chair: That might be helpful. Some of us may have forgotten.
Mr Wessenger: The amendment includes the term "land lease community home" in the definition of "residential premises." That's the whole purpose, to include land-lease community homes as part of the definition of residential premises. It was a technical aspect that was just not caught in the initial drafting situation.
The Chair: Further questions or comments concerning Mr Wessenger's proposed amendment to subsection 1(2)? If not, shall Mr Wessenger's amendment to subsection 1(2) carry? Carried.
Shall section 1, as amended, carry? Carried.
We'll start with section 2.
Mr Wessenger: I have an amendment to that. I move that the definition of "non-seasonal mobile home park" in section 79 of the Landlord and Tenant Act, as set out in section 2 of the bill, be struck out.
The explanation is that originally we introduced the concept in my bill of a non-seasonal mobile home park. Since then, it has been pointed out to me that we already have a distinction in effect. We have a four-month situation. If a mobile home is only occupied four months, it's not subject to the Landlord and Tenant Act, so we don't need to create three categories. It was felt to be unnecessarily confusing to have three categories of mobile home parks. So we're taking out the non-seasonal and this will be done throughout the bill, because again it was one of these technical aspects in the initial drafting that was not caught. We already did have it, but the recognition that they're excluded from the Landlord and Tenant Act.
The Chair: Are there questions or comments or further amendments? Shall Mr Wessenger's amendment to section 2 carry? Carried. That section will be struck out.
Now we'll discuss section 2. This is an unusual way but because it will be part of the bill, that's how it has to be done. Are there questions, comments or further amendments to section 2? If not, shall section 2, as amended, carry? Carried.
Section 3: Questions, comments or amendments? If not, shall section 3 carry? Carried.
Section 4: Questions, comments or amendments? If not, shall section 4 carry? Carried.
1050
Section 5: Questions, comments or amendments? Shall section 5 carry? Carried.
Section 6: I believe, Mr Wessenger, you have an amendment.
Mr Wessenger: Yes, I do. I move that clause 84(3)(a) of the Landlord and Tenant Act, as set out in section 6 of the bill, be amended by striking out "entered into or renewed" in the fifth and sixth lines and substituting "that is in force."
It's basically just a technical aspect. The legal experts believe "that is in force" is more effective than "entered into or renewed," because whether the agreement is actually in effect is what's important, not whether it was entered into or renewed. So you would only want it to apply where there's an existing tenancy relationship, not something that is theoretical. So it's a technical one to correct that.
The Chair: Questions or comments regarding Mr Wessenger's amendment? Shall Mr Wessenger's amendment to section 6 carry? Carried.
Questions, comments or further amendments to section 6? Shall section 6, as amended, carry? Carried.
Section 7: Questions, comments or amendments? Shall section 7 carry? Carried.
Section 8: Mr Wessenger?
Mr Wessenger: I move that subsection 94(6) of the Landlord and Tenant Act, as set out in section 8 of the bill, be amended by striking out "entered into or renewed" in the fifth and sixth lines and substituting "that is in force."
The Chair: Shall the amendment carry? Carried.
Shall section 8, as amended, carry? Carried.
Mr Wessenger: There's a second amendment.
The Chair: Oh, I'm sorry. I got ahead of us.
Mr Wessenger: I guess you'll have to undo that one; there's another amendment to section 8.
The Chair: Do we have unanimous consent to reopen section 8? Agreed.
Mr Wessenger: I move that subsection 94(6) of the Landlord and Tenant Act, as set out in section 8 of the bill, be struck out and the following substituted:
"Same
"(6) Despite subsection (5), this section applies to tenancies under tenancy agreements for possession of land intended and used as a site for a land lease community home used for residential purposes that is in force on or after the day the Land Lease Statute Law Amendment Act, 1993 receives royal assent and to periodic tenancies for the possession of such land that are in effect on or after that day and, in the case of other land, the law applies to tenancies for the possession of such land as it existed immediately before that day."
Interjection: This is just an alternative motion.
Mr Wessenger: Oh. I'm going to withdraw that one.
The Chair: So the Chair was right in the first place.
Mr Wessenger: Yes, the Chair was right in the first place.
The Chair: Unbeknownst to the Chair.
Shall section 8, as amended, carry? Carried.
Mr Eddy: So the proposed amendment was here listed, but it's withdrawn? Is that right?
Mr Wessenger: It's withdrawn.
Mr Eddy: Okay, because the other one would have been redundant.
Mr Wessenger: Yes, it would have been redundant, that's right.
The Chair: Section 9: Are there questions, comments or amendments? Shall section 9 carry? Carried.
Section 10: Questions, comments or amendments? Shall section 10 carry? Carried.
If you look at the amendments, I believe you have an amendment 10.1.
Clerk of the Committee: Which is out of order, because that section is not in this bill.
Mr Wessenger: No, I don't have an amendment.
The Chair: That's good. I'm told that likely it's out of order anyway.
Clerk of the Committee: That's number 8 we're talking about.
Mr Wessenger: I'd like to stand number 8 down because it relates to, first of all, an amendment that's not been dealt with yet, so I'm asking that it be stood down.
Mr Eddy: I wondered what happened to motion 7. Did we deal with that?
Mr Wessenger: They were in reverse order, Mr Eddy. That's the problem.
The Chair: Could I have some help here? This would be a totally new section if it were actually introduced.
Mr Wessenger: That's right, so I would ask that it be stood down.
The Chair: I guess we can deal with that amendment at a later date.
All right. Now we're to section 11, which is numbered 7 up at the top.
Mr Eddy: Mr Chairman, I'm not clear what we've done with motion 8.
The Chair: I can help you, I think. We have done nothing with 8. It won't be considered at this point.
Mr Wessenger: I have to move it in order for it to be stood down.
I move that the bill be amended by adding the following section:
"10.1 Subsection 122(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act is amended by adding after `125' in the third line `125.2.'"
I've asked that that be stood down because it relates to a further section that we --
The Chair: I'm afraid, Mr Wessenger, that this amendment is out of order, because we're trying to open a section that isn't open. We can ask for unanimous consent.
Mr Wessenger: I was going to suggest we wait for unanimous consent. Could I ask for unanimous consent now to --
The Chair: Stand it down. Do we have unanimous consent to stand it down and to reopen? Agreed.
Clerk of the Committee: You're asking for unanimous consent to place the amendment, then you're asking for unanimous consent to stand it down?
Mr Wessenger: That's right. I'm asking for unanimous consent to place the amendment.
The Chair: Do we have unanimous consent to place the amendment? Agreed. And we have unanimous consent to stand this amendment down.
Now we'll move to section 11 of the bill, which is number 7 on the amendment sheets in the corner.
Mr Wessenger: I move that subsection 125.1(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act, as set out in section 11 of the bill, be amended by striking out "non-seasonal" in the third and fourth lines.
This again is a technical amendment with respect to my comments made previously.
Mr Arnott: Are you standing this one down, Mr Wessenger?
Mr Wessenger: No, because it's just technical. I thought we should get the "non-seasonal" -- we've already taken it out so we might as well do the technical.
Mr Arnott: Do you intend to move that we pass section 11?
Mr Wessenger: No, I don't intend to pass all of section 11, but I thought we'd get the technical parts out of the way.
The Chair: Questions/comments regarding Mr Wessenger's amendment?
Mr Wessenger: Do you want me to do number 7?
Clerk of the Committee: Withdraw.
Mr Wessenger: Withdraw number 7. Okay.
The Chair: Mr Wessenger has withdrawn his amendment.
Mr Eddy: May I ask why?
Mr Wessenger: It's already covered in number 9. I thank legislative counsel for pointing that out.
The Chair: All right. Now we're dealing with section 11. All amendments previously have been withdrawn. You wish to place --
Mr Wessenger: I'm going to place it and then I'm going to ask that it be stood down.
1100
I move that section 125.1 of the Landlord and Tenant Act, as set out in section 11 of the bill, be struck out and the following substituted:
"Right of first refusal
"125.1(1) If a tenancy agreement contains a provision prohibiting a tenant who owns a mobile home that is situated in a mobile home park from selling the mobile home unless the tenant first offers to sell it to the landlord, the landlord shall not exercise the option to purchase the mobile home unless,
"(a) the landlord exercises the option within seventy-two hours of receiving notice that the tenant has received an offer to purchase from a prospective purchaser; and
"(b) the landlord agrees to purchase the mobile home on the same terms and conditions as are contained in the prospective purchaser's offer to purchase.
"Purchase at reduced price
"(2) Despite subsection (1), any provision described in subsection (1) contained in a tenancy agreement is void if it provides that the landlord may purchase the mobile home at a price that is less than the one contained in the prospective purchaser's offer to purchase.
"Restriction on real estate agent
"(3) Despite subsection (1), any provision in a tenancy agreement requiring a tenant who owns a mobile home that is situated in a mobile home park to use the landlord as an agent for the sale of the mobile home is void.
"Application
"(4) Despite any agreement or waiver to the contrary, this section applies to tenancies under tenancy agreements entered into or renewed before and subsisting on the day the Land Lease Statute Law Amendment Act, 1993 receives royal assent or entered into on or after that day."
I'm going to ask that this be stood down. This is one of the substantive items that I referred to previously.
The Chair: Do we have unanimous consent to stand Mr Wessenger's amendment down? Agreed.
Mr Wessenger: We'll stand down all of section 11 because all the other --
The Chair: We'll stand down section 11. Agreed? Agreed.
The Chair sees an amendment to 11.1.
Interjections.
The Chair: Oh, right. Section 11: Mr Wessenger, did you wish to place this amendment?
Mr Wessenger: The one marked number 10. No, I don't wish to place this. As section 11 is still open, I don't wish to place that one.
I would advise that number 11 and 12 are being withdrawn because they're unnecessary.
Mr Eddy: What is the disposition? Are they being withdrawn?
The Chair: They haven't been moved. He's not going to place them.
Clerk of the Committee: Your amendments which have the 10 circled and 11 and 12 will not be moved as of now, so just disregard them.
The Chair: I'm looking at amendment 13. Mr Wessenger, do you wish to place that?
Mr Wessenger: No, we don't wish to place 13.
The Chair: All right. Now we're moving to section 12 of the bill. Mr Wessenger has an amendment.
Mr Wessenger: I move that sections 128.2, 128.3, 128.4, 128.5, 128.6 and 128.7 of the Landlord and Tenant Act, as set out in section 12 of the bill, be struck out.
The purpose of this amendment is to delete all the provisions relating to a reserve fund with respect to the bill. I had indicated earlier my intention to remove the reserve fund from the bill because of the complications. We may want some discussion on this, but it was felt by all parties that it was unworkable.
Mr Eddy: So the deletion is a permanent one; it's not coming back.
Mr Wessenger: No, it's not coming back.
The Chair: In essence what this does, Mr Wessenger, so that members understand, is leave 128.1(a) and (b) in place. After that, everything is deleted.
Mr Wessenger: Everything else is gone. That's right.
The Chair: Do members understand what's happening here?
Mr Arnott: Mr Wessenger, did you not say at the outset of the meeting that you were going to stand down the --
Mr Wessenger: I could if you wish, but I think all parties have agreed. It's not a contentious matter that the reserve fund is to go. There's nobody who wants a reserve fund with respect to this bill. Every stakeholder wants it out.
The Chair: If the Chair can depart from his normal neutrality, I think Mr Wessenger has characterized this correctly.
Mr Gregory S. Sorbara (York Centre): Attaboy, Chair.
The Chair: All in favour of Mr Wessenger's amendment? Agreed.
Then we will deal with section 12, as amended. Questions, comments or further amendments? Shall section 12 carry? Carried.
Section 13.
Mr Wessenger: Again this relates purely to the reserve fund, so I'd recommend that we vote against this section.
The Chair: Questions or comments on section 13? Shall section 13 carry? Section 13 is lost.
Section 14: Questions, comments or amendments? Shall section 14 carry? Carried.
Section 15: Questions, comments or amendments to section 15? Shall section 15 carry? Carried.
All right, subsection 16(1): Questions, comments?
Mr Wessenger: I'm recommending we vote against subsection 16(1).
The Chair: And why?
Mr Wessenger: It's necessary to remove any reference to the term "residential unit" currently found in the bill. This term is an unnecessary change to the Rental Housing Protection Act. In other words, we originally were going to define the term "residential unit," and it was felt to be completely unnecessary, by technical advice.
The Chair: Questions or comments? Shall subsection 16(1) carry? It's lost.
1110
Subsection 16(2).
Mr Wessenger: This is one of the new ones. I don't think members have a copy of this yet, so we'll need some copies.
The Chair: This is an amendment no one has seen. So the section 17 we have will not be moved?
Mr Wessenger: This will be moved instead. This is a technical amendment to bring the definition in accordance with the Rental Housing Protection Act as amended by Bill 120. It's to make it coincide.
The Chair: Mr Wessenger, before you move your amendment, perhaps we should stand it down for a minute while we allow the clerk to photocopy it for other members. We'll come back to it.
We'll then move on to subsection 16(3). Mr Wessenger has an amendment to subsection 16(3).
Mr Wessenger: I move that the definition of "rental unit" in section 1 of the Rental Housing Protection Act, as set out in subsection 16(3) of the bill, be struck out and the following substituted:
"`rental unit' means premises used as rented residential premises and includes,
"(a) premises that have been used as rented residential premises and are vacant; and
"(b) a rented site for a mobile home or a rented site for a land lease community home even if the mobile home or the land lease community home on the site is owned by the tenant of the site."
The reason for this is that we need to change the definition of rented residential premises to include rented mobile homes and land-lease community homes and the sites. Without it, the sites would not be covered.
The Chair: Questions, comments? Shall Mr Wessenger's amendment to subsection 16(3) carry? Carried.
Subsection 16(4).
Mr Wessenger: I move that subsection 16(4) of the bill be struck out and the following substituted:
"(4) Section 1 of the act is amended by adding the following definitions:
"`infrastructure' includes, with respect to a land lease community or a mobile home park, the roads, water supply, fuel, sewage, drainage and electrical systems and such other things or systems as may be prescribed that,
"(a) are under the direct or indirect control of the landlord, and
"(b) provide access or service to the park or community or to any rental unit in the park or community;
"`land lease community' means the residential premises and the land, structures and facilities of which the landlord retains possession and that are intended for the common use and enjoyment of the tenants of the landlord where two or more occupied land lease community homes are situated;
"`land lease community home' means any dwelling that is a permanent structure where the owner of the dwelling leases the land used or intended for use as the site for the dwelling, but does not include a mobile home;
"`mobile home' means any dwelling that is designed to be made mobile and constructed or manufactured to provide a permanent residence for one or more persons, but does not include a travel trailer, tent trailer or a trailer otherwise designed;
"`mobile home park' means the residential premises, and the land, structures, services and facilities of which the landlord retains possession and that are intended for the common use and enjoyment of the tenants of the landlord where two or more occupied mobile homes are located for a period of sixty days or more."
This basically sets out the definitions for the Rental Housing Protection Act, so it's a technical definition clause. It defines what "infrastructure" means, what "land lease community" means.
The Chair: Further questions or comments on Mr Wessenger's amendment? Shall Mr Wessenger's amendment to subsection 16(4) carry? Carried.
Do I see a further amendment to section 16?
Mr Wessenger: I move that subsection 16(5) of the bill be struck out and the following substituted:
"(5) Section 1 is further amended by adding the following subsections:
"Unorganized territories
"(2) For the purposes of the application of this act to land lease communities or mobile homes parks located in territories without municipal organization, a reference in this act to a municipality, its council or any officers or employees shall be deemed to be a reference to the Minister of Housing or to a person to whom responsibility is delegated under section 23.
"Delegation of power under act
"(3) The minister or a person to whom responsibility is delegated under section 23 may by order exercise any power that a municipality would exercise by bylaw under this act."
There are an awful lot of parks in unorganized territories that are not covered in northern Ontario, so this --
The Chair: I understand that this particular amendment is out of order, however, and we will have to ask for unanimous consent for it to be considered. Do I have unanimous consent? Agreed.
Are there questions or comments to Mr Wessenger's amendment to subsection 16(5)? Being the only one in the room who represents any unorganized territory, I have a technical question.
The power of delegation in many instances, or at least in some instances I'm aware of, is not to a person but to a board. For example, the Manitoulin planning board deals with minister's orders.
1120
Mr Wessenger: Can I ask legislative counsel or the Ministry of Housing people to comment on that? Maybe a legal person from the Ministry of Housing would like to comment. Mr Chair, are you suggesting it might be --
The Chair: I'm not suggesting anything. I'm asking a question of fact.
Mr Ron Hansen (Lincoln): That's important, because in Algoma I know the Sault Ste Marie Board of Education is involved with the tax part in the Waboose area, if you know where that is.
The Chair: We have, for example, in the district of Manitoulin, a planning board that is delegated by the minister to make decisions in both the organized, which is one process, and the unorganized, under a different process. It isn't, to my knowledge, the person; it is the board that has had the power delegated to it. I just wonder if this amendment encompasses that particular situation. I could be wrong, but I'm just asking for the legal.
Mr Wessenger: Could I ask legal counsel or someone to comment on that?
Mr Noah Morris: My name is Noah Morris. I'm a policy adviser with the Ministry of Housing. I'm not giving a legal opinion on this, but I believe the intention of the amendment was to delegate authority to the Minister of Housing and employees of the Ministry of Housing.
The Chair: But there are local boards that are empowered by the Minister of Housing to do things in the planning field. They've had the authority delegated to them, and it is effective in at least some unorganized municipalities or territories.
Mr Eddy: If that's the case, it could easily be changed to read "or to a person or body to whom responsibility is delegated."
The Chair: This is a technical amendment and I just would like it to reflect the technical --
Mr Wessenger: We could have some legal advice about what it would involve if we added the words "or body."
Mr Eddy: You said it's a planning board that's organized for all of Manitoulin Island.
The Chair: In the district of Manitoulin, the planning board encompasses all the organized municipalities, with the exception of Rutherford and George, plus four or five unorganized territories or townships where the planning board does exercise minister's orders.
Mr Michael Lyle: My name is Michael Lyle. I'm legal counsel with the Ministry of Housing. As I understand it, the provision was drafted in such a way that it wasn't intended to be able to delegate the power to a planning board. Your suggestion is to change that to make reference to a body or board.
Mr Wessenger: Yes. What would be the appropriate language that would give the minister that discretion to delegate it?
Mr Lyle: I would prefer to have some opportunity to look at the Municipal Act so I could be sure what the appropriate term is.
Mr Wessenger: Should we stand this one down?
The Chair: I'm just interested in getting it right, that's all.
Mr Wessenger: I think we should get it right.
The Chair: Is there consent to stand this amendment down? Agreed.
I believe all members now have a copy of Mr Wessenger's motion regarding subsection 16(2). Can we now deal with subsection 16(2)? Agreed.
Mr Wessenger: I move that subsection 16(2) of the bill be struck out and the following substituted:
"(2) The definition of `rental property' in section 1 of the act is repealed and the following substituted:
"`rental property' means,
"(a) a building or related group of buildings in which one or more rental units are located,
"(b) a mobile home park in which two or more rental units are located, or
"(c) a land lease community in which two or more rental units are located,
"and includes all common areas and services and facilities available for the use of its residents, but does not include a condominium.
"(2.1) On the day subsection 27(2) of the Residents' Rights Act, 1994 comes into force or on the day this act comes into force, whichever is later, the definition of `rental property' in section 1 of the act is repealed and the following substituted:
"`rental property' means
"(a) a building or related group of buildings in which one or more rental units are located,
"(b) a mobile home park in which two or more rental units are located, or
"(c) a land lease community in which two or more rental units are located,
"and includes all common areas and services and facilities available for the use of its residents, but does not include
"(d) a condominium;
"(e) accommodation that is subject to the Public Hospitals Act, the Private Hospitals Act, the Community Psychiatric Hospitals Act, the Mental Hospitals Act, the Homes for Special Care Act, the Homes for the Aged and Rest Homes Act, the Homes for Retarded Persons Act, the Nursing Homes Act, the Correctional Services Act, the Charitable Institutions Act, the Child and Family Services Act or the Developmental Services Act, or
"(f) accommodation occupied by a person solely for the purpose of receiving rehabilitative or therapeutic services agreed upon by the person and the provider of the accommodation, where,
"(i) the parties have agreed that,
"(A) the period of occupancy will be of a specified duration, or
"(B) the occupancy will terminate when the objectives of the services have been met or will not be met, and
"(ii) the average length of the occupancy of the occupants of the building in which the accommodation is located does not exceed six months or such lesser time period as the regulations made under this act prescribe."
The purpose of this amendment is to make it coincide with the amendment that's already been passed and Bill 120.
The Chair: Perhaps you could be a little clearer for the Chair. I'm not exactly sure what you're saying.
Mr Wessenger: We're incorporating into the definition, as set out in Bill 120, a "mobile home park" and a "land lease community." You see, they're not in that act.
The Chair: So does this place them in that act?
Mr Wessenger: Yes, this places them in that act.
Ms Sibylle Filion: We have presently in front of the House two bills dealing with the same subject matter. We don't know which one will come into force first. This provides for the inclusion in the Rental Housing Protection Act of land-lease communities within the definition of "rental property." Second, if this bill were to come into force after Bill 120 does, it also includes all the amendments brought in by Bill 120 into the definition of "rental property." It brings both acts in line, one with the other.
The Chair: So this would permit in land-lease communities accessory apartments as of right.
Mr Wessenger: No, it has absolutely nothing to do with that at all, absolutely nothing.
The Chair: Now I understand, I think.
1130
Mr Eddy: As a follow-up to the previous speaker, shouldn't we know which one should come into force first, then decide that?
Ms Filion: As a general rule, it's always dangerous to refer to bills in other bills. However, Bill 120 has now received third reading just this week and it's a fairly sure deal. It comes into force upon proclamation. We just want to make sure that whichever occurs first, they both represent the law at the time the bill comes into force.
Mr Eddy: Then why can't we decide when proclamation will be? It will be proclaimed.
Ms Filion: Unfortunately, that's a power given to the Lieutenant Governor in Council.
Mr Wessenger: It's beyond my power.
Mr Eddy: There are many things beyond myself, so I understand.
The Chair: Further questions or comments on the amendment to subsection 16(2)? Shall Mr Wessenger's amendment to subsection 16(2) carry? Carried.
Interjection.
The Chair: Shall we stand down section 16? Agreed.
Section 17: You have an amendment, Mr Wessenger.
Mr Wessenger: Yes, we have another amendment that will have to be given to the clerk.
The Chair: Ah, we have a new amendment to section 17. Perhaps, Mr Wessenger, you could read your proposed amendment while Mr Carrozza gets some copies.
Mr Wessenger: I move that section 17 of the bill be struck out and the following substituted:
"17(1) Section 2 of the act is repealed and the following substituted:
"Application of Act
"2(1) Despite any act or agreement to the contrary, this act applies to,
"(a) any rental property comprised of a building or a related group of buildings situated in any municipality in Ontario except municipalities that are exempted by the regulation; and
"(b) all rental properties that are land lease communities or mobile home parks.
"Same
"(2) Despite subsection (1) and any regulation exempting a municipality from this act, this act applies to rental property situated in any municipality in Ontario in respect of,
"(a) a proposed conversion to a cooperative or a condominium; and
"(b) a proposed conversion, demolition, renovation or repair of a place that is prescribed by regulation.
"(2) On the day section 28 of the Residents Rights Act, 1994 comes into force or on the day this act comes into force, whichever is later, section 2 of the act is repealed and the following substituted:
"Application of Act
"2(1) Despite any act or agreement to the contrary, this act applies to,
"(a) any rental property comprised of a building or a related group of buildings situated in any municipality in Ontario except municipalities that are exempted by the regulation; and
"(b) all rental properties that are land lease communities or mobile home parks.
"Same
"(2) Despite subsection (1) and any regulation exempting a municipality from this act, this act applies to rental property situate in any municipality in Ontario in respect of,
"(a) a proposed conversion of,
"(i) rental property to a cooperative or condominium,
"(ii) a care home to use as a hotel, motel, tourist home, inn or apartment hotel, or to any use for a purpose other than rental property, or
"(iii) a care home to use as any other rental property;
"(b) a proposed demolition of a care home; or
"(c) a proposed renovation or repair of a care home if,
"(i) a tenant is in possession of a rental unit in the care home and vacant possession would be required, or
"(ii) the proposed repair or renovation is to a vacant rental unit in the care home and is so extensive that vacant possession of the unit would be required if it were occupied.
"Same, severance approval
"(3) Despite subsection (1), section 5 applies to all care homes located in Ontario."
I believe the reasons given by the legislative counsel with respect to the previous amendment apply the same to this one.
The Chair: We can either stand this down until all members have a copy or we can just wait for a few minutes.
Mr Wessenger: Let's just wait.
The Chair: How be we take five?
Mr Wessenger: I think it would be good to take five.
The Chair: We will reconvene at 20 minutes to 12.
The committee recessed from 1136 to 1148.
The Chair: The standing committee will reconvene.
Mr Wessenger: Could we further stand down the motion we're dealing with -- there are some technical problems -- and just move on to 18?
The Chair: Mr Wessenger has asked that we stand down the amendment he has just placed. Agreed? Agreed.
Mr Wessenger: With respect to 18, I will be recommending that we vote against it because it's redundant. It has already been covered in previous amendments.
The Chair: Further questions, comments or amendments to section 18? All in favour? No.
Section 18 is lost and deleted.
Section 19.
Mr Wessenger: I move that section 19 of the bill be struck out and the following substituted:
"19. Section 4 of the act is amended by adding the following subsections:
"(1.1) Subsection (1) does not apply so as to require the approval of the council of the municipality if,
"(a) the rental property is not a building or a related group of buildings in which one or more rental units are located; and
"(b) the demolition, conversion, renovation or repair of the rental property was commenced before the day the Land Lease Statute Law Amendment Act, 1993 received royal assent.
"(1.2) No infrastructure or part of an infrastructure in a rental property which is a land lease community or mobile home park shall be,
"(a) permanently removed; or
"(b) renovated or repaired if,
"(i) a tenant is in possession of a rental unit and vacant possession of the rental unit would be required, or
"(ii) the repair or renovation is so extensive that if any vacant rental unit affected by the repair or renovation were occupied, vacant possession would be required,
"by any person unless the council of the municipality in which the property is situate approves the removal, renovation or repair.
"(2.1) Clause (1)(b) does not apply so as to require the approval of the council of the municipality for the removal of a leased mobile home from the rental property that is the site for the mobile home, if the person who removes the leased mobile home is the tenant of the site and of the leased mobile home, whether or not the mobile home and the site are owned by the same person."
Basically what this amendment does is add a specific prohibition on the removal of infrastructure under the activities that the act prohibits without municipal approval. It also makes the application of the act in mobile home parks and land-lease communities come into effect on the day of royal assent. It makes sure this only applies when royal assent is obtained.
The Chair: Questions or comments?
Shall Mr Wessenger's amendment to section 19 carry? Carried.
Section 20.
Mr Wessenger: I'll be recommending we vote against section 20. This is again something that was unnecessary.
The Chair: Questions or comments regarding section 20? Shall section 20 carry? No.
The section is lost.
Mr Eddy: This bill is going to be a lot shorter.
Mr Wessenger: That's right, it will be a lot shorter.
The Chair: Section 21.
Mr Wessenger: I move that section 21 of the bill be struck out and the following substituted:
"21(1) Subsection 9(1) of the act is amended by inserting after `4(1)' in the fifth line `or (1.2).'
"(2) Subsection 9(3) of the act is amended by inserting after `4(1)' in the ninth line `or (1.2).'
"(3) Section 9 of the act is amended by adding the following subsection:
"Same
"(4) Despite section 113 of the Landlord and Tenant Act, no order for a writ of possession of a rental unit in a land lease community or in a mobile home park shall be issued in respect of the ground set out in section 105 of that act, even if the notice of termination was given or application made for a writ of possession before the day the Land Lease Statute Law Amendment Act, 1993 receives royal assent, unless the approval of the council of the municipality under subsection 4(1) or (1.2) of this act has been obtained, where such approval is required."
Basically this changes the aspect with respect to retroactivity to ensure that existing court orders will be respected as a final determination.
The Chair: Questions or comments on Mr Wessenger's amendment to section 21? Oh, the Chair is getting ahead of himself. This is out of order because subsection 9(1) is not open in the bill. I would therefore have to ask for unanimous consent to permit this amendment. Agreed? Agreed.
Mr Arnott: Why is it out of order?
The Chair: Because under the bill as presented, subsection 9(1) is not open, so we need consent.
Mr Arnott: All right, agreed.
The Chair: Questions or comments regarding Mr Wessenger's amendment? Shall Mr Wessenger's amendment to section 21 carry? Carried.
I think perhaps we've done a good morning's work.
Mr Wessenger: I think we have done a great morning's work. Thank you, Mr Chair. I think you also wanted not to sit this afternoon. Is that correct?
The Chair: Yes, that's my suggestion.
Mr Wessenger: Unless you want to come back for 20 minutes. In 20 minutes we could finish the technical matters, if people wish, then we wouldn't have to sit on the --
The Chair: It won't take all that long to do it in the next time we sit.
Mr Wessenger: No, it wouldn't, so why don't we?
Mr Arnott: For clarification, which sections have been stood down? I just want to get a quick summary of those.
The Chair: The clerk may be able to give you a quick list.
Clerk of the Committee: We have a new section, section 10.1, stood down, and section 11 stood down. We have a subsection in section 16 stood down, which is subsection 16(5). Then we have section 17 stood down, and that is all.
Mr Arnott: Just to get further clarification, where do we go from here?
The Chair: The committee will reconvene Thursday morning, June 2, to continue clause-by-clause consideration of Bill 21.
Mr Arnott: And Mr Wessenger plans to meet with some of the interested parties prior to that.
Mr Wessenger: What we can do is finish the technical aspects off on June 2, and then we are going to meet on June 7.
Mr Arnott: That will be done in the formal committee.
Mr Wessenger: We'll finish off in formal committee, and then we'll have a meeting on June 9 where we'll deal with the substantive outstanding matters.
The Chair: The committee will stand in adjournment until Thursday morning, June 2, at 10 am.
The committee adjourned at 1158.