Legislative Assembly of Ontario

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The committee met at 1620 in committee room 1, following a closed session.

Committee business

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): I’d like to call this meeting of the Standing Committee on Justice Policy to order. We’re here to consider committee process with respect to Bill 159, which was referred to the committee pursuant to the order of the House of December 11, 2019.

I anticipate a motion on the floor. May I have a motion with respect to the hearings of the bill? Mr. Bouma.

Mr. Will Bouma: Mr. Chair, I’ll so move, just to get it on the floor.

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Sure. Just please read the whole motion.

Mr. Will Bouma: I move that—I have to read the whole motion?

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Yes, sir.

Mr. Will Bouma: (1) That the Standing Committee on Justice Policy be authorized to hold public hearings in Windsor, Brampton and Ottawa on January 20, 21 and 22, 2020.

(2) That the Clerk of the Committee, with the authorization of the Chair, post information regarding the public hearings on the Ontario parliamentary channel, on the Legislative Assembly’s website and with Canada NewsWire.

(3) That the Clerk of the Committee, with the authorization of the Chair, place an advertisement in a major newspaper for one day in each of the cities where the committee intends to hold public hearings, that the advertisements be placed in both English and French papers where possible, and that advertisements be placed in ethnic media outlets, subject to the approval of the subcommittee.

(4) That the deadline for requests to appear be set at 5 p.m. on Monday, January 13, 2020.

(5) That following the deadline for requests to appear, the Clerk of the Committee provide the subcommittee members and their designate with an electronic list of all potential witnesses who have requested to appear before the committee by 10 a.m. on Tuesday, January 14, 2020.

(6) That the Clerk of the Committee be authorized to schedule all interested witnesses in a location, if all requests received by the deadline can be accommodated.

(7) That, if all requests to appear in any location cannot be accommodated, each of the subcommittee members or their designate supply the Clerk of the Committee with a prioritized list of witnesses chosen from the Clerk’s list by 12 p.m. on Tuesday, January 14, 2020.

(8) That the deadline for written submissions be 5 p.m. on Wednesday, January 22, 2020.

(9) That the committee authorize up to one staff person from each recognized party to travel with the committee, space permitting, for the purpose of public hearings on Bill 159 and that reasonable expenses incurred for travel, accommodation and meals be paid for by the committee upon receipt of a properly filed expense claim.

(10) That witnesses be offered a total of 30 minutes, with up to 10 minutes for a presentation and up to 20 minutes for questioning, divided equally between the two recognized parties.

(11) That the research officer provide the committee with a summary of testimony received by the committee on Bill 159 by 12 p.m. on Wednesday, January 29, 2020.

(12) That in the event of less than four witnesses scheduled in any given location, the Chair be authorized to cancel the hearing.

(13) That the deadline for filing amendments to Bill 159 with the Clerk of the Committee be 5 p.m. on Monday, February 3, 2020.

(14) That clause-by-clause consideration of Bill 159 be held on dates to be determined by the subcommittee.

I’m noting that I didn’t read everything on the page here in front of me on clause (12).

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): So the motion, as moved—if I could kindly direct the attention of the committee to clause (12), what has been removed in the motion moved by Mr. Bouma versus what was previously on paper is everything beginning from the word “and” and ending at the word “date.”

Any debate? Mr. Singh.

Mr. Gurratan Singh: With respect to this motion, just correct me if I’m wrong: Does this designate the cities that we’ll be attending as well?

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Yes, it does.

Mr. Gurratan Singh: Which point is that?

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Clause (1).

Mr. Gurratan Singh: Okay. On that point, we would like to move an amendment, if the committee is agreeable to it, and see if we can put Peterborough back on the list of cities to attend.

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): What would you propose to remove?

Mr. Gurratan Singh: Given the schedule, if it’s possible—we are agreeable with Windsor. There’s no contention with Windsor. But given the nature of the developments happening in Peterborough, we do think that’s an important and crucial city to have with respect to these hearings. What I would like to put forward, if the committee is agreeable, is to try to find out if we can work out an addition of Peterborough to be considered as a place for hearings.

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Mr. Bouma.

Mr. Will Bouma: I think I would be amenable to that—if we don’t get through clause-by-clause in one day, does it pass as is?

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): No.

Mr. Will Bouma: We can’t do that. So the difficulty will be, with 10 schedules, to try to—if I may, through you, Mr. Chair—get through clause-by-clause in one day, unless we can extend hours of committee, because we won’t be sitting.

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Mr. Rakocevic.

Mr. Tom Rakocevic: To my understanding, clause-by-clause is generally dealt with following second reading of a bill. What appears to be happening is that we are taking away time when we could be meeting with communities and listening to stakeholders and affected people and putting the clause-by-clause in at that stage. Is there any reason that we can’t do the clause-by-clause following the travelling of the bill, if it’s in contention?

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): One second—

Interjections.

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Further debate? Ms. Singh.

Ms. Sara Singh: I just want to echo some of the points that were brought up. I think that having an extra day to go to a city to listen to the community and some of the concerns they may have will inform any amendments that we’ll be putting forward in clause-by-clause. I think that allowing more time to hear from the community and perhaps limiting some time—again, we haven’t reached second reading of the bill, so we can use additional time after second reading in order to move any further amendments that need to be made.

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Further debate? Are members prepared to vote on Mr. Singh’s amendment?

Mr. Gurratan Singh: Just to clarify: The amendment is the addition of Peterborough. I put forward a motion that we include Peterborough in clause (1) of this motion, in addition to the other cities that are listed.

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Are members prepared to vote on Mr. Singh’s motion, as clarified? All in favour of the motion? All opposed? I declare the motion lost.

We will now go back to debate on the original motion. Any additional debate?

Ms. Sara Singh: I just want to have some clarification around clause (12). There was some discussion about potentially not rescheduling hearings if we don’t have the number of witnesses that are needed. I think it’s important that we do provide alternative dates, so I would just request that the language stay the same in the motion.

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): As clarification before we debate Ms. Singh’s motion: The motion before the committee is as moved, which means that the motion before the committee right now—clause (12) ends with the word “hearing.” That’s what we’re now considering.

Further debate on Ms. Singh’s motion?

Interjections.

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Ms. Singh’s motion is to extend clause (12) to include “and reschedule presenters to appear on an alternate date.”

Any debate on Ms. Singh’s motion?

Ms. Natalia Kusendova: Through you, Chair: Isn’t that what’s already—

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Ms. Kusendova, what Mr. Bouma moved ended at the word “hearing,” whereas your paper has six or seven words subsequent to the word “hearing.” The motion moved by Mr. Bouma did not include those words.

Any debate on Ms. Singh’s motion? Are members prepared to vote on Ms. Singh’s motion? All in favour of Ms. Singh’s motion? All opposed? I declare the motion lost.

Further debate on Mr. Bouma’s motion? Mr. Rakocevic.

Mr. Tom Rakocevic: I move a motion to replace clause (14) and say that clause-by-clause be held at a time following second reading of the bill.

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Any debate? Are members prepared to vote on Mr. Rakocevic’s motion? All in favour? All opposed? I declare the motion lost.

Further debate on Mr. Bouma’s motion? Mr. Singh?

Mr. Gurratan Singh: Can we actually just hear that motion again? Mr. Bouma’s motion?

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Mr. Bouma’s motion is before you on paper.

Mr. Gurratan Singh: Okay, it’s the entire motion. I understand.

Mr. Will Bouma: Do you really want me to read it again?

Mr. Gurratan Singh: No, my apologies.

Laughter.

Ms. Sara Singh: Dispense, dispense with that.

Mr. Gurratan Singh: I thought I missed an amendment of some sort. Not again.

Mr. Lorne Coe: Once is enough.

Mr. Will Bouma: I mean, I like the sound of my own voice.

Mr. Gurratan Singh: My apologies.

The Chair (Mr. Roman Baber): Are members prepared to vote on Mr. Bouma’s motion? All in favour? All opposed? Carried.

Seeing that there is no further business, I declare the committee adjourned.

The committee adjourned at 1632.

 

 

 

STANDING COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE POLICY

Chair / Président

Mr. Roman Baber (York Centre / York-Centre PC)

 

Vice-Chair / Vice-Présidente

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos (Oakville North–Burlington / Oakville-Nord–Burlington PC)

 

Mr. Roman Baber (York Centre / York-Centre PC)

Mr. Will Bouma (Brantford–Brant PC)

Mr. Lorne Coe (Whitby PC)

Mr. Parm Gill (Milton PC)

Ms. Natalia Kusendova (Mississauga Centre / Mississauga-Centre PC)

Ms. Suze Morrison (Toronto Centre / Toronto-Centre ND)

Mr. Gurratan Singh (Brampton East / Brampton-Est ND)

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos (Oakville North–Burlington / Oakville-Nord–Burlington PC)

Mr. Kevin Yarde (Brampton North / Brampton-Nord ND)

 

Substitutions / Membres remplaçants

Mr. Robert Bailey (Sarnia–Lambton PC)

Mr. Tom Rakocevic (Humber River–Black Creek ND)

Ms. Sara Singh (Brampton Centre / Brampton-Centre ND)

 

Clerk / Greffier

Mr. Christopher Tyrell

 

Staff / Personnel

Mr. Andrew McNaught, research officer,
Research Services