Daytime Meeting - Sessional Day 142
Evening Meeting - Sessional Day 143
Mercredi
21 juin 2006
Séance de l'après-midi - jour de session 142
Séance du soir - jour de session 143
2nd Session,
38th Parliament
2e session
38e législature
PRAYERS
1:30 P.M.
PRIÈRES
13 H 30
The Speaker addressed the House
as follows:-
I beg to inform the House that I
have today laid upon the Table the Individual Members'
Expenditures for the fiscal year 2005-2006 (Sessional Paper No.
177).
REPORTS BY
COMMITTEES
RAPPORTS DES
COMITÉS
Ms. Horwath from the Standing
Committee on Estimates presented the Committee's report as
follows:-
Pursuant to Standing Order
60(a), the following Estimates (2006-2007) are reported back to
the House as they were not previously selected by the Committee
for consideration and are deemed to be passed by the
Committee:-
OFFICE OF THE
ASSEMBLY
201 Office of the Assembly $
108,762,900
202 Commission(er)'s $
15,091,600
OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR
GENERAL
2501 Office of the Auditor
General $ 13,662,200
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ELECTION
OFFICER
501 Office of the Chief Election
Officer $ 7,516,900
OMBUDSMAN ONTARIO
2301 Ombudsman Ontario $
9,451,200
Pursuant to Standing Order
60(b), the report of the Committee is deemed to be received and
the Estimates of the offices named therein as not being selected
for consideration by the Committee are deemed to be concurred
in.
INTRODUCTION OF
BILLS
DÉPÔT DES PROJETS
DE LOI
The following Bill was
introduced and read the first time:-
Le projet de loi suivant est
présenté et lu une première fois:-
Bill 132, An Act to include
members of the Legislative Assembly in the Public Service Pension
Plan and to make related amendments to other Acts. Mr.
Sterling.
Projet de loi 132, Loi visant
à faire participer les députés à
l'Assemblée législative au Régime de retraite des
fonctionnaires et à apporter des modifications connexes
à d'autres lois. M. Sterling.
MOTIONS
MOTIONS
With unanimous consent, on
motion by Mr. Bradley,
Ordered, that an humble address
be presented to the Lieutenant Governor in Council as
follows:-
"To the Lieutenant Governor in
Council:-
We, Her Majesty's most dutiful
and loyal subjects, the Legislative Assembly of the Province of
Ontario, now assembled, request the appointment of Jim McCarter
as Auditor General for the Province of Ontario, as provided in
section 4 (1.1) of the Auditor General Act, RSO 1990, c. A35, to
hold office under the terms and conditions of the said
Act."
And, that the Address be
engrossed and presented to the Lieutenant Governor in Council by
the Speaker.
Mr. Bradley moved,
M. Bradley propose,
That pursuant to Standing Order
9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on
Wednesday, June 21, 2006, for the purpose of considering
government business.
The question being put on the
motion, it was carried on the following division:-
La motion, mise aux voix, est
adoptée par le vote suivant:-
AYES / POUR -
51
Arthurs
Barrett
Bentley
Berardinetti
Bradley
Broten
Brownell
Chambers
Chudleigh
Colle
Crozier
Delaney
Dombrowsky
Duguid
Duncan
Flynn
Fonseca
Hardeman
Hoy
Klees
Kular
Kwinter
Lalonde
Martiniuk
Matthews
Mauro
McNeely
Meilleur
Miller
Mitchell
Mossop
Munro
Orazietti
O'Toole
Peters
Phillips
Qaadri
Racco
Ramal
Ramsay
Runciman
Ruprecht
Sandals
Smith
Smitherman
Sterling
Tory
Van Bommel
Wynne
Yakabuski
Zimmer
NAYS / CONTRE -
5
Bisson
Horwath
Kormos
Marchese
Prue
The Speaker delivered the
following ruling:-
On Tuesday, June 6, the Member
for Leeds-Grenville (Mr. Runciman) raised a point of order under
Standing Order 23(g), relating to the sub judice rule. The
sub judice rule refers to the practice that the House
should not discuss matters that are pending or currently before a
court of law for adjudication.
Standing Order 23(g)
states:-
In debate, a member shall be
called to order by the Speaker if he or she:
Refers to any matter that is the
subject of a proceeding,
(i) that is pending in a court
or before a judge for judicial determination, or
(ii) that is before any
quasi-judicial body constituted by the House or by or under the
authority of an Act of the Legislature,
where it is shown to the
satisfaction of the Speaker that further reference would create a
real and substantial danger of prejudice to the
proceeding.
In his point of order, the
Member for Leeds-Grenville asserted that the Premier had offended
the sub judice rule while answering a question on the
topic of the ongoing land dispute in Caledonia. Specifically, the
Member stated that the Premier's comments had the potential to
prejudice the Ipperwash Inquiry currently being conducted by the
Honourable Sidney Linden.
The Member for Niagara Centre
(Mr. Kormos) and the Attorney General (Mr. Bryant) also made
contributions on this point of order.
Let me spend a bit of time
talking about sub judice. Translated literally from the
Latin, sub judice means "under judgement", and while it is
a parliamentary convention, in Ontario it is also a specific rule
which entered our Standing Orders in 1970, and was modified to
the current version in 1978. This convention exists as an
acknowledgement that it is in the public interest, and in the
interest of the administration of justice, broadly interpreted,
that the Legislative Assembly will voluntarily refrain from
debating or discussing matters before courts of law or largely
similar judicial bodies.
The principle of the separation
of powers in our system acts to ensure that the legislative,
executive and judicial branches of government operate
independently. The legislature should never discuss matters
before the courts when doing so could undermine the work of the
court, the rights of any individual to due process in a neutral
environment, or when unproved allegations might irrevocably
damage personal reputations.
As the presiding official in
this place, it falls upon the Speaker to exercise his or her
discretion whether or not to impose restraint upon the Assembly
when, in a situation of the type I just described, it appears to
the Speaker that Members may be venturing too far in their
remarks.
The Speaker, however, has two
other major considerations in mind when sub judice arises:
first, the fundamental parliamentary privilege of freedom of
speech and, second, the practical limitations on his ability to
be fully aware of every matter before the courts. Let me address
each of these important factors.
Freedom of speech is one of the
most important and useful privileges enjoyed by Members of the
Legislative Assembly. The Bill of Rights of 1688 first declared
this privilege, and Canadian legislatures, even before
Confederation, likewise claimed it. It was formally conveyed to
the Parliament of Canada in the Constitution Act, 1867 and the
provinces of Canada have since aggressively and successfully
continued to claim this privilege. It is the basic building block
of this legislature.
The Speaker, therefore, has a
solemn obligation to uphold the right of every Member to speak
freely in this place, and would only reluctantly interfere in
debate in certain instances. One of these is when matters being
discussed fall under the sub judice rule. However, in the
absence of a blatant and obvious transgression of the sub
judice convention, the Speaker will instead err on the side
of the right of Members to debate and consider important public
issues in the Legislature.
Marleau and Montpetit's House of
Commons Procedure and Practice, at page 537, in a reference to
the First Report of the House of Commons Special Committee on the
Rights and Immunities of Members, explains this application of
the sub judice convention as follows:
"...when there is doubt in the
mind of the Chair, a presumption should exist in favour of
allowing debate and against the application of the
convention."
On the second matter of
knowledge of matters before the courts, as numerous of my
predecessors in this chair have stated, Members can surely
appreciate the difficulty the Speaker has, as he cannot be fully
aware of every matter before every judicial body. Moreover,
Standing Order 23(g) directs the Speaker to interfere in debate
only when he or she is satisfied that continued reference to the
specific matter may tend to prejudice the relevant proceeding.
This is extremely difficult for a Speaker to gauge.
The specific case at hand refers
to comments made during Question Period, and here again the
authorities and our practice are instructive.
The voluntary nature of the
sub judice convention means that every Member must be
careful to refrain from making comments in debate, motions or
questions.
In debate, this self-regulation
is essential. In oral question period, Speakers largely rely upon
the Ministers to whom questions are addressed to decide if
further discussion of the matter might prejudice a matter before
a court, or other judicial or quasi-judicial body, or tribunal.
And while Ministers have every right to decline to answer a
question which in their view rubs up against the sub
judice convention, Members in framing questions must also be
cognizant of their responsibility in this regard.
Indeed, the very posing of a
question may cross the sub judice line, but the conundrum
for all is that, regardless of the subsequent actions of the
Speaker or anyone else, the damage may already have been
done.
In the specific case at hand, I
have reviewed the Hansard exchange from June 6 between the Member
for Leeds-Grenville and the Premier. Beyond subjective inferences
which a reader might draw from them - which is well beyond the
concern of the Speaker - I do not find any of the comments go so
far as to concern me with regard to sub judice.
I will end by noting again that
the sub judice convention relies for its effectiveness
upon the goodwill of all Members in voluntarily refraining from
discussing matters before courts or judicial bodies. I think it
is worth reminding Members that extreme caution should always be
the order of the day whenever such matters arise as a topic of
discussion in this Chamber.
PETITIONS
PÉTITIONS
Petition relating to funding
community agencies to ensure quality support and services to
people who have an intellectual disability (Sessional Paper No.
P-15) Mr. O'Toole.
Petition relating to identity
theft (Sessional Paper No. P-113) Mr. Ruprecht.
Petition relating to increasing
operating funding to Long Term Care homes (Sessional Paper No.
P-136) Ms. Scott .
Petition relating to supporting
the provincial government's efforts to improve access to family
doctors and the Family Health Teams Program (Sessional Paper No.
P-161) Mr. Ruprecht.
Petitions relating to amending
the Ontario School Boards' Education Act to divert waste from
Ontario high school classrooms and cafeterias (Sessional Paper
No. P-168) Mr. Hardeman and Mr. O'Toole.
Petition relating to reviewing
and amending the Workplace Safety Insurance Act (Sessional Paper
No. P-197) Mr. Zimmer.
Petition relating to supporting
the Fair Access to Regulated Professions Act, 2006 (Sessional
Paper No. P-202) Mr. Leal.
Petition relating to stopping
repairs, securing funding and constructing a new facility for St.
Paul's Elementary School (Sessional Paper No. P-207) Mr.
Wilson.
Petition relating to supporting
the Ombudsman having the power to probe decisions and investigate
complaints concerning the Children's Aid Societies (Sessional
Paper No. P-211) Ms. Horwath.
Petition relating to investing
in energy sources for the future (Sessional Paper No. P-217) Mr.
Delaney.
ORDERS OF THE
DAY
ORDRE DU JOUR
Debate was resumed on the motion
for Second Reading of Bill 52, An Act to amend the Education Act
respecting pupil learning to the age of 18 and equivalent
learning and to make complementary amendments to the Highway
Traffic Act.
Le débat reprend sur la
motion portant deuxième lecture du projet de loi 52, Loi
modifiant la Loi sur l'éducation concernant l'apprentissage
des élèves jusqu' à l'âge de 18 ans et
l'apprentissage équivalent et apportant des modifications
complémentaires au Code de la route.
After some time, there being no
further debate, the question having been put, the Acting Speaker
(Mr. Prue) declared his opinion that the Ayes had it, and a
recorded vote having been demanded,
Après quelque temps, comme
il n'y a plus de débat, la motion mise aux voix, le
président par intérim, M. Prue déclare qu'à
son avis les voix favorables l'emportent et un vote par appel
nominal ayant été demandé,
The Acting Speaker directed that
the Members be called in, for which purpose the division bells
were rung.
Le Président par
intérim donne des directives pour convoquer les
députés et la sonnerie d'appel se fait
entendre.
During the ringing of the bells,
the Acting Speaker addressed the House as follows:-
Pendant la sonnerie d'appel, le
Président par intérim s'adresse à l'Assemblée
en ces mots:-
I have received a request from
the Chief Government Whip, under Standing Order 28(h), that the
vote on the motion for Second Reading of Bill 52, An Act to amend
the Education Act respecting pupil learning to the age of 18 and
equivalent learning and to make complementary amendments to the
Highway Traffic Act, be deferred until Thursday, June 22,
2006.
J'ai reçu une requête
du Whip en chef du gouvernement, conformément à
l'article 28 h) du Règlement, que le vote sur la motion
portant deuxième lecture du projet de loi 52, Loi modifiant
la Loi sur l'éducation concernant l'apprentissage des
élèves jusqu' à l'âge de 18 ans et
l'apprentissage équivalent et apportant des modifications
complémentaires au Code de la route, soit différé
jusqu'au jeudi 22 juin 2006.
Therefore the vote is
accordingly deferred.
En conséquence, le vote est
différé.
Debate was resumed on the motion
for Third Reading of Bill 117, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act
to provide for an Ontario home electricity payment.
Le débat reprend sur la
motion portant troisième lecture du projet de loi 117, Loi
modifiant la Loi de l'impôt sur le revenu pour prévoir
un paiement au titre des factures d'électricité
résidentielle de l'Ontario.
After some time, the motion was
declared carried and the Bill was accordingly read the third time
and was passed.
Après quelque temps, la
motion est déclarée adoptée et en
conséquence, ce projet de loi est lu une troisième fois
et adopté.
Mr. Bartolucci moved, That the
House do now adjourn.
M. Bartolucci propose que
l'Assemblée ajourne les débats maintenant.
The question, having been put on
the motion, was declared carried.
Cette motion, mise aux voix, est
déclarée adoptée.
The House then adjourned at 5:35
p.m.
À 17 h 35, la chambre a
ensuite ajourné ses travaux.
6:45 P.M.
18 H 45
ORDERS OF THE
DAY
ORDRE DU JOUR
Mr. Sorbara moved,
M. Sorbara propose,
That the Minister of Finance be
authorized to pay the salaries of civil servants and other
necessary payments pending the voting of supply for the period
commencing July 1, 2006, and ending on December 31, 2006, such
payments to be charged to the proper appropriation of the 2006-07
fiscal year following the voting of supply.
A debate arose and, after some
time, the motion was declared carried.
Il s'élève un
débat et après quelque temps, la motion est
déclarée adoptée.
Mr. Bartolucci moved, That the
House do now adjourn.
M. Bartolucci propose que
l'Assemblée ajourne les débats maintenant.
The question, having been put on
the motion, was declared carried.
Cette motion, mise aux voix, est
déclarée adoptée.
The House then adjourned at 7:50
p.m.
À 19 h 50, la chambre a
ensuite ajourné ses travaux.
le président
Mike Brown
Speaker
PETITIONS TABLED PURSUANT TO
STANDING ORDER 38(a)
Petition relating to withdrawing
or amending Bill 102 to ensure fairness to patients and
pharmacies (Sessional Paper No. P-193) Mrs. Witmer.
QUESTIONS ANSWERED (SEE
SESSIONAL PAPER NO. 5):-
Final Answers to Question
Numbers: 179, 181 and 182.
