WORKERS' COMPENSATION AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY AMENDMENT ACT, 1994 / LOI DE 1994 MODIFIANT LA LOI SUR LES ACCIDENTS DU TRAVAIL ET LA LOI SUR LA SANTÉ ET LA SÉCURITÉ AU TRAVAIL

CONTENTS

Monday 26 September 1994

Workers' Compensation and Occupational Health and Safety Amendment Act, 1994, Bill 165, Mr Mackenzie / Loi de 1994 modifiant la Loi sur les accidents du travail et la Loi sur la santé et la sécurité au travail, projet de loi 165, M. Mackenzie

STANDING COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

Chair / Président: Vacant

*Vice-Chair / Vice-Président: Cooper, Mike (Kitchener-Wilmot ND)

Conway, Sean G. (Renfrew North/-Nord L)

*Fawcett, Joan M. (Northumberland L)

Ferguson, Will, (Kitchener NDP)

Huget, Bob (Sarnia ND)

Jordan, Leo (Lanark-Renfrew PC)

Klopp, Paul (Huron ND)

*Murdock, Sharon (Sudbury ND)

*Offer, Steven (Mississauga North/-Nord L)

Turnbull, David (York Mills PC)

Waters, Daniel (Muskoka-Georgian Bay ND)

*Wood, Len (Cochrane North/-Nord ND)

*In attendance / présents

Substitutions present / Membres remplaçants présents:

Arnott, Ted (Wellington PC) for Mr Jordan

Duignan, Noel (Halton North/-Nord ND) for Mr Huget

Hope, Randy R. (Chatham-Kent ND) for Mr Waters

Mahoney, Steven W. (Mississauga West/-Ouest L) for Mr Conway

Witmer, Elizabeth (Waterloo North/-Nord PC) for Mr Turnbull

Clerk / Greffière: Manikel, Tannis

Staff / Personnel: Spakowski, Mark, legislative counsel

The committee met at 1311 in committee room 1.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY AMENDMENT ACT, 1994 / LOI DE 1994 MODIFIANT LA LOI SUR LES ACCIDENTS DU TRAVAIL ET LA LOI SUR LA SANTÉ ET LA SÉCURITÉ AU TRAVAIL

Consideration of Bill 165, An Act to amend the Workers' Compensation Act and the Occupational Health and Safety Act / Projet de loi 165, Loi modifiant la Loi sur les accidents du travail et la Loi sur la santé et la sécurité au travail.

The Vice-Chair (Mr Mike Cooper): Today, we'll be beginning our clause-by-clause on Bill 165.We'll be starting with section 1.

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Waterloo North): I would suggest at this time that we move to adjourn the committee.

Unfortunately, as recently as five minutes ago I received copies of the government amendments. I have certainly not had an opportunity to peruse the amendments or make the appropriate comments, so I would move for adjournment of the committee today.

Mr Steven W. Mahoney (Mississauga West): I think I just received the PC amendments as well, which is somewhat frustrating. So we've got new government amendments and new PC amendments coming in and it appears that the Liberal amendments were the only ones that were put in on time and distributed for an opportunity to look at them.

I'm a little frustrated at this, but I tend to agree that it's unfortunate that we're going to have to literally fly by the seat of our pants with such important issues. Even the first PC motion on section 1 appears to be quite extensive; it's almost a full page. I've just got that and haven't had an opportunity to even look at it. So I'm afraid I'm going to have to concur and second that motion.

Mr Randy R. Hope (Chatham-Kent): Just in all fairness, and I won't take any strikes at whether it was PC or Liberal motions we just obtained, but I think the times that the Liberal and Conservative and NDP amendments were brought forward and presented into people's hands made it difficult for a proper analysis. Mr Mahoney's saying he's just received some of the NDP and the Conservatives. I could get into that too but I won't.

Because it is an important piece of legislation that we have to deal with which is affecting a number of people, whether they be current injured workers or future injured workers -- hopefully not future injured workers -- I think it's appropriate that we take the time to carefully do an analysis on the amendments that are being brought forward and to resume tomorrow with the constructive comments that will be made.

Mrs Witmer: I guess the other reason for the delay, and perhaps it's the reason why some of the amendments were not ready on the date that had been predetermined, is the fact that those of us who are on the committee did not receive any summary of the recommendations of Bill 165 that had been prepared by legislative research until September the -- well, last Wednesday, I guess, whatever date that was. I know those were supposed to be ready for us on Monday and certainly that's what we were waiting for, in order to get those recommendations before we put our amendments together. So, unfortunately, the delay by that particular branch delayed the preparation of the amendments.

I think as a result we're all operating at a bit of a disadvantage now and I would concur with Mr Hope. We simply haven't had sufficient opportunity to analyse the information that's been presented to us.

Mr Steven Offer (Mississauga North): I have no problem in the motion as put forward and seconded by my colleague. I would like to make the point that when we resume I would hope that the ministry would comply with undertaking number 8 dealing with the legal ramifications of including a financial responsibility framework in the purpose clause as per your agreement. I care not whether it is today or tomorrow, as long as it happens.

Ms Sharon Murdock (Sudbury): Just on Mr Offer's point: It's legislative counsel to the committee that will answer your question rather than the Ministry of Labour.

The Vice-Chair: Further? Seeing nothing further, all those in favour of adjournment? Opposed? Carried.

Just for the committee's information, the amendments will be put in a binder for tomorrow by the clerk.

Mr Mahoney: Is this all of them?

The Vice-Chair: The package that you have just received is all the amendments that the clerk has received to this moment.

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair: My apologies. They'll be put in a binder just for myself, so it's easier for me.

Mr Mahoney: What time are we going to start tomorrow?

Ms Murdock: I know that we were supposed to start tomorrow at 11, as per our sheet that was handed out by the clerk. However, given that we would only sit for an hour and then adjourn for lunch and then come back, I'm suggesting that perhaps, if the other parties agree, we would come back at 1 and not sit in the morning at all.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you, Ms Murdock. I've already checked with all three parties and they have agreed to that. Seeing nothing further, this committee stands adjourned until 1 pm tomorrow afternoon.

The committee adjourned at 1316.