Thursday 29 July 1993

Subcommittee report


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)

Fletcher, Derek (Guelph ND)

Grandmaître, Bernard (Ottawa East/-Est L)

*Johnson, David (Don Mills PC)

*Mammoliti, George (Yorkview 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:

Eddy, Ron (Brant-Haldimand L) for Mr Grandmaître

Hayes, Pat (Essex-Kent ND) for Mr Dadamo

Wiseman, Jim (Durham West/-Ouest ND) for Mr Morrow

Clerk / Greffier: Carrozza, Franco

Staff / Personnel: Richmond, Jerry, research officer, Legislative Research Service

The committee met at 1003 in room 151.


The Vice-Chair (Mr Hans Daigeler): Seeing that representatives of all three parties are here, I call the meeting of the standing committee on general government to order for the purpose of considering the report of the subcommittee.

Since the Chair was present at the subcommittee, and I'm the Vice-Chair and I wasn't present, perhaps the clerk of the committee could give us the report. I understand you have the report in front of you. Perhaps the clerk could explain how the discussion went and what we need to do at this point.

Clerk of the Committee (Mr Franco Carrozza): Just to bring everyone up to date, yesterday afternoon the Legislature transferred Bill 17 from the finance committee to the general government committee, so that now we can officially discuss the bill. Yesterday afternoon the subcommittee met on both bills. It came to a number of conclusions on them and made the recommendation to the full committee.

I'd like to bring your attention to the report. The subcommittee decided on Bill 17, because the time was short, to have a direct mailing list instead of advertising. The lists were given to the clerk. They are being looked at to find the addresses. I hope my office will be able to mail them this afternoon or, at the latest, tomorrow. There will be no advertising.

The committee will meet during the week of August 16 to August 19. The subcommittee also discussed the ministry giving a briefing to the committee and having the minister make a statement, so the agenda will look this way.

At 2 pm, the minister will make a statement for 20 minutes followed by both critics. Each will have 20 minutes. At 3 o'clock, the ministry will give the committee a briefing that will last from 3 pm to 5 pm. There will be public hearings beginning on Tuesday, August 17, from 10 till 12 and from 2 to 5 and also on Wednesday, August 18, at the same times.

The subcommittee also recommended that each witness be given 20 minutes, and it also recommended that there will be 10 minutes for presentation and 10 minutes for questions, or if they wish to use the whole 20 minutes, the subcommittee was quite flexible and it hopes the committee will also be quite flexible on this.

There will be clause-by-clause consideration of the bill on Thursday, August 19, from 10 to 12 and from 2 to 5.

They also realize, because of the shortness of time and a direct mailing, that the Chair will have more authority to set the agenda in consultation with the subcommittee.

That is the first part of the report on Bill 17.

They also met and discussed Bill 40. They came to a number of recommendations: that the bill be reviewed the weeks of August 23 and August 30; that on Monday, August 23, from 2 pm to 3 pm, there will be a minister's statement for 20 minutes followed by the critics for 20 minutes each. At 3 to 5 pm there will be a briefing by the ministry.

Then on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, that would be August 24, 25 and 26, there will be public hearings beginning from 10 to 12 and from 2 to 5. Again, the subcommittee recommended to be flexible. As there are more groups than the time allows, perhaps we should expand the time to 5:30 or 1:30 in the afternoon of Monday.

The following week again on Monday it will be from 2 to 5, that's August 30, and on Tuesday will be from 10 to 12 and 2 to 5. That is the last day of the public hearings.

There will be two days for clause-by-clause. That will be September 1 and 2. The times will be from 10 to 12 and 2 to 5.

The committee also recommends that the witnesses be given 20 minutes: 10 minutes for presentation, 10 minutes for questions. Again, in the spirit of flexibility, the subcommittee recommended that the Chair, in consultation with the subcommittee, will decide, if they are umbrella groups or there are special groups the committee wishes to see, that they could expand the time for them.

The committee decided to have advertising of Bill 40. It will be done on August 6, which is a Friday, and it will be in all the dailies in the province in English, and in French, Le Droit in Ottawa. The deadlines they recommended will be Friday, August 13, for oral presentation and Friday, August 20, for the written presentation.

The committee realizes this is an important bill, and it made the recommendation that it would travel to communities, if numbers indicated or were sufficient for the committee to travel. It decided on Kingston or Ottawa, Windsor and Sault Ste Marie. Again this would be based upon the availability of venues in these communities.

Mr Ron Eddy (Brant-Haldimand): I don't know if I should wait till the end or not.

The Chair: Please.

Clerk of the Committee: Here again the subcommittee decided to be flexible. They were not sure which day and they allowed the Clerk to find out the venues for us so we can make a recommendation.

Mr Chair, I am finished.

The Vice-Chair: Any comments? Mr Johnson.

Mr David Johnson (Don Mills): I think everything is 100% perfect, except for one minor thing. What we agreed on in clause 4 of Bill 40 was that we would travel to Kingston or Ottawa, London or Windsor and Sault Ste Marie.

The Vice-Chair: So we should add London?

Mr David Johnson: So if you add "London or Windsor," that's what we actually decided. Other than that, as far as I can see it's perfect.

Mr George Mammoliti (Yorkview): I think it was Windsor or London.

Mr Jim Wiseman (Durham West): My only comment would deal with, if we do fly to any of these places, that we select a transport company that has planes that are slightly a bit more comfortable than the one we used when we were doing the Bill 143 hearings. I don't mean that in the sense that I'm looking for comfort. It's just that --

The Vice-Chair: I'm sure you're not looking for first class, but just normal --

Mr Wiseman: I just want it to be class, that's all.

The Vice-Chair: I'm sure the clerk will do his best.

Mr Wiseman: Our legislative researcher will be able to fill you in on the details of those flights, and I think all of the committee would thank me for this recommendation if they knew what we flew in.

Mr Eddy: Not on the record, though.

Mr Wiseman: Not on the record.

The Vice-Chair: Okay, I think the clerk has heard those remarks. As I indicated, I'm sure he will do his best to accommodate those concerns. Mr Mammoliti.

Mr Mammoliti: I think it's important to mention as well that there might be a possibility, from what I can gather, that we may have to leave on a Sunday if need be.

The Vice-Chair: That is routine --

Mr Mammoliti: Well, it's not routine for me.

The Vice-Chair: It is routine, in my experience, frankly, as a member, that these requests would happen from time to time.

Are there any further comments on the proposed schedule for the hearings and for the sessions of this committee? If not, can I have a motion to adopt the report of the subcommittee?

Moved by Mr Eddy, seconded by Mr Johnson. All in favour? Agreed.

I understand from the clerk that there's another motion that the committee would like us to pass. They felt they should be a little more flexible in terms of the membership of the subcommittee, that sometimes members of the subcommittee are critics and they're in the House and it's difficult to call them into a subcommittee and there should be more flexibility to name representatives, from their own caucus obviously, to take their place on the subcommittee.

I think you have in front of you a motion, and if the motion is clear, if somebody would care to move it. I understand that the names to be filled in are the ones that are currently on the subcommittee. I think it's Mr Grandmaître for the Liberals, Mr Arnott for the Conservatives and Mr Mammoliti for the government.

You're moving that, Mr Mammoliti?

Mr Mammoliti: Sure I am.

Mr David Johnson: Just a question. This pertains to both Bill 40 and Bill 17, does it?

The Vice-Chair: Well, no. This has nothing to do with either of these bills. It's just a general motion as to who can sit on the subcommittee for the purposes of arranging the discussions of the committee.

Clerk of the Committee: Just to clarify with you, Mr Johnson, you see, yesterday you would have required, as Mr Eddy gave me, a substitution form. This motion will remove that. It will permit you to substitute on the say-so of your own Mr Arnott.

Mr David Johnson: But is it only Mr Arnott that I could substitute?

Clerk of the Committee: No, no.

The Vice-Chair: No. As the motion says, anyone, as long as it's somebody from your caucus.

Mr David Johnson: Okay. All right. I'm just reading this for the first time here. So Mr Cousens, for example --

Clerk of the Committee: Yes.

The Vice-Chair: That's correct, anyone. Like the last line --

Mr David Johnson: Oh, I see. I didn't get down to that. "Any member," all right.

The Vice-Chair: -- "who is of the same recognized party."

Mr David Johnson: Good.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Mammoliti has moved this motion. Is there any further discussion? All in favour? Carried.

Is there any other matter before the committee at this point?

Clerk of the Committee: No. I just draw to your attention the advertising that will be placed and a copy of the letter which will go on Bill 17 to the invitees.

My only other item, if I may, if the members have any other lists that they wish to give to the clerk regarding Bill 44 --

Mr Wiseman: Just a reminder that the second paragraph, you would want to put "London or Windsor" in there.

Clerk of the Committee: Yes.

The Vice-Chair: That was noted before.

Clerk of the Committee: It will be noted. I will do that right now.

The Vice-Chair: Seeing that there's no further business before the committee, the committee now stands adjourned. I look forward to seeing you on August 16. Thank you very much and have a good day.

The committee adjourned at 1015.