Committee Transcript 2014-Dec-01 | Legislative Assembly of Ontario

Committee Transcript 2014-Dec-01 (PDF)

G008 - Mon 1 Dec 2014 / Lun 1er déc 2014

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT

COMITÉ PERMANENT DES AFFAIRES GOUVERNEMENTALES

Monday 1 December 2014 Lundi 1^er décembre 2014

Public Sector and MPP Accountability and Transparency Act, 2014 Loi de 2014 sur la responsabilisation et la transparence du secteur public et des députés

The committee met at 1402 in committee room 2.

Public Sector and MPP Accountability and Transparency Act, 2014 Loi de 2014 sur la responsabilisation et la transparence du secteur public et des députés

Consideration of the following bill:

Bill 8, An Act to promote public sector and MPP accountability and transparency by enacting the Broader Public Sector Executive Compensation Act, 2014 and amending various Acts / Projet de loi 8, Loi visant à promouvoir la responsabilisation et la transparence du secteur public et des députés par l’édiction de la Loi de 2014 sur la rémunération des cadres du secteur parapublic et la modification de diverses lois.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I’d like to call the meeting to order. I’d like to welcome all members of the committee and members of the public who are here this afternoon to deal with clause-by-clause consideration of Bill 8.

I would like to advise members of the committee that at 3 p.m., all the amendments that are proposed that have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved, and I shall interrupt the proceedings, without any further debate or amendment, and every question will be put to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto. Any division required shall be deferred until all remaining questions have been put and taken in succession, with one 20-minute waiting period allowed pursuant to standing order 129(a).

Having said that, are there any general questions or comments concerning the clause-by-clause consideration? Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: With regard to the amendments as they’re presented, I just want it noted that we’re not moving any amendments on schedules 4, 6, 7 and 11.

Also, I wanted to move a motion that consideration of schedule 10 amendments be moved up in the agenda to be considered first.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): All right, thank you. We’ll deal with your second question. That would require unanimous consent.

Just for clarification, which sections are you asking—

Ms. Catherine Fife: I would like schedule 10 amendments to be considered first, beginning with motion number 87, I guess—or 88, since the PCs are not here as of yet.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Again, that will require unanimous consent from the committee.

Mr. Baker.

Mr. Yvan Baker: Could I ask for clarification as to why?

Ms. Catherine Fife: Because we only have one hour to actually speak to the amendments, and I think that, given the concern raised by the provincial advocate and respective groups, it warrants us having an open debate, not just an up-and-down vote on the amendments as presented.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. Thank you for the clarification. I will ask the committee, is there any other discussion?

Does the committee have unanimous consent to—

Mr. Mike Colle: We’ve got to wait for the Tories to get here. I think in courtesy, we should wait for them. Just hold it until they come.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Can we get clarification that they are coming from staff? Is there a Conservative staffer here?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I think the request has been made. The committee is sitting. I respect Mr. Colle’s position; however, I’ll put the question forward: Is there unanimous consent that the schedules be moved up? Okay, there’s no unanimous consent.

Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I have a question, actually, for the committee. I’ll be introducing a motion to rule amendment 106 out of order.

Chair, I’d like to move a motion that government motion 106 be ruled out of order as it falls outside of the scope of this bill. If you’ll give me a moment to actually address it, this is actually an unprecedented amendment from the government, asking whether or not children would be able to determine if they wish a matter be pursued by the provincial advocate. It’s unprecedented, it’s outside the scope of the bill and, quite honestly, it caught us by surprise that it was actually included in the amendments to this bill.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you. There’s no requirement for a motion at this point, or an allowance. When we get to motion 106, you can certainly bring your points forward at that time.

Any other questions or comments? There being none, we will begin clause-by-clause consideration.

Shall schedule 1, section 1—

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Oh, sorry. I have to go to the first page.

There are no amendments to sections 1, 2 or 3. Is it the wish of the committee, perhaps, that we could just group all of those together? There’s no opposition?

Shall section 1, section 2 and section 3 carry? Those opposed? Carried.

Schedule 1, section 1: Shall that carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Schedule 1, section 2: Shall it carry? Those in favour? Any opposed? Carried.

We shall move to schedule 1, subsection 3(1). It’s a government motion. Those in favour?

Ms. Catherine Fife: Just a point of clarification: Should the amendment not be read out?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Yes, so I’ll ask the government to read the motion into the record. Mr. Baker.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I move that subsection 3(1) of schedule 1 to the bill be amended by adding the following paragraphs:

“8.1 Every body prescribed as a public body under the Public Service of Ontario Act, 2006 that is not also prescribed as a commission public body under that act.

“8.2 The corporation known as Ornge, incorporated under the Canada Corporations Act on October 8, 2004 as Ontario Air Ambulance Services Co.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. Discussion? Those in favour of the motion? Those opposed? The motion is carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 3, as amended, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 4, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 5, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

We have a motion from the third party, the NDP: Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Under this schedule, this sets as a default under schedule 1 that all executive compensation frameworks are capped at double the compensation package.

1410

I move that section 6 of schedule 1 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsections:

“Limitation on compensation

“(4) A compensation framework must provide that no designated executive may receive compensation in excess of 200% of the Premier’s compensation.

“Exemptions from limitation

“(5) A compensation framework may provide that specified designated executive positions may receive compensation in excess of the limit set out in subsection (4) if the Lieutenant Governor in Council, having examined the executive compensation frameworks of other jurisdictions, is of the opinion that a suitable candidate could not be recruited if compensation for the position were limited to the amount set out in that subsection.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Any discussion? Those in favour of the motion? Those opposed? The motion is defeated.

Shall schedule 1, section 6, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 7, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 8, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

We have government motion number 3. Mr. Baker.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I move that section 9 of schedule 1 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection:

“After third anniversary

“(1.1) Despite paragraph 1 of subsection (1), after the third anniversary of the effective date of the applicable compensation framework, any element of compensation in the compensation plan of a designated executive described in subsection (1) that is greater than that authorized under the applicable compensation framework is not valid or payable to the extent that it is not in accordance with the applicable compensation framework, regardless of when the contract or agreement was entered into.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? Those in favour of the motion? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 9, as amended, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 10, carry? Those in favour? Opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 11, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 12, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 13, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 14, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 15, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 16, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 17, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 18, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 19, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

We have government motion number 4. Mr. Baker.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I move that clause 20(1)(c) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“(c) as a direct or indirect result of anything done or not done in order to comply with this act or a regulation or directive, including any denial or reduction of compensation that would otherwise have been payable to any person.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Any further discussion? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Government motion number 5: Mr. Baker.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I move that subsection 20(2) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Same

“(2) Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), that subsection applies to an action or other proceeding claiming any remedy or relief, including specific performance, injunction, declaratory relief or any form of damages or any other remedy or relief, or a claim to be compensated for any losses, including loss of earnings, loss of revenue or loss of profit.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? Those in favour of the motion carrying? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 20, as amended, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 21, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

We have government motion number 6. Mr. Baker.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I move that section 22 of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Not entitled to be compensated

“22. Despite any other act or law, no person is entitled to be compensated for any loss or damages, including loss of revenues, loss of profit or loss of expected earnings or denial or reduction of compensation that would otherwise have been payable to any person, arising from the enactment or application of this act or anything done in accordance with this act, the regulations or directives.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? Those in favour? Those opposed? The motion is carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 22, as amended, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 23, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 24, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 25, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 26, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

NDP motion number 7: Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: The NDP recommends voting against section 27 of schedule 1 to the bill.

Having an exception for health care sector executive salaries in the schedule is counter to the entire theme of the bill around transparency and accountability. We would encourage the committee, of course, to vote against this section around broader public sector executive pay.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There is no official motion, I believe, at this point on that. Further debate?

Shall schedule 1, section 27, carry?

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a recorded vote request.

Mr. Yvan Baker: Point of order.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Yes?

Mr. Yvan Baker: Could you just clarify what we’re voting on?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): You’re voting on whether or not schedule 1, section 27, carries.

Mr. Mike Colle: Point of clarification: Is there a motion before us?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There is no motion.

Mr. Mike Colle: So we’re going back to—

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): —the actual schedule and section.

Any further discussion? No further discussion?

There has been a request for a recorded vote. Those in favour—

Ms. Catherine Fife: Just a clarification: The motion was to vote against section 27 and therefore remove section 27 from schedule 1 of the bill. That was the motion, and I put it on the floor. If the committee wishes to remove an entire section from the bill, the rules of parliamentary procedure require that the committee vote against the section, rather than pass it. So you just had some members vote in favour of removing the section—

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I’m going to consult with the Clerk.

Ms. Catherine Fife: —which would make me very happy.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I don’t believe there was an official motion put forward at the time of the deadline. I know there has been a recommendation to vote against. In order to be able to proceed, I believe what you did was provide a notice to vote against the particular section, and as such the committee has respected that.

Now we’re at the point of a recorded vote. So we’re in the process of a recorded vote. There were none in favour, so I’m going to ask for those who are opposed to please raise your hand so the Clerk can acknowledge you.

1420

Mr. Mike Colle: Opposed to?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Shall schedule 1, section 27, carry? I asked, “Those in favour?” There were no hands that came up. I have asked, “Those opposed to the schedule and section carrying?”

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Fife, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

Mr. Mike Colle: We’re agreeing with you.

Ms. Catherine Fife: You just voted to remove executive salary—

Interjection.

Ms. Catherine Fife: That is amazing.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): We’re in the middle of the vote.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Okay.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I had asked, “Shall schedule 1, section 27, carry?” It is defeated.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I’m so surprised.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. Back to business.

Shall schedule 1, section 28, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 29, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 1, as amended, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

That was interesting. This is good. We’re moving to schedule 2.

Shall schedule 2, section 1, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

We have NDP motion number 8. Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I move that part IV.2 of the Ambulance Act, as set out in subsection 2(1) of schedule 2 to the bill, be amended by adding the following section:

“Application of other oversight mechanisms

“7.8(1) The following apply, with necessary modifications, to air ambulance service providers and their subsidiaries and contractors:

“1. The Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act, 1996, as if air ambulance service providers and their subsidiaries and contractors were agencies of the crown in right of Ontario under that act.

“2. The Ombudsman Act as if air ambulance service providers and their subsidiaries and contractors were governmental organizations under that act.

“3. The Auditor General Act as if air ambulance service providers and their subsidiaries and contractors were crown agencies under that act.

“Same, legislative committees

“(2) A committee of the House may require an air ambulance service provider, a contractor of an air ambulance service provider or a director, officer, partner, shareholder, member or employee of an air ambulance service provider or of a subsidiary or contractor of an air ambulance service provider to attend before the committee.

“Interpretation—subsidiary, contractor

“(3) For the purpose of this section, a person or entity is a subsidiary or contractor of an air ambulance service provider if the person or entity, in any fiscal year of the person or entity,

“(a) receives 50 per cent of its annual budget from public money; or

“(b) receives more than $1,000,000 in public money.

“Definition

“(4) In this section,

“‘contractor’ means a person or entity contractually engaged to provide services to or on behalf of an air ambulance service provider or a subsidiary of an air ambulance service provider.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Any further discussion on the motion?

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): A recorded vote has been requested. No further discussion? Okay.

Ayes

Fife, Yurek.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

Shall schedule 2, section 2, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 3, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

NDP motion number 9: Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I move that clause 22(1)(b.7) of the Ambulance Act, as set out in section 4 of section 2 to the bill, be struck out.

It’s a bad precedent to be set in the health care sector. That’s the rationale.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you for the motion. Just a point of clarification: It’s section 4. You said section 2. Could you just read—

Ms. Catherine Fife: Section 4 of schedule 2 to the bill.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you. Any further discussion? Those in favour? Those opposed? The motion is defeated.

Shall schedule 2, section 4, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 5, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 6, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 7, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 2 carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Moving on to schedule 3, we have PC motion number 10. We’ll ask Mr. Yurek to read it into the record.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: You give me a long one to read.

I move that schedule 3 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“0.1 The Broader Public Sector Accountability Act, 2010 is amended by adding the following section:

“‘Public posting of expenses, heads of certain organizations

“‘9.1(1) The minister responsible for this part shall post on a public website the information required by subsection (2) with respect to payments made to the head of an agency of the government of Ontario or of a publicly funded organization for,

“‘(a) travel expenses;

“‘(b) expenses for hotel accommodation;

“‘(c) meal expenses; and

“‘(d) hospitality expenses.

“‘Information required to be posted

“‘(2) Subject to subsection (4), the following information is required to be posted with respect to each payment for an expense referred to in subsection (1):

“‘1. The name and title of the person who incurred the expense.

“‘2. The date on which the expense was incurred.

“‘3. The type of expense, with reference to the applicable category of expense listed under subsection (1).

“‘4. The total amount claimed by and paid to the person, for each category of expense listed under subsection (1).

“‘5. The purpose of the expense.

“‘6. The travel destination or other geographic location where or in respect of which the expense was incurred.

“‘Minister to determine timing, manner

“‘(3) The minister shall determine the timing of the posting of information under subsection (1) and the manner in which the information is presented.

“‘Information may be excluded

“‘(4) The minister may exclude information from posting under subsection (1) if he or she is of the view that,

“‘(a) posting the information would likely,

“(i) constitute an unjustified invasion of personal privacy, or

“‘(ii) jeopardize the security of any person, place or thing; or

“‘(b) other circumstances exist that make it necessary or advisable to exclude the information.

“‘Application

“‘(5) This section applies,

“‘(a) in addition to any requirements for posting expense information under sections 8 and 9;

“‘(b) despite the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act; and

“‘(c) only with respect to payments for expenses incurred on or after the day section 0.1 of schedule 3 to the Public Sector and MPP Accountability and Transparency Act, 2014 came into force.’”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you, Mr. Yurek. As Chair, I have to rule that this motion is out of order, as it proposes to introduce a section to the bill that is beyond the scope of the bill, but I will provide you with the alternative of asking for unanimous consent of the committee to consider the motion, if you would like.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Chair, I wish you would have told me that before I read it, but I will ask for unanimous consent to carry forth this motion.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you for the request. I would like to have been able to, but in order for me to call a motion out of order, it would have to be read into the record, so thank you for your patience.

Do we have unanimous consent to consider the motion? I heard a no. So it’s out of order.

We’ll move to schedule 3, section 1. We have an NDP motion. Ms. Fife.

1430

Ms. Catherine Fife: I move that subsection 13.1(1) of the Broader Public Sector Accountability Act, 2010, as set out in section 1 of schedule 3 to the bill, be amended by striking out “may” and substituting “shall”.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Any further discussion? Those in favour of the motion? Those opposed? The motion is defeated.

We have a little bit of an issue that has presented itself. With the committee’s approval, we could deal with item 13, which would be NDP motion 13, before NDP motion 12, because 12 would be dependent on 13 passing. So if 13 is lost, then 12 is out of order; it’s dependent on an amendment that has already been defeated.

What we will do, then, is we will deal with item 13 at this point. Ms. Fife, if you could read motion 13 into the record.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I move that section 13.1 of the Broader Public Sector Accountability Act, 2010, as set out in section 1 of schedule 3 to the bill, be amended by adding the following subsection:

“Business plan requirements

“(2.1) Directives issued under subsection (1) with respect to business plans shall require the business plan of a designated broader public sector organization to include,

“(a) clear and specific policy and operational outcomes to be achieved in the coming year by the designated broader public sector organization; and

“(b) a clear and detailed assessment of the broader public sector organization’s success or failure in achieving the outcomes specified in its previous year’s business plan.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Any further discussion? Those in favour of the motion? Those opposed? The motion is defeated.

As such, since 13 has been defeated, then 12, which would have been dependent on 13 passing—

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I’m being advised, Ms. Fife, that if you would like to move the motion—

Ms. Catherine Fife: You mean 12?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Twelve, yes.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Didn’t you just rule it out of order?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): It’s redundant now because it would have been based on 13 passing, and 13 was just defeated.

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The reason being, as I had indicated to an earlier motion, you would have to read it into the record in order for me to declare it out of order.

Ms. Catherine Fife: It sounds very painful to me.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): You don’t have to. You could withdraw it if you choose.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I’m going to withdraw so I don’t have to waste time.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. NDP motion 12 has been withdrawn.

Shall schedule 3, section 1, which is unamended, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 3, section 2, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 3, section 3, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 3, section 4, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 3, section 5, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 3 carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Schedule 4 has no amendments, so we have schedule 4, sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9. Would it be the committee’s wish to lump those together? I hear nothing but yeses so we shall do that. I shall ask: Shall schedule 4, sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 4 carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried. Thank you.

We shall move to schedule 5, section 1.

We have government motion 14. Mr. Baker.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I move that section 1 of schedule 5 to the bill be amended by adding the following definition to section 1 of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010:

“‘caregiver’ and related terms have the meaning or meanings provided for in the regulations; (fournisseur de soins)”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. Any further discussion? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

We have NDP motion number 15. Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I move that the definition of “health sector organization” in section 1 of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010, as set out in section 1 of schedule 5 to the bill, be amended by striking out “and” at the end of clause (c) and by adding the following clauses:

“(c.1) a home for special care within the meaning of the Homes for Special Care Act,

“(c.2) a private hospital within the meaning of the Private Hospitals Act,

“(c.3) an ambulance service or air ambulance service within the meaning of the Ambulance Act,

“(c.4) a board of health within the meaning of the Health Protection and Promotion Act,

“(c.5) a retirement home within the meaning of the Retirement Homes Act, 2010, in respect of the provision of care services,

“(c.6) a premises as defined in part XI of Ontario regulation 114/94 (General) made under the Medicine Act, 1991, and”

I move that motion and would welcome a debate on it.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Any further discussion? Ms. Fife?

Ms. Catherine Fife: In other words, we’re looking to include, within the definition of “health sector organization,” all homes for special care, private hospitals, ambulance services, air ambulance services, boards of health, retirement homes and out-of-hospital private clinic premises.

This is obviously a crucial amendment to ensure that oversight is extended to all health sector organizations. If the goal of the committee is actually to strengthen oversight within the health care system, we see this as a key amendment to this bill.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Any further debate or discussion?

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote, please.

Ayes

Fife, Yurek.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

We shall move to NDP motion number 16. Ms. Fife.

“(c.1) an ambulance service or air ambulance service within the meaning of the Ambulance Act, and”

Clearly, for us, amending section 1 to expand “health sector organization” to include all ambulance and air ambulance service providers—we obviously believe that oversight should be extended to ambulance providers and Ornge. There are too many reasons to put forward this motion, all of which the government should be well acquainted with.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much, Ms. Fife.

To all members of the committee: In the future, could you just read the motion into the record, and then I will ask for discussion? It makes it difficult for Hansard to separate exactly what the motion was.

I will read final part of the motion, if that’s okay: “(c.1) an ambulance service or air ambulance service within the meaning of the Ambulance Act, and”.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote, please.

Ayes

Fife, Yurek.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

1440

We shall move to NDP motion 17: Ms. Fife.

“(c.l) a premises as defined in part XI of Ontario regulation 114/94 (General) made under the Medicine Act, 1991, and”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. Further discussion?

Ms. Catherine Fife: In this section, we are looking to amend section 1 to include within the definition of “health sector organization” all out-of-hospital premises or private clinics.

The government has expanded the number of private clinics over 30% in the last four years, without ensuring adequate oversight. We’re looking to correct that oversight gap with this amendment, and given the direction that the government is going with the privatization of health care, we actually see this as ensuring the health and well-being of people in this province with regard to the health care system.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Any further discussion? Those in favour of the motion? Those opposed? The motion is defeated.

There are no other motions on this particular section.

Shall schedule 5, section 1, as amended, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 5, section 2, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 5, section 3, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

We shall move to schedule 5, section 4, NDP motion number 18: Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I move that subsection 13.1(1) of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010, as set out in section 4 of schedule 5 to the bill, be struck out and the following substituted:

“Patient ombudsman

“(1) The patient ombudsman shall be appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council on the address of the assembly.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much, Ms. Fife. Discussion?

Ms. Catherine Fife: We are looking to amend section 4 and the proposed subsection 13.1 to ensure that the patient ombudsman is appointed by the Legislative Assembly and not cabinet.

Many of the committee members will have heard delegations over the last week expressing some concern about who will be in charge of the patient ombudsman, aside from the concerns around the patient ombudsman as they stand. Who does that person report to? We feel strongly that this should be an officer of the Legislature, not to cabinet of any government going forward. We think this is a reasonable amendment, and I hope that the committee supports it.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Any further discussion? Those in favour of the motion? Those opposed? The motion is defeated.

We have government motion number 19: Mr. Baker.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I move that clauses 13.1(2)(a), (b) and (c) of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010, as set out in section 4 of schedule 5 to the bill, be struck out and the following substituted:

“(a) to receive and respond to complaints from patients and former patients of a health sector organization and their caregivers, and from any other prescribed persons;

“(b) to facilitate the resolution of complaints made by patients and former patients of a health sector organization and their caregivers, and by any other prescribed persons;

“(c) to undertake investigations of complaints made by patients and former patients of a health sector organization and their caregivers, and by any other prescribed persons, and to undertake investigations of health sector organizations on the patient ombudsman’s own initiative;”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Any further discussion? Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: We think we that this is inadequate, based on the other motions that we’ve brought forward. If you’re going to give the patient ombudsman the ability to respond to a caregiver, if those caregivers are on all of the other private health care options in the province, then this really means nothing, so we will not be supporting it.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? Okay. Those in favour of the—

Mr. Mike Colle: Recorded vote.

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala, Yurek.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is carried.

We have NDP motion number 20. Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I move that subsection 13.1(2) of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010, as set out in section 4 of schedule 5 to the bill, be struck out and the following substituted.

“Functions of the patient ombudsman

“(2) The functions of the patient ombudsman are,

“(a) to receive and respond to complaints made to him or her by any person affected by a decision or recommendation made or act done or omitted by a health sector organization, or by any member of the assembly to whom such a complaint is made by any person so affected;

“(b) to facilitate the resolution of complaints described in clause (a);

“(c) to investigate any decision or recommendation made or any act done or omitted by a health sector organization and affecting any person or body of persons in his, her or its personal capacity;

“(d) to undertake the investigations of health sector organizations on the patient ombudsman’s own initiative;

“(e) to make recommendations to health sector organizations and the minister following the conclusion of the investigations; and

“(f) to do anything else provided for in the regulations or on the address of the assembly.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: We, of course, are looking to amend this section to allow the patient ombudsman to respond to complaints from any person affected and any MPP, and to investigate any decision, recommendation or act done or omitted by a health sector organization and to make recommendations to the minister.

We saw first-hand with the Ornge fiasco that MPPs were trying to raise this issue in the Legislature. If MPPs’ voices had been respected and heard on behalf of the workers who were facing the issues at Ornge, then that issue may have been resolved much sooner and tragedies avoided.

This is expanding the complaints procedure.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? There being none—

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote, please.

Ayes

Fife.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

Schedule 5, section 4, NDP motion 21: Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I move that section 13.1 of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010, as set out in section 4 of schedule 5 to the bill, be amended by adding the following subsection:

“Nature of employment

“(2.1) The patient ombudsman shall devote himself or herself exclusively to the duties of the patient ombudsman’s office and shall not hold any other office under the crown or engage in any other employment.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Any further discussion? Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: As the act is crafted right now, the patient ombudsman could have another job, which is just incredible, really, in some regards. We think it’s reasonable for the Legislature to expect the patient ombudsman to solely be engaged in the advocacy and the safety of the patients and health care system of the province. We’re asking that the patient ombudsman not hold any other employment other than being a patient ombudsman.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? Mr. Baker.

Mr. Yvan Baker: The only thing that I would mention is that we’ve worked to make sure that there be no conflict of interest and that the patient ombudsman has term limits.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote, please.

Ayes

Fife, Yurek.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Just a question of clarification.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): A point of order.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Point of order. Mr. Baker just referenced conflict of interest and something else. Was he making an amendment to the amendment or was he just making a note of it?

Mr. Yvan Baker: I was speaking as part of the debate.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Okay.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much. We shall move to NDP motion number 22. Ms. Fife.

1450

Ms. Catherine Fife: I move that subsection 13.1(3) of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010, as set out in section 4 of schedule 5 to the bill, be struck out and the following substituted:

“Employee of council

“(3) The council shall employ as the patient ombudsman the person appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council on the address of the assembly and shall terminate that person’s employment as patient ombudsman when the term of the appointment expires.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? Ms. Hoggarth.

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: I have a question. Earlier, we defeated a motion that the patient ombudsman would be appointed by the Lieutenant Governor, so is this not out of order?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Stand by.

Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I understand the member’s concern, but this motion also looks to remove cabinet’s authority. So it’s under the assumption, as it stands right now, that cabinet would be hiring the patient ombudsman. This would revoke the individual’s appointment as the patient ombudsman. This also removes cabinet’s authority to revoke the individual’s appointment as patient ombudsman. So it’s a dual motion in some regards.

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: Can we have a ruling on that?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): We’re looking at that as we speak.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Chair, I would like to withdraw the motion, because I’d like to get on with it, and we all know how this is going to go.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Sorry?

Ms. Catherine Fife: I’m withdrawing the motion.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. The motion has been withdrawn by Ms. Fife. That’s acceptable.

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: At some point, as I’m learning, I would like to know the answer.

Mr. Mike Colle: Set up a consultation with the Clerk and the member later.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you, Mr. Colle. That’s a wonderful idea.

Okay. NDP motion number 22 has been withdrawn.

We shall move to NDP motion 23. Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I move that section 13.1 of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010, as set out in section 4 of schedule 5 to the bill, be amended by adding the following subsection:

“Term of office and removal

“(3.1) The patient ombudsman shall hold office for a term of five years and may be reappointed for a further term or terms, but is removable at any time for cause by the Lieutenant Governor in Council on the address of the assembly.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? Ms. Hoggarth, same thing?

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: Yes.

Ms. Catherine Fife: May I speak to that?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay, Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Well, this one is different because, by adding this new subsection to include a mandate of five years, the patient ombudsman would be subject to removal by the Legislative Assembly. We believe that the patient ombudsman should have a set term of office, as should the government, rather than be subject to the political whims of cabinet. Otherwise, this undermines the power of the patient ombudsman, who already has very limited powers, as we see it. This would bring some stability, I believe, to that office.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. Further discussion?

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote, please.

Ayes

Fife, Yurek.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

We have government motion number 24. Mr. Baker.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I move that section 13.1 of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010, as set out in section 4 of schedule 5 to the bill, be amended by adding the following subsections:

“Term of office

“(5.1) The patient ombudsman shall be appointed for a term of five years and may be reappointed for one further term of five years.

“Same

“(5.2) The Lieutenant Governor in Council may revoke the appointment of the patient ombudsman for cause.

“Temporary appointment

“(5.3) If the position of patient ombudsman is vacant or if for any reason the patient ombudsman is unable or unwilling to fulfil the duties of the office, the Lieutenant Governor in Council may appoint a temporary patient ombudsman for a term of up to six months.”

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Discussion? Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: We find that this motion is still flawed, because the patient ombudsman still falls under the oversight of cabinet. If political interference and the possibility of political interference are still there, it doesn’t really matter what the term is or what other extenuating circumstances the government builds into it. We will not be supporting this.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? Mr. Baker.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I’d just say that, as discussed in the previous hearings of this committee, a number of steps have been taken to make the patient ombudsman as independent as possible. So we believe that that has been addressed.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Just to counter that, you just voted in favour of motions that kept the patient ombudsman under the control of cabinet and the appointment of cabinet. Therefore, this is just window dressing, as we see it, to make it look like the patient ombudsman is truly independent when he is not.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? Mr. Yurek.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Chair, I have noticed in the previous amendments that have not been supported, the government has blocked openness and transparency. However, with this motion, we do like seeing the term limit of at least two, just so there’s a change of the ombudsman over time instead of a consistent person being reappointed year after year. So, we will support the two-term limit for the patient ombudsman.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? There being none, those in favour of the motion? Those opposed? The motion is carried.

NDP motion number 25: Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I move that subsection 13.1(6) of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010, as set out in section 4 of schedule 5 to the bill, be struck out and the following substituted:

“Definition

“(6) In this section and in sections 13.2 to 13.4,

“‘patient or former patient’ includes,

“(a) a patient or former patient of a hospital,

“(b) a resident or former resident of a long-term care home, a home for special care or a retirement home,

“(c) a client or former client of a community care access corporation,

“(d) a person who was transported in an ambulance or air ambulance,

“(e) a person affected by a program or service provided by a board of health under the Health Protection and Promotion Act,

“(f) a patient or former patient of a premises as defined under part XI of Ontario regulation 114/94 (General) made under the Medicine Act, 1991,

“(g) any other individual provided for in the regulations, and

“(h) in respect of an individual mentioned in clause (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) or (g) who is or was incapable with respect to a treatment or another matter, a person with the authority to consent to the treatment or the other matter on behalf of that individual in accordance with the Health Care Consent Act,” 1991.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): 1996, I believe.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Sorry, 1996.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion? Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Once again, we’re trying to make this bill a little stronger and the scope of practice of the patient ombudsman a little bit more expansive to capture as many people as we can, including patients who are in ambulances, out-of-hospital private clinics and anyone impacted by a board of health decision, which we see the patient ombudsman should have oversight for.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Further discussion?

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

Ayes

Fife, Yurek.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

Given the fact that it is now 3 p.m., and according to the order of the House that I had read previously, at the commencement of this committee meeting, we shall move directly with the business beforehand, with the fact that all motions are deemed to have been moved. Try to get that out without reading it.

1500

What I’ll do is I’ll just clarify that if there is any division—if there’s a recorded vote requested—we’ll have to put that off until the end of the meeting and do them all at the end, or there can be a request, if I hear from the floor, to do it one after the other. That’s available as well.

There is one 20-minute recess, which is called the waiting period, pursuant to standing order 129(a). Okay?

Mr. Mike Colle: Could you explain that again about the recorded votes?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. According to the order of the House, if there is a request for a recorded vote on a motion, generally it goes to the end of the meeting. However, if there is a request to do it immediately, then I can accept that as well. But it has to be a—

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): No?

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. In the past, what happened was that there was a request for all recorded votes. It hasn’t been the case today. So any requests for recorded votes will be done at the end of the meeting, or towards the end.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: But if we request a recorded vote, then we just carry on as we’ve been doing.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): You could. Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Just a clarification: This is now just strictly voting: no debate, no discussion, no reading out of motions. Is this correct?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): That’s correct. I’ll give you an example. If I was to do number 26, I would say, “Schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.2(1): Does it carry?” So that’s how I would do it.

Ms. Catherine Fife: How will you deal with amendments, then? We’re still going to go through the bill, clause by clause, and then you are going to—we’ll still stop for the amendments.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): No. There’s no discussion on any amendments, so I will just continue one after the other and ask for the decision of the committee through vote.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: It’s called democracy.

Ms. Catherine Fife: It’s democracy in action. Okay.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): We’ll do number 26, because we should be moving forward at this particular point.

Schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.2(1): Shall this section—sorry.

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The Excellent Care for All Act, 2010: Shall the motion carry?

Interjections.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): That’s number 26. I’ll start over.

For clarification purposes, NDP motion number 26 to schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.2(1) of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010: Shall the motion carry?

Interjections.

Mr. Mike Colle: You say “all in favour”—

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Yes, I’m trying to get to that.

Those in favour? Those opposed? Defeated.

Government motion 27: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.2(1) of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010: Shall the motion carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? The motion is carried.

Government motion 28: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.2(2) of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010: Shall the motion carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

NDP motion 29: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.2(2) of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010: Shall the motion carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? The motion is defeated.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Question? Clarification?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): No, there are no questions. Sorry.

Ms. Catherine Fife: There are no questions. Are you serious?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Well, if it’s—

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Point of order.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Point of order.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay, point of order.

Ms. Catherine Fife: If I wanted recorded votes on this, then how do I secure it? I have to ask before you do the amendment, and then we deal with it at the end?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): As I go through it, you would have to be—

Ms. Catherine Fife: Every single time.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): —right at the end, “Shall the motion carry?” is when you’d say, “Recorded vote.”

Ms. Catherine Fife: Okay.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): NDP motion number 30: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.2(2), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. Shall the motion carry?

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote. Those in favour?

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Oh yes, it’s stacked till the end. Sorry.

Government motion 31: schedule 5, section 4—sorry.

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Government motion 31: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.2(3), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. Does the motion carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? The motion is carried.

NDP motion 32—I’ll read it into the record: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.2(3), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. I must note that this is out of order as the text it seeks to strike out has been amended by the previous motion.

Moving on to NDP motion number 33: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.2(3), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote.

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: Point of order?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Point of order, Ms. Hoggarth.

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: When we get to the end and we deal with these ones that require a recorded vote, they must go in the order that they’re in on our papers.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): That’s correct.

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: Thank you.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): NDP motion number 34: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.2(4), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote. It shall be deferred till the end.

Government motion 35: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.2(4), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. Those in favour? Those opposed? The motion is carried.

NDP motion 36: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.3(3), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. Those in favour?

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote. It will be voted on at the end.

Government motion 37: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.3(3), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. Those in favour? Those opposed? The motion is carried.

NDP motion 38: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.3(3.1), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. Those in favour?

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote.

NDP motion 39: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.3(6), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. Those in favour?

1510

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): A recorded vote has been requested.

Government motion 40: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.3(6), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. Those in favour of the motion? Those opposed? The motion is carried.

NDP motion 41: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.3(8), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote.

Government motion 42: schedule 5, section 4, clause 13.3(12)(a), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. Those in favour of the motion? Those opposed? Carried.

NDP motion 43: schedule 5, section 4, clause 13.3(12)(a), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. Those in favour?

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a recorded vote request.

NDP motion 44: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.3(20)—

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote.

NDP motion 45: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.3(21), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): A recorded vote request.

Government motion 46: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.4(2), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. Those in favour? Those opposed? The motion is carried.

Government motion 47: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.4(3), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010. Those in favour? Those opposed? The motion is carried.

NDP motion 48: schedule 5, section 4, section 13.4, Excellent Care for All Act, 2010.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Recorded vote.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Thanks, Jeff. Tag team?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote.

NDP motion 49: schedule 5, section 4, subsection 13.5(1), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): A request for a recorded vote.

NDP motion 50: schedule 5, section 4, sections 13.1, 13.2, 13.3, 13.4, 13.5, 13.6 and 13.7, Excellent Care for All Act, 2010.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote.

NDP motion 51—

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Members of the committee, that was schedule 5, section 4. Typically, we would vote on whether the schedule would carry, but because of the recorded votes, we will do this one at the end.

We shall move to schedule 5, section 5, at this time.

We have NDP motion 51: schedule 5, section 5, clause 16(1)(t.1), Excellent Care for All Act, 2010.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote.

NDP motion 52: Excellent Care for All Act, 2010—

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): —schedule 5, section 5, clause 16(1)(t.1), Excellent Care for All Act.

Amendment 20 was lost, so this amendment is now out of order because it was dependent on that amendment—out of order, number 52.

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: Can we have an explanation, please?

Mr. Yvan Baker: Can you explain what happened?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. NDP motion number 20 was lost. Had it passed, this would have been relevant. As such, it lost, so it becomes irrelevant. Okay, so—

Mr. Mike Colle: Can we have a five-minute recess?

Mr. Jeff Yurek: You can only get 20.

Mr. Mike Colle: We’ll just clear it up. A 10-minute recess—

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I’m being advised that the 20-minute recess that is available would be between the business and the recorded vote.

Mr. Mike Colle: So right now we can’t request a five-minute recess with unanimous consent?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The time allocation motion does not permit that.

Mr. Mike Colle: Even if you have to go to the washroom, you can’t—

Ms. Catherine Fife: You’ve got to sit there, Mike.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I would like to just explain: We’ve been at this for just a little bit over an hour. Had we been going a number of hours and I felt that perhaps, using my discretion as Chair, a health break would be required and/or necessary, I would use my discretion. But I think we should be fine until further notice.

We will move on to the next schedule, section 6—sorry. Sometimes, as Chair, I move too fast and just want to keep going.

We will deal with schedule 5, section 5 at the end of the votes, and we’ll move to schedule 5, section 6.

Shall schedule 5, section 6, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

We’re going to move to schedule 6 at this point. We will deal with schedule 5 at the end, after the recorded votes.

Moving on to schedule 6, sections 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5: Would it be permissible to lump those together? I don’t hear a no, so we shall move ahead.

Shall schedule 6, section 1, section 2, section 3, section 4 and section 5, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 6 carry? Those in favour? Carried.

Moving on to schedule 7, shall schedule 7, section 1, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 7, section 2, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

We have PC motion number 53: schedule 7, section 2.1, section 75 of the Legislative Assembly Act.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote, but I will call this motion out of order, as it proposes to introduce a section that is beyond the scope of the bill.

Schedule 7, section 3: Shall schedule 7, section 3, carry? Those in favour?

Mr. Mike Colle: What about section 2?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Schedule 7, section 2 has carried.

1520

Shall schedule 7, section 3, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 7 carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

We shall move to schedule 8. We have NDP motion 54: schedule 8, subsection 1(1), Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998, definition of “high-level public office holder.”

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote, please.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote.

Schedule 8, section 2, section 3 and section 4, have no amendments. Can we lump those together? It has been agreed.

Shall schedule 8, sections 2, 3 and 4, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Moving on to government motion 55: schedule 8, section 5, subsection 3.4(3) of the Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998. Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Shall schedule 8, section 5, as amended, carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Carried.

Moving on to schedule 8, a new section, 5.1: Schedule 8, section 5.1, section 3.5, Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998. This is NDP motion 56.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been—

Mr. Yvan Baker: Chair, point of order.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Mr. Baker.

Mr. Yvan Baker: Could I make a proposal that we just make all the votes recorded?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): You could do that, yes. That’s a lot of work for the Clerk, but that’s okay. Is there agreement in the committee that all votes be recorded?

Ms. Catherine Fife: All schedule 8?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Every vote from here on in, one right after the other.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Good.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Yes?

Ms. Catherine Fife: Yes.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There’s no opposition? We shall do recorded votes on everything until the end—or would you prefer recorded votes on just the amendments?

Mr. Yvan Baker: Why don’t we just do recorded votes on everything?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): On everything?

Mr. Jeff Yurek: I’d say the amendments.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I say we go with everything.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: If we don’t have agreement, we’re just going to carry on, so I say amendments.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Chair, there’s no disagreement, as has already been indicated, with sections 4, 6 and 7, where we came to consensus, and those sections of the bill passed.

Having a recorded vote from here on in with the amendments that have already been referenced seems reasonable, but going through every single amendment of Bill 8—is the intention just to drag the proceedings out or to actually have a clear indication of what the parties are feeling about the amendments? We’re only on amendment 56 of 123.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): According to the order of the House, I have to do my job as Chair as well. There’s really no discussion. Mr. Baker has made a proposal of having a recorded vote on every vote before this committee. It is the consensus of the committee to—

Mr. Jeff Yurek: No.

Mr. Mike Colle: We don’t need unanimous consent. Do we need unanimous consent? With a request for a recorded vote, you don’t need unanimous consent.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): You just need the request, right?

Mr. Mike Colle: Yes.

Ms. Catherine Fife: But Chair—

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request for a recorded vote. I chaired a meeting previously where there was one request for a recorded vote on all—

Mr. Jeff Yurek: But everybody agreed.

Ms. Catherine Fife: A question, though: At the start of this meeting, we were instructed that if we wanted to make every vote a recorded vote, then we should do so at the beginning. That’s why I had to go through every single one. You already made one ruling which actually contradicts the motion that’s on the floor to have a recorded vote on every single amendment in Bill 8.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Every member has the right to make the request, as you have made the request as well. I did not make a ruling on that. I just honour the request that has been made. Had any member of the committee requested a recorded vote on any and all, then I would say, “Agreed.”

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Could I see in the regulations where that’s spelled out, that it’s not consent?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): At some point, yes, but we’re going to continue the business before us.

I believe we’re at schedule 8. There has been a request for a recorded vote on every vote, so we shall proceed in that manner.

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I’ve been advised that since there has been a request for a recorded vote for everything here on in, then we will go back to the first request for a recorded vote.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Chair, a point of order.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Point of order, Mr. Yurek.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Chair, I would like to request that we only do recorded votes on amended items.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Well, I believe there’s already going to be a recorded vote on every aspect of the bill. That has been the request, and I have to honour that.

Interjections.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Okay. Thank you very much, everyone, for your patience. The first request for a recorded vote occurred on NDP motion 30.

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

Ms. Catherine Fife: That was 48?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): That was 49.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Did you do 48?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I did.

Ms. Catherine Fife: That was a good one, too.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): NDP motion 50: Schedule 5, section 4, subsections 13.1, 13.2, 13.3, 13.4, 13.5, 13.6 and 13.7 of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010.

Ayes

Fife, Yurek.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

Shall schedule 5, section 4, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Fife, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. The motion is carried.

NDP motion number 51: schedule 5, section 5, clause 16(1)(t.1) of the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010—that was dependent on amendment 50 passing. Since amendment 50 was lost, this amendment is out of order.

Mr. Yvan Baker: Sorry, Chair. Which motion was that?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): NDP amendment 51: If amendment 50 was lost, which it just was, then this amendment is out of order, as it is dependent on an amendment that has already been defeated.

Mr. Yvan Baker: That’s 51 that you’re referring to.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): That’s correct. This is 51 in reference to 50.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Fifty-one passed.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): No. You had requested a recorded vote for 51. As such, because it’s dependent on 50 passing, it’s now out of order.

Fifty-two was declared out of order.

We’ve moved down schedule 5 to section 6. Right? So we’re on schedule 5, section 5.

Shall schedule 5, section 5, as amended, carry?

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): It’s not amended? No, it wasn’t amended.

Shall schedule 5, section 5, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is carried.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Chair, can I have a point of order when you get a chance?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Point of order.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Chair, I know that you ruled my motion 53 out of order. Can I just have an explanation as to why it was ruled out of order?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I don’t think we’re at 53 yet, so maybe when we get there. Would that be okay?

Mr. Jeff Yurek: That would be fine.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you, sir.

We have already gone through schedule 5, section 6; it has carried. So we’ll do the schedule in its entirety now.

Shall schedule 5, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Schedule 5 is carried.

Schedule 6, sections 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 have all been carried, and this whole schedule was also carried.

Then we move to schedule 7 and the point of order.

You’re asking why your motion 53 is out of order. It’s because it proposes to introduce a section that is beyond the scope of the bill. That’s all I can say.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Can I comment on that?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): No. Thank you very much. I’m trying to be as nice as I can.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Can I have a point of order?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Point of order, Mr. Yurek.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: I don’t believe this is actually creating something new in the legislation. In fact, it’s just expanding upon the number of people posting on a site. The money comes from the same pool that is spent. It’s not something entirely different in this Legislature. I’m questioning your ruling making that amendment out of order.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Thank you very much, but the ruling still stands. I guess we’ll do what we can to get you an explanation, unless the Clerk wants to—

Mr. Jeff Yurek: So you’re saying we’ve got to agree to disagree. Is that it?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Well, there are options you can take, other alternatives. If you’re not satisfied with the ruling of the Chair, you can appeal it. But we are here to continue with business according to the order from the House.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: If I appeal it, what’s the process for appealing, Chair?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): I will ask you: Shall the Chair’s ruling be appealed to the Speaker? Are you appealing it? Yes or no?

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Yes.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): This is to the committee: Shall the Chair’s ruling be appealed to the Speaker? This is without debate. All in favour? Those opposed? Sorry, Mr. Yurek.

We already went through schedule 7, section 3.

1540

We have a recorded vote on NDP motion number 54: schedule 8, subsection 1(1) of the Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998, definition of “high-level public office holder.”

Ayes

Fife.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala, Yurek.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

Shall schedule 8, section 1, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is carried.

Now we’re at NDP motion number 56: schedule 8, section 5.1, section 3.5 of the Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998.

Mr. Yvan Baker: Point of clarification: Can you repeat the number of the motion?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): It’s NDP motion 56.

Mr. Yvan Baker: Motion 56, thank you.

Ayes

Fife.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

Government motion 57: schedule 8, subsection 6(3), subparagraphs 1.1 v and vii of subsection 4(4) of the Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998.

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Fife, Hoggarth, Kiwala, Yurek.

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Fife, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. The motion is carried.

Government motion 62: schedule 8, subsection 8(1), paragraphs 11 and 12, of subsection 5(3), Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998.

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala, Yurek.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Those opposed? Ms. Fife? Yes? No?

Ms. Catherine Fife: I’m opposed. I’m really opposed.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. The motion is carried.

NDP motion 75: schedule 8, subsection 14(2), subsection 18(2) of the Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998. I’ve got to check something.

This is out of order because number 60 was lost, and as such, it was dependent on a motion that has already been defeated. So I shall call this one out of order.

Mr. Mike Colle: Which number is that?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): NDP motion 75.

NDP motion 76: schedule 8, subsection 14(3), subsection 18(3) of the Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998. That was dependent on motion number 65 passing, and it was defeated, so the amendment is out of order.

Mr. Mike Colle: That’s 76?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): NDP motion 76: out of order.

NDP motion 77: schedule 8, subsection 14(8.1), subsection 18(7.5) of the Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998. Did 56 pass, Madam Clerk?

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): It was lost, so as such, then this motion is out of order.

Mr. Mike Colle: That’s 77?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Yes, because 56 was defeated.

NDP motion number 78: schedule 8, subsection 14(8.2), subsection 18(7.6) of the Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998.

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Fife, Hoggarth, Kiwala, Yurek.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. The motion is carried.

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. Schedule 8, section 15 is carried.

1600

There are no amendments to schedule 8, section 16. Shall schedule 8, section 16, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. Section 16 is carried.

Shall schedule 8, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Schedule 8 is carried, as amended.

How is everybody’s health? Good.

Fife.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

Shall schedule 9, section 5, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is carried.

Government motion number 82: schedule 9, subsection 6(7), subsection 14(4.2) to (4.5), Ombudsman Act.

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is carried.

Government motion number 83: schedule 9, subsection 6(8), subsection 14(5), Ombudsman Act.

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala, Yurek.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is carried.

Shall schedule 9, section 6, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Schedule 9, section 6, is carried.

So we have schedule—

Mr. Mike Colle: Can we do a lump?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): As amended, yes. Schedule 9, section 6, is carried as amended.

There is a request to lump schedule 9, sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. Is it the committee’s will to lump? We shall lump.

Shall schedule 9, section 7, section 8, section 9, section 10, section 11 and section 12 ,carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. The motion is carried.

Mr. Arthur Potts: Chair, some clarification.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Mr. Potts on a point—

Mr. Arthur Potts: Am I properly constituted in this committee at this point in time?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Point of order?

Mr. Arthur Potts: Point of order.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): From 4:15 until 5:15, so another seven minutes.

Mr. Arthur Potts: Oh. Sorry.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): PC motion number 84: schedule 9, subsection 13(3), subsection 25(2.1), Ombudsman Act.

Interjection: This is 84?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): This is PC motion 84.

Ayes

Yurek.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

Shall schedule 9, section 13, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

Mr. Mike Colle: Can we lump the rest?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): We’re just dealing with the one that had the amendment. None opposed. The motion is carried.

Mr. Mike Colle: I move to lump the rest.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): There has been a request to lump schedule 9, section 14, section 15, section 16, section 17, section 18 and section 19—no, 18. Up to 18. Is it the will of the committee to lump these sections? Very good.

Shall schedule 9, section 14, section 15, section 16, section 17 and section 18, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Those sections in the motion are carried.

1610

Schedule 9, section 19: It’s a government motion, number 85. It’s a notice to vote against.

Shall schedule 9, section 19, carry?

Mr. Yvan Baker: Point of clarification, Chair?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Point of order.

Mr. Yvan Baker: Point of order; sorry. In voting now, we’re voting on the section?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): That’s correct. You’re voting on schedule 9, section 19.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Fife, Hoggarth, Kiwala.

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts, Yurek.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. The motion is carried.

Shall schedule 10, section 1, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. Schedule 10, section 1, as amended, is carried.

Baker, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. Schedule 10, section 3, is carried.

1620

Government motion 94: schedule 10, section 4, section 6 of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth Act, 2007.

Ayes

Baker, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts.

Nays

Yurek.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is carried.

NDP motion 95: schedule 10, section 4, of the bill section 6 of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth Act, 2007. This is out of order. The committee has already decided on the question and cannot be asked to vote on the same matter twice, as we just passed government motion 94.

Ayes

Baker, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts, Yurek.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is carried.

Shall schedule 10, section 5, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. Schedule 10, section 5, is carried.

Schedule 10, section 6: There are no amendments.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I’m just checking. I think there was 103. Did we miss that?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): No, not yet.

Mr. Arthur Potts: No. Okay.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Moving on to schedule 10, a new section, 7.1, and NDP motion 103: schedule 10, section 7.1, section 15.1, Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth Act, 2007.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Point of order.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): A point of order, Ms. Fife.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Mr. Chair, of course, this is our motion. I’d like to see it come to the floor. But the government has already voted against expanding the powers of the provincial advocate, so isn’t this out of order?

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): It’s not up for debate. It’s not a point of order. It’s a motion that’s before the committee, so we can deal with it under the normal process.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Can we appeal?

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): They could withdraw, if they like.

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

1630

Government motion 106: schedule 10, subsection 8(3), subsection 16(4.1) of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth Act, 2007.

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. The motion is carried.

Shall schedule 10, section 8, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. Schedule 10, section 8, as amended, is carried.

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Fife, Hoggarth, Potts, Yurek.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. The motion is carried.

NDP motion 113: schedule 10, section 9, subsection 16.2(3) of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth Act, 2007—this motion I will rule out of order as it is the same as the previous motion, 112, which was just passed, and we cannot ask the committee to vote twice on the same matter.

Yes, Mr. Yurek?

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Point of order. I would just like it to be put into the record that this is the first amendment under this majority government that the PC Party has won in general government, so I just wanted to congratulate the government for finally seeing things our way on this bill.

Mr. Mike Colle: During Mike Harris, we had maybe one amendment in 10 years.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): That’s not a point of order, but thank you for sharing the news with us.

Interjections.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): Order. Thank you all.

NDP motion 114: schedule 10, section 9, section 16.3, Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth Act, 2007.

Interjections.

Fife.

We shall move to schedule 10, section 11,

This is government motion 120: schedule 10, subsection 11(2), paragraph 3.1 of section 20 of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth Act, 2007.

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Fife, Hoggarth, Potts, Yurek.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. The motion is carried.

Government motion 121: schedule 10, subsection 11(4), paragraph 4.1 of section 20 of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth Act, 2007.

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Fife, Hoggarth, Potts, Yurek.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. The motion is carried.

1640

NDP motion 122: schedule 10, subsection 11(6), paragraph 7 of section 20 of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth Act, 2007.

Ayes

Fife.

Nays

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is defeated.

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. Schedule 10, section 12, as amended, is carried.

We shall move to schedule 10, new section 12.1, government motion 126: schedule 10, section 12.1, section 21.3 of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth Act, 2007.

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts.

Nays

Fife.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): The motion is carried.

Schedule 10, new section 12.2, government motion 127: schedule 10, section 12.2, section 22.1 of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth Act, 2007.

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Fife, Hoggarth, Potts, Yurek.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. The motion is carried.

Moving right along to schedule 10, section 13. Shall schedule 10—

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): These were new sections. We’re all good.

Shall schedule 10, section 13, carry without amendment?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. Schedule 10, section 13, is carried.

Shall schedule 10, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Hoggarth, Potts.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. Schedule 10 is carried.

We’ll move to schedule 11, section 1, section 2, section 3, section 4 and section 5. There are no amendments. Is it the wish of the committee to lump? Okay.

Shall schedule 11, section 1, section 2, section 3, section 4 and section 5, carry?

Ayes

Baker, Colle, Dickson, Fife, Hoggarth, Potts.

The Chair (Mr. Grant Crack): None opposed. Schedule 11, sections 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 are carried.

The committee adjourned at 1648.

CONTENTS

Monday 1 December 2014

Public Sector and MPP Accountability and Transparency Act, 2014, Bill 8, Ms. Matthews / Loi de 2014 sur la responsabilisation et la transparence du secteur public et des députés, projet de loi 8, Mme Matthews G-253

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT

Chair / Président

Mr. Grant Crack (Glengarry–Prescott–Russell L)

Vice-Chair / Vice-Président

Mr. Joe Dickson (Ajax–Pickering L)

Mr. Mike Colle (Eglinton–Lawrence L)

Mr. Grant Crack (Glengarry–Prescott–Russell L)

Mr. Joe Dickson (Ajax–Pickering L)

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky (Windsor West / Windsor-Ouest ND)

Ms. Ann Hoggarth (Barrie L)

Ms. Sophie Kiwala (Kingston and the Islands / Kingston et les Îles L)

Ms. Eleanor McMahon (Burlington L)

Ms. Lisa M. Thompson (Huron–Bruce PC)

Mr. Jeff Yurek (Elgin–Middlesex–London PC)

Substitutions / Membres remplaçants

Mr. Yvan Baker (Etobicoke Centre / Etobicoke-Centre L)

Ms. Catherine Fife (Kitchener–Waterloo ND)

Mr. Arthur Potts (Beaches–East York L)

Clerk / Greffière

Ms. Sylwia Przezdziecki

Staff / Personnel

Ms. Tamara Kuzyk, legislative counsel