CONTENTS
Wednesday 6 November 1991
Subcommittee report
Organization
Adjournment
STANDING COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
Chair: Kormos, Peter (Welland-Thorold NDP)
Vice-Chair: Waters, Daniel (Muskoka-Georgian Bay NDP)
Arnott, Ted (Wellington PC)
Cleary, John C. (Cornwall L)
Dadamo, George (Windsor-Sandwich NDP)
Huget, Bob (Sarnia NDP)
Jordan, Leo (Lanark-Renfrew PC)
Klopp, Paul (Huron NDP)
Murdock, Sharon (Sudbury NDP)
Offer, Steven (Mississauga North L)
Ramsay, David (Timiskaming L)
Wood, Len (Cochrane North NDP)
Substitutions:
Phillips, Gerry (Scarborough-Agincourt L) for Mr Cleary
McGuinty, Dalton (Ottawa South L) for Mr Ramsay
Also taking part: Cunningham, Dianne E. (London North PC)
Clerk pro tem: Manikel, Tannis
Staff: Luski, Lorraine, Research Officer, Legislative Research Service
The committee met at 1558 in committee room 1.
The Chair: We have a couple of matters. One is the report and recommendation of the subcommittee. There is the matter of Ms Cunningham's private member's bill, Bill 124, and its status. I propose, subject to what people might tell me, that we deal with the subcommittee report first.
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
The Chair: The subcommittee report: "The subcommittee met on Wednesday, 27 October, 1991, and Monday, 4 November, 1991, to discuss the committee's agenda. The subcommittee agreed that the committee should consider the private member's bill, Bill 124, An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act. Consideration on this bill should start on Monday, 18 November, 1991. The subcommittee recommends that advertising on this bill be run and has directed the clerk of the committee to prepare a draft ad for the committee's approval. The subcommittee agreed that groups would have 30 minutes for presentations and individuals have 15 minutes.
"The subcommittee has also directed the clerk of the committee to contact the ministries of the Attorney General, Solicitor General, Transportation, Consumer and Commercial Relations, Tourism and Recreation, Health and Community and Social Services to invite their comments on the bill and on any possible regulation and to supply the committee with any list of potential participants they might have.
"The subcommittee also discussed Bill 118, An Act to amend the Power Corporation Act. The subcommittee agreed to set the agenda so that the week of hearings in Toronto would be between the two weeks of travel. The subcommittee agreed to the draft advertising distributed to the committee, although the sites must still be determined. The subcommittee agreed that groups would have 30 minutes to make their presentations and individuals would have 15 minutes each.
"By majority vote, the subcommittee recommends that the committee travel to Thunder Bay, Sioux Lookout, Timmins, Ottawa, Kingston, Chatham, Guelph and St Catharines."
Ms S. Murdock: Can we run through that again, please?
The Chair: That is the report of the subcommittee. Copies of that report, in particular the list of communities which will be visited, will be made available to the members of the committee during the course of the afternoon.
Ms S. Murdock: I just wondered if we were in a race of some kind here today, or are we still going to 6? Sorry.
The Chair: The subcommittee report is there. There are basically two matters. One is the direction and the agreement of the subcommittee regarding Bill 124, and the other is the recommendation regarding Bill 118. Mr Waters, do you want to speak to the matter of the direction regarding Bill 124 in view of what happened in the Legislature, by way of reference, during the days prior to today?
Mr Waters: Yes. Since the last subcommittee meeting another bill has been referred to the committee, Bill 126. It is a government bill. Therefore, by the standing orders, it takes precedence over Bill 124. It is my understanding from conversation that the concerns over Bill 126 are somewhat minor and that, if at all possible, they might be dealt with in one afternoon.
The Chair: Can you be specific about that? I want the record to illustrate who is concerned and what that implies.
Mr Waters: Okay. I understand the concerns are from the Conservative Party. The indication is that they can be dealt with in one afternoon. If that be so, I, as a person on the subcommittee and Vice-Chair, am willing to carry on with Bill 124 immediately following that one afternoon, which would mean a delay of one working day for the committee.
The Chair: So you are going to be, at some point, making a motion or looking for a motion from a member of the committee that one afternoon be devoted to the government's Bill 126?
Mr Waters: One afternoon, and after that it would be moved on out of committee, be passed by the committee, and then we would proceed with Bill 124.
The Chair: All right. You are indicating that on behalf of the government.
Mr Waters: Yes.
The Chair: Ms Cunningham will address this, but first perhaps Mr McGuinty ought to address this, if he can, on behalf of his caucus.
Mr McGuinty: I have not had an opportunity to review this with my caucus. I do not have any difficulty, on the face of it, that we proceed in this manner. However, if this goes on longer, what will the implications be?
The Chair: All right, let's hear from Ms Cunningham.
Mrs Cunningham: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Such efficiency.
I agree. I think Mr Waters has stated it fairly. It would be the intention of my caucus colleague Mr Tilson that he have an opportunity to question the minister and the department on the issue of Bill 126. The questions are already on record and he wants an opportunity to get his answers, which were not clearly stated in the House during the debate. That is the specific reason for having it referred to committee.
I discussed this issue with the government House leader just after I talked to Mr Waters. He has agreed -- I am sure you already knew this -- that one day would be sufficient, if that is what we want. That is what we thought we would get. I would appreciate it very much if in fact the direction of Mr Waters could be followed and the bill proceed after that one day of hearing.
The Chair: Is there a motion then within the committee with reference to Bill 126? Notwithstanding that we are considering the subcommittee report, I think that is appropriate because it impacts on the subcommittee report. Is there a motion with respect to the time period during which Bill 126 will be considered by this committee?
Mr Waters: I think I know what you want. I move that Bill 126 receive one afternoon's discussion to clear up any misunderstandings and after that be passed through the committee.
The Chair: To make this perfectly clear, your motion means that one afternoon, from approximately 3:30 or soon thereafter until 6 pm, during a House sitting day will be all the time that is allocated for Bill 126 and that upon the completion of that day Bill 126 will be deemed to have been passed, approved by this committee. Does your motion entail that?
Mrs Cunningham: Or simply referred back.
Mr Waters: I want it passed.
Mrs Cunningham: It does not matter.
Mr Waters: To me, the other way means it is going to be referred back and we go into committee of the whole House. I do not want that.
The Chair: Your motion entails the elements I spoke of.
Mr Waters: Yes.
Mrs Cunningham: I think you have to vote to report it from this committee.
Mr Waters: We will consider what the Chair has to say.
The Chair: Perhaps a more generous position you might take in your motion is that upon the completion of that day allocated for the consideration of Bill 126, at 5:30 on that day the Chair will interrupt the proceedings and any debate that is being carried on and shall, without further amendment or debate, put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto and that the committee shall vote without further debate and without recesses to call in members until all votes are completed.
Mrs Cunningham: You think that is generous?
Mr Waters: That is very generous.
Mrs Cunningham: I think that is not generous at all. I do not really care, but I do not think that is generous.
Mr Waters: Put it this way: I do not want to see him Christmas morning.
Mrs Cunningham: That is right. That is a good reason. If that is the reason for those tight restrictions on our debate, Mr Chairman, I agree.
The Chair: Is that your motion, Mr Waters?
Mr Waters: I can agree with that, Mr Chair.
The Chair: Further discussion of that motion? Mr McGuinty, is there anything you want to say with respect to that motion, having said what you did earlier?
Mr McGuinty: Again, I have the same concern, and that is that I am not sure, because I have not had the opportunity to discuss it, whether one afternoon is going to be sufficient. I have no reason to believe it will not be but I cannot commit.
The Chair: Fair enough. I do not know whether that will dissuade any other members on the committee from voting how they anticipate voting.
Mr McGuinty: I do not expect it will.
The Chair: Is there any other discussion of Mr Waters's motion as clarified and elaborated and as put on record?
Motion agreed to.
The Chair: That resolves the matter of Bill 126. Mr Waters, basically there are two halves to the report, the first one dealing with Ms Cunningham's.
Mr Waters: I believe the concern we had over Ms Cunningham's bill was the fact that Bill 126 would have taken precedence. Having that cleared up, I think all this does is delay by one day. I am looking at the clerk to make sure it would delay by one day proceeding with Mrs Cunningham's bill.
The Chair: Is there anybody who disagrees with that interpretation of the course of events as they will unfold? Nobody disagrees.
Mr Waters: The only other thing that could happen that might interfere is if something new and unforeseen comes to the committee. I do not know how we deal with that.
The Chair: Like they repossess the Parliament buildings or the bailiff comes or another government bill, but as things stand now, everybody agrees with Mr Waters's interpretation of how things should proceed? Nobody disagreeing, there is unanimity in that regard. We can then move to the second half of the subcommittee report, Bill 118.
1610
Mr McGuinty: Just for the purpose of certainty here, that means we will start considering Mrs Cunningham's bill on Tuesday, November 19?
Clerk pro tem: Wednesday, November 20.
The Chair: As things stand now, subject to anything else intervening, and I have no familiarity with what may or may not intervene.
Mr Waters, do you want to talk about the second half of the subcommittee report dealing with Bill 118?
Mr Waters: I guess it is up to me at this point to make a motion.
The Chair: Are you going to move acceptance of the report?
Mr Waters: Yes.
The Chair: Did you want to speak to that?
Mr McGuinty: I have my own motion.
The Chair: By way of an amendment?
Mr McGuinty: Yes.
The Chair: Mr McGuinty moves that in lieu of "Kingston, Chatham and Guelph," we substitute therefor "Bonville, Wingham and Rockwood."
So people are perfectly clear, the subcommittee report contains in its final paragraph, "By a majority vote, the subcommittee recommends that the committee travel to Thunder Bay, Sioux Lookout, Timmins, Ottawa, Kingston, Chatham, Guelph and St Catharines."
Mr Waters's motion entails acceptance of that recommendation and the amendment by Mr McGuinty replaces --
Mr McGuinty: Kingston, Chatham and Guelph would be deleted from that list.
The Chair: And "Bonville, Wingham and Rockwood" -- Bonville mere miles north of Cornwall, Wingham north of Chatham and Rockwood within Ted Arnott's riding -- would be substituted for "Kingston, Chatham and Guelph."
Please speak to that. I just wanted to demonstrate that I know where these places are.
Mr McGuinty: I appreciate your intelligence regarding geography, Mr Chair.
The Chair: That could be the limit of it.
Mr McGuinty: Bill 118 is, for me and my party, an extremely important bill. I am sure the government members would think the same way. One of the most controversial elements contained within the bill is the element that would allow Hydro to subsidize fuel substitution. In particular, it would mean that ratepayers everywhere would have to pay for those ratepayers who have access to natural gas to complete that substitution. So if I lived in Bonville, for instance, my hydro rates would incorporate the cost of allowing someone in Kingston, for instance, to switch to gas.
Obviously those people in rural Ontario, and that is why you have those smaller communities there as part of my amendment to the motion, are going to have a great deal to say about this fuel substitution element. I think there is an obligation on this committee and on the government to ensure that we visit those rural communities. You cannot apply the old standard that we are just going to go where we normally go, to the larger centres, because it is more convenient. This is a special bill which impacts in a special way on rural communities and on northern Ontario. That is why I think it is essential we make an effort to visit those communities which I have outlined.
I might add that your government has consistently indicated that it is open to consultation, not consultation in some kind of abstract sense, but it is committed to a fair, consultative process. It wants to take the necessary steps to ensure that we hear from everyone, including those who might be against a particular government initiative. We are not making that effort in this case unless we visit those communities. That is it.
The Chair: Does anybody else want to speak to the amendment that is currently on the floor?
Mr Waters: To the amendment: It is my understanding that this committee has in the past, and I assume will on this particular Bill 118, subsidize or assist people in financial need to attend committee hearings. We have done that in the past.
The Chair: Let's deal with Mr McGuinty's amendment.
Mr Waters: That is what I am talking about.
The Chair: Fair enough. Go ahead.
Mr Waters: When you look at a situation where, as in Bonville, you are within three quarters of an hour of Ottawa, a major centre, and Rockwood, where you are within eight miles of Guelph -- Wingham is the only one of any distance at all -- we are going to help these people and we are not restricting them from making it in, so I see absolutely no need to make these trips into these small remote communities, because it is more difficult to get the committee and everyone else there. It is much cheaper and fairer to everyone in the province, so that people can have their say on this bill, with the list we have presented.
Mr McGuinty: In response to Mr Waters's submission, it is not the same. We should understand that. It is not the same for small-town folk to have to come to the big city as it is for us to go to their community. Unless we make the effort and show that we are receptive to hearing from them by visiting their communities -- as an aside, it does not hurt at all to drop $1,000 or $2,000 in those communities that this committee is going to be spending; it will not hurt at all in a recession to visit those smaller communities and leave a bit of government money behind. That is not the thrust of what I am after. I think we have an obligation to hear from those communities, and we are not doing that.
The Chair: We are voting now on Mr McGuinty's amendment. He moved that the subcommittee report be amended by striking "Kingston, Chatham and Guelph" and replacing them with "Bonville, Wingham and Rockwood."
Motion negatived.
The Chair: Prior to discussing the subcommittee report further, Mr Waters wanted to make a motion, by way of amendment to the subcommittee report, regarding the number of days per week that will be spent as the committee visits these out-of-Toronto locations.
Mr Waters moves that the committee follow the normal practice of four-day weeks during these hearings.
You are speaking of Monday through Thursday, inclusive?
Mr Waters: Monday through Thursday.
The Chair: All those in favour of the motion, which is an amendment to the subcommittee report? Opposed?
Motion agreed to.
Ms S. Murdock: Is the order of these cities carved in stone?
The Chair: The clerk --
Ms S. Murdock: The clerk sets that? Well, Tannis, I will talk to you later.
The Chair: We are dealing with wintertime. We are dealing with the north. We are dealing with some communities that are more difficult to get into in terms of flight schedules. The clerk will do her best to make sure the most reasonable schedule is maintained, but obviously she is going to have to be capable of juggling a little bit.
Mr Wood: There is no problem with the north. I travel back and forth every weekend.
Ms S. Murdock: Yes, me too.
Interjection: I heard today there was a road closed.
Ms S. Murdock: I drove through a whiteout in Parry Sound for 80 kilometres.
The Chair: That implies we are flying rather than taking a bus.
Mr Klopp: I have no problems; whatever she wants.
Ms S. Murdock: I will talk to you, Tannis.
The Chair: All those in favour of the subcommittee report, as amended by Mr Waters's motion, please indicate? Those opposed? Subcommittee report carries.
Motion agreed to.
ORGANIZATION
The Chair: I understand Mr Waters might have yet one more motion to make.
Mr Waters: I do.
The Chair: Mr Waters moves that the committee authorize the Chair to approve witness expenses to attend meetings on Bill 118, whoever that Chair might be.
Mr Huget: Is that what we normally do, or have we in the past just waited for a request for assistance? Is this just stepping that procedure ahead a little bit? Is that how I understand it?
The Chair: What the motion does, as I understand it, is delegates to the Chair, whoever the Chair may be, the committee's power to authorize payment. It does not have to come by motion. It is not on record. The Chair would probably be expected to report back one way or another to the committee as to how many applications there were and how many were granted.
Ms S. Murdock: It just saves calling the committee together.
The Chair: Yes.
Mr Wood: We would only be reimbursing them if they request it, where witnesses are coming from. Not everybody is going to be reimbursed.
The Chair: Quite right. But I think it is incumbent upon members of the committee and people involved to let people who are travelling know it is available to them. To hide that light under a bushel is really kind of cruel.
Motion agreed to.
The Chair: Mr Waters, you are going to raise the matter of advertising. Perhaps before making any specific motion, you want to talk about it generally.
Mr Waters: We had some discussion on advertising and decided, I believe, that not only would we do the dailies but we would try to do weeklies throughout the areas we would be visiting. Is that not correct? I have not actually had a moment to have a quick look at what we have here.
The Chair: That is interesting because there is notice of out-of-town hearings as well as Toronto hearings. Are you talking province-wide or restricting it to places where the committee is going to be in and about?
Mr Waters: No. I believe our concern was, if all we used were the big dailies of Toronto when we were going into different geographic areas of the province, rural Ontario reads their weeklies much more than they read the dailies. They read the ads in the weeklies much more closely; they watch them much more closely. In order to make sure they were aware we were out in rural Ontario or throughout the province, we had asked that we look at these rural newspapers that come out on a weekly basis.
The Chair: Quite right, but what about daily newspapers? You see, the ad is going to indicate that the committee is conducting its hearings in Toronto, Thunder Bay, Sioux Lookout, Timmins, Ottawa, Kingston, Chatham, Guelph and St Catharines. Surely people all over Ontario are entitled to know that the committee is hearing submissions.
Mr Waters: I do not believe the subcommittee at all intended to restrict the ads to the dailies. We just wanted to make sure these weeklies were included in some way.
The Chair: Is your motion going to be that every newspaper, daily or otherwise, be the recipient of advertising? You are quite right: There are daily newspapers and there are a large number of weekly and biweekly newspapers, some monthlies, some trimonthlies across the province. Those would obviously be very difficult because of their publication date. I am trusting you are suggesting that every newspaper in the province be the recipient of advertising.
Mr Waters: I do not think we were going that far in our subcommittee discussions. What we were trying to do was create a balance between the dailies and making sure that we made allowances for some weeklies so that there could be in rural Ontario --
The Chair: Are you prepared to make a motion identifying those?
Mr Waters: I do not know whether it is proper. I would like to see if we could go off the record for five minutes so the three of us could have a quick discussion on it.
The Chair: Mr McGuinty, before a little five-minute break --
Mr McGuinty: I was just going to ask what the usual procedure is. Let's for a moment assume that we could agree this is an important bill, a contentious bill. What would normally be the case?
Clerk pro tem: It really varies committee by committee and the subject matter of what the committee is doing. I think everyone agrees that all committees will advertise in all the dailies, and I do not think anyone here is questioning that. For the French newspapers, we generally go to the weeklies as well because there are so few French dailies. Those two are pretty well standard, and then it comes down to whether you want to do the weeklies as well. I have a listing here of all the weeklies in Ontario.
The total number of weeklies and bimonthlies is, according to my count, 187. I could be off a bit because I counted them very quickly.
Mr Waters: Would it be possible for us to go off the record for five minutes? I do not think there is a big problem, but we would like to talk about it without being recorded.
The Chair: We are going to break for five minutes.
The committee recessed at 1626.
1634
The Chair: We are back on record. Mr Waters moves that we advertise in all of the dailies and all of the weeklies in the province on this bill. That means English- and French-language.
Any discussion regarding that motion? All in favour? There being none opposed, it carries.
Motion agreed to.
The Chair: Mr Waters, you have a motion regarding the format of the ad, as corrected to comply with the subcommittee report being the accurate list of cities to be visited.
Mr Waters: The information as presented by the clerk and corrected in committee since. I would move that we adopt the draft.
Motion agreed to.
The Chair: There is yet a further matter and a motion Mr Jordan might be inclined to make regarding the form of advertising with respect to Mrs Cunningham's bill. I should indicate that it has obviously been considered only that the committee will meet here at Queen's Park in Toronto for the consideration of submissions regarding her bill. Perhaps you want to move the approval of the form of the advertisement as provided by the clerk.
Mr Jordan: I would so move, yes.
The Chair: This motion now begs discussion regarding the scope and breadth of this advertising.
Ms S. Murdock: Can I get off the committee and appear as a person?
The Chair: Because this is Toronto-only sittings, the issue here is whether you advertise in the Toronto papers or the Toronto papers plus out-of-Toronto papers. If you go out of Toronto, do you do the dailies only or dailies plus all the non-dailies?
Ms S. Murdock: But they drive bicycles everywhere. It is not precluded to even large cities.
Mr Waters: There are also children who are head injured everywhere. There are interested doctors and there is interest on the other side of the discussion everywhere. A helmet discussion is a helmet discussion.
Ms S. Murdock: It is Bill 126 that is going to be one day. There is no time frame on it.
The Chair: That is right. There is no time frame yet determined. The subcommittee was to await the type of response to try to set up a time frame. Perhaps if we took another break for a couple of minutes -- if you wanted to call Mrs Cunningham to get her insights.
The committee recessed at 1639.
1649
The Chair: We resume the meeting now.
Mr Jordan, your last motion regarding the adoption of the draft form of advertising for Bill 124 carried.
You are now making a motion, as I understand it, that the advertisement appear in every Ontario newspaper, daily as well as non-daily, that is, weeklies, biweeklies, English-language and French-language. That is in view of the fact that this is a matter of concern across the province and will impact on people in each and every one of those municipalities where those newspapers are read. It will ensure that the largest possible number of people have an opportunity to be made aware of the hearings. Is that your motion?
Mr Jordan: That is correct, Mr Chair. It is also in accordance with our policy on the previous Bill 118.
The Chair: You are right. It is consistent with the motion that passed with respect to the advertising for Bill 118. Mrs Cunningham, did you want to speak to that briefly?
Mrs Cunningham: As this is going to be one of those pieces of legislation that is going to impact on people's lives, especially children and especially families, I think it is in our best interest, as representatives of the public, to make certain first of all that everybody knows about it and, second, has an opportunity to speak to their local members. They may not want to always make presentations before a committee, but they will want to let their local members know how they feel. So I would be very happy if that could be the direction this committee took.
The Chair: Mr McGuinty, did you want to speak to that?
Mr McGuinty: No, I have nothing to add.
Mr Huget: I would be happy to support Mr Jordan's recommendation that we do what is policy on Bill 118, and that is dailies and weeklies, because I agree it is a very important issue.
Mr Klopp: I also will agree, because in my riding -- it has been ironic. I was hoping you would get some stuff from my office. People have been phoning me, doctors and other people in my riding, about the helmet issue. If they accidentally forget because they do not get the London paper, I am going to look really bad if I do not remember who they were. So I think it is better to be safe, and we will get some good news too.
The Chair: Thank you. All in favour of the motion, please indicate. Any opposed? There being no persons opposed, the motion carries unanimously, all parties being represented in the committee.
Motion agreed to.
The Chair: The clerk is proceeding with these ads as promptly as possible to ensure that they appear as quickly as possible.
Mr Klopp: When are we going to start our travelling show, the third week in January? Or is that something you guys decide?
The Chair: The House leaders, who rule our lives, will make that decision.
Mr McGuinty: Mr Chair, I want to confirm that we will be travelling in two separate blocks, one in the north and one in the rest of Ontario. Can we at least confirm that the northern cities are Thunder Bay, Sioux Lookout, Timmins and Ottawa? Will they be done in one separate block?
The Chair: Once again, we indicated at the onset -- and I think your comment is reasonable and everybody is nodding their heads -- there is no disagreement with that proposition but for the fact that the clerk has to have some liberty to arrange schedules in the most efficient way. But everybody agrees with that proposition that the northern tour, if it can be called that, consist of Thunder Bay, Sioux Lookout, Timmins and Ottawa and that the southern tour consist of Kingston, Chatham, Guelph and St Catharines, although you appreciate that the proximity of Ottawa and Kingston may blend the two.
The comment is well made and obviously there is consensus.
Mr McGuinty: The other thing is, I am not sure whether we have agreed to this in open committee yet, but are we going to do one week of travel followed by a week in Toronto followed by another week of travel?
The Chair: That is inherent in the report of the subcommittee that was accepted and approved by this committee.
Mr Dadamo: Is this Monday-through-Thursday travel?
The Chair: It has been indicated to be four days a week and the clerk indicates to me that the traditional days when it is a four-day week are Monday through Thursday; the traditional days when it is a three-day week are Monday through Wednesday. So, yes, beginning Monday -- once again, subject to any exceptional travel arrangements, about which everybody will be notified and we will try to get some approval.
Mr Huget: I would like to go on record as being in very strong support of Mr McGuinty's point about doing the northern block first or doing it together.
The Chair: Thank you, sir. Ms Murdock, I trust you are moving that the list of witnesses and addresses, that is to say, persons who participated in the committee consideration of Bill 70, be released to the Ministry of Labour?
Ms S. Murdock: Yes.
The Chair: That having been moved by Ms Murdock, is there any discussion?
Mr McGuinty: What are we talking about here, Mr Chair?
The Chair: Bill 70, the employee wage protection plan. The bill was before the committee and a number of persons and organizations appeared and made comments. They are a matter of public record, the fact that they appeared here, but the Ministry of Labour wants an opportunity to communicate with those same people and it is requesting that the list of names and addresses of those people and groups be released to it.
Mr McGuinty: Is that an unusual request?
The Chair: I do not think so. Does anybody think it is an unusual request? Nobody has indicated that they believe it to be an unusual request. Do you consider it bizarre or peculiar?
Mr McGuinty: I do not know. I do not have your breadth of experience, Mr Chair.
The Chair: You are fortunate.
Ms S. Murdock: As I recall, they had mentioned that in the hearings, asking for that information.
Mr McGuinty: I can offer no comment, then.
The Chair: All those in favour, please indicate. All those opposed? No persons were opposed. That motion carries.
Motion agreed to.
The Chair: We meet next on the 18th of this month at 3:30 to deal with Bill 126.
Mr McGuinty: What happens on the 19th?
The Chair: You do what you wish on the 19th, or what your House leader or your leader tells you to. Who knows?
Mr McGuinty: All right.
The committee adjourned at 1656.