Legislative Assembly of Ontario

The committee met at 1400 in room 151.

Child Care Modernization Act, 2014 Loi de 2014 sur la modernisation des services de garde d’enfants

Consideration of the following bill:

Bill 10, An Act to enact the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014, to repeal the Day Nurseries Act, to amend the Early Childhood Educators Act, 2007, the Education Act and the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities Act and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts / Projet de loi 10, Loi édictant la Loi de 2014 sur la garde d’enfants et la petite enfance, abrogeant la Loi sur les garderies, modifiant la Loi de 2007 sur les éducatrices et les éducateurs de la petite enfance, la Loi sur l’éducation et la Loi sur le ministère de la Formation et des Collèges et Universités et apportant des modifications corrélatives et connexes à d’autres lois.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Et voilà. Good afternoon, everyone. Bonjour tout le monde. My name is France Gélinas, and I’ll be your Chair for this afternoon. The Standing Committee on Social Policy will now come to order.

We are here for clause-by-clause consideration of Bill 10, An Act to enact the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014, to repeal the Day Nurseries Act, to amend the Early Childhood Educators Act, 2007, the Education Act and the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities Act and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts.

Please note that we have from now until 3. At 3, I will be required to interrupt the proceedings—right in the middle of a sentence, if need be—and shall, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments. From that point forward, those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved.

Are there any comments or questions before we go to section 1 of the bill? I recognize Mr. Dunlop.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I just want to make sure I’m clear on the time allocation motion. Do we have an opportunity for an opening statement?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): You do. Would you like to do this now?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I’d like to do that at the very beginning. I’m not saying an hour or anything like that—just a few minutes.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I will take Mr. Tabuns’s point of order, and then I’ll give you your opening comments right after.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Okay. I had another question before—

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Go ahead.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I wanted to say that the official opposition will be asking for recorded votes on all of these amendments. Can I ask for that right up front so I don’t have to ask it on each motion?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Yes, you can.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: We’d like to ask for recorded votes on each motion.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. Mr. Tabuns.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I didn’t hear you clearly, Chair. I was considering some notes. It’s at 3 o’clock tomorrow?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Today. We have an hour. That’s all. After an hour, every motion is deemed to have been moved.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I don’t think we’ll be making it all the way to 6, then.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): No.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I do have a question, and it’s for the government party. I’ve informed the minister’s office. In the past, I’ve been asked by a constituent who is concerned about the bill. Under the Day Nurseries Act, it was very clear that child care services provided for payment were regulated. She was concerned that in the current writing there isn’t that clarity.

I’d like it to be on the record that the government has no interest in this bill applying to children’s birthday parties or to people exchanging babysitting for each other—say, someone has to go out shopping: “Will you look after my kids for a few hours?” Can you speak to that?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Mr. Crack?

Mr. Grant Crack: Can you repeat your first point?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: The bill does not explicitly say that looking after children for money is what is being regulated. People don’t want to be in a situation where they might find that a children’s birthday party would be regulated or that if they were looking after a neighbour’s child, when they went out to do some shopping briefly—that that would not be covered by this act.

Mr. Grant Crack: The position of the government would be—and this is from my perspective—not to regulate birthday parties and that type of thing.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: And incidental exchange of babysitting between families?

Mr. Grant Crack: If they’re not a licensed or an unlicensed child care provider, then I don’t believe the legislation would capture that.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Your only concern in this legislation is people who are providing a service for money.

Mr. Grant Crack: Correct.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Good.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. Mr. Dunlop wanted to do an opening statement. Everyone, understand that the one hour is now ticking. We have from 2 till 3.

Go ahead, Mr. Dunlop.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: The other question I wanted to ask is, when every motion is read out, does that mean that there’s no debate at all on it? You just vote on it? Or can we—

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): You are absolutely right. After 3, there will no debate.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Not even a comment from the parliamentary assistant or from the critic or anything? It’s just a straight vote?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Correct. That’s what was voted on in the time allocation motion.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: That’s what the Liberals voted on in the time allocation motion.

Interjection.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: This is unbelievable. So 90 amendments get absolutely no debate whatsoever.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): After 3, no, there won’t be any debate. Before 3, I encourage you to use your time wisely. So you have an hour—now, actually, you have 54 minutes.

Any more opening comments before we start? Yes, Mr. Tabuns.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Well, that’s not my opening comment.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. I’ll do Mr. Tabuns, then I’ll come to your opening remarks.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Okay.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I’ll be brief as well. It is completely outrageous to have only one hour for debate. I understand why the government is time-limiting, but I don’t agree with it; I haven’t supported it. To have only one hour open for commentary is quite extraordinary, and I think the government should be ashamed of itself for doing this.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Mr. Dunlop, you wanted to make some opening comments.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. This adds even more support for the comments I wanted to make.

This bill is a very, very important bill, not only for today when it passes but for the long-term future of child care in Ontario. What we tried to point out during the previous three or four weeks is that we need to see more consultation on this particular bill. We were accused in the House, by the minister, of playing games because we tried to get out and inform the public; we asked for travel within the province of Ontario.

To think that a bill like this would be passed and rubber-stamped this afternoon—it’ll likely all be done by dinnertime. That’s probably what’s going to happen. It’s nothing more than a kangaroo court, as far as I’m concerned. We had asked for travel around the province. The government went back and said, “Well, we consulted on the previous bill”—not knowing whether they’d ever win the election again.

We felt that it was a real opportunity, Madam Chair, to spread the word, particularly to the people who had never been consulted, and that’s the independent child care providers of Ontario. You’ve seen them here. They made some really good statements. I feel proud of the fact that we brought those sorts of people to the table. Only a few months ago, they weren’t even organized in any way and, of course, they had not been consulted with. They’re the huge losers on this. Many of the people who helped draft this bill sat at this table and were part of the presenters, some of the people who support Bill 10. They were actually some of the folks who helped draft the bill.

So here we are. It’s supposed to be democratic—

Mrs. Gila Martow: Democracy loses.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Yes, democracy.

The people who look after about 80% of the young people in the province of Ontario have been left out of these consultations.

I guess the government should be proud of themselves. I’m with Mr. Tabuns; I say shame on the government for the way they’ve treated people. I understand there are a couple of little carrots in here to try to calm people down, but this is not going to calm people down.

I also want you to know that the Ombudsman is watching this very carefully. There was a discussion with him this morning. There have been a couple of discussions in the last week. As these businesses close in Ontario, the Ombudsman has asked us to provide him with what daycares are closing and how many child care spaces will be lost. Most of these, of course, are the independent child care providers who don’t want to sign up with an agency or whatever organization is out there.

We think there has been a real collusion between the government and the agency system, and as a result of that, they’ve left out all of the independent child care providers in Ontario. These are the ones who are unlicensed, but they are not illegal. You heard over and over again in the statements made in this House—the people who took a lot of pride in their work.

Parental choice is a very, very important factor here. Because so many people won’t be able to earn a living, they’ll shut the businesses down, so those choices will go. Those choices will leave the parents, and then what’ll happen? It’ll drive up the cost of daycare everywhere, which becomes like another tax on the young families in Ontario.

We might as well walk out of this place and forget that anything has ever happened, because the government is going to rubber-stamp this. They’re going to put people out of work. Then we’re going to lose, we think, over 140,000 child care spaces—

Interjection: Minimum.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: —minimum, and we’ll find those numbers very, very quickly. How are those children going to be looked after? We’ve just cut $500 million out of the education budget, so none of that money will be available. So what will happen to these young families?

I could talk here all day. I’m disgusted with this sort of attempt on closure. I was so sure that the government would want to travel this bill and get this thing right. I thought it was a no-brainer to travel it. I can hardly believe, here we are at the end of November time-allocating it. Maybe they’ll find a couple of hours this week for that three hours and stamp it before December 1. If that’s what they want, that’s what they want, but the reality is that there’s really been no consultation on this. This is a kangaroo court as far as I’m concerned. Shame on the Liberal government for attempting to do this to the people of Ontario.

Those are my comments.

1410

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Anybody else have comments before we start? Hearing none, I would start and I will try to use our time wisely. Therefore, I suggest that section 1, section 2 and section 3, given that there are no motions for any one of those three sections—I suggest that all three sections carry? Are you ready to vote?

Mr. Grant Crack: Yes.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Recorded vote.

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): The three sections, 1, 2 and 3, carry.

I’m now at schedule 1. In schedule 1, there is section 1 and I see that there’s a motion from the NDP. Mr. Tabuns.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I move that subsection 1(2) of schedule 1 to the bill be amended by striking out “and” at the end of clause (e), by adding “and” at the end of clause (f) and by adding the following clause:

“(g) establishes the duties of the minister with respect to the development of a policy framework for child care and Early Years programs and services that is focused on,

“(i) maximizing the provision of high quality programs and services that are accessible to and that meet the needs of families in all communities, and

“(ii) maximizing the provision of programs and services mentioned in subclause (i) by not-for-profit operators or public operators who are licensed under this act.”

Very briefly, Chair: I think that building a non-profit and public child care system is crucial to meeting child care needs in Ontario.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Comments from the other parties? Hearing none, are you ready to vote?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Recorded.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): This will be a recorded vote.

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): The amendment is lost.

I would now ask that that we would vote on schedule 1, section 1, as written. Shall schedule 1, section 1 carry? All those in favour? Recorded vote.

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Schedule 1, section 1 carries.

I’m now at schedule 1, section 2. I see that we have a motion from the PCs.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I move that the definition of “child” in subsection 2(1) of schedule 1 to the bill be amended by striking out “13 years” and substituting “10 years”.

By allowing the definition of “child” to be 10 instead of 13, daycare providers will be able to take on more children, as those older children who require less supervision will not count against their cap of five total children. It will also make it easier for parents to find a daycare as more spaces will be available with less ages covered under the cap.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Comments from the other parties? Hearing none, are we ready to vote on motion number 2? Recorded vote.

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare motion 2 lost.

Given that there are no more motions in section 2, are we ready to vote on schedule 1, section 2? Recorded vote.

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 2 carried.

I’m now looking at schedule 1, section 3. There are no amendments proposed. Are we ready to vote?

Shall schedule 1, section 3 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 3 carried.

I’m now at schedule 1, section 4. There is a government motion. Who wants to present? Mr. Crack.

Mr. Grant Crack: I move that subsection 4(3) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014, as set out in schedule 1 to the bill, be struck out and the following substituted:

“Camps, exception

“(3) Paragraph 9 of subsection (1) does not include temporary care for or supervision of children that is provided as part of a camp,

“(a) that is operated by a person who,

“(i) stopped operating a child care centre at a premises for the purpose of operating the camp at the premises,

“(ii) stopped providing home child care at a premises for the purpose of operating the camp at the premises,

“(iii) stopped providing child care described in paragraph 2 of subsection 6(3) at a premises for the purpose of operating the camp at the premises, or

“(iv) stopped operating any other child care program or service prescribed by the regulations at a premises for the purpose of operating the camp at the premises; and

“(b) that is operated during the same or similar hours as before the operation of the camp and where the child care provided is otherwise of the same nature as before the operation of the camp.”

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any comments? Hearing none, are we ready to vote on motion number 3?

Mr. Grant Crack: Yes.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): All those in favour? This is a recorded vote.

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare motion number 3 carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 4 carry, as amended? Ready to vote?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Schedule 1, section 4, as amended, is carried.

I see no amendments to schedule 1, section 5, so are we ready to vote?

Shall schedule 1, section 5 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Schedule 1, section 5 carried.

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Opposed?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: That was us.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I’m so sorry.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: That’s okay.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): All those opposed?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: You’ve got a long day ahead of you. I oppose this whole bloody bill, just so you know.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): You need to keep your hands up while she calls you. All those opposed?

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): And we have just started.

I declare schedule 1, section 5 carried.

I’m now at schedule 1, and we’re entering section 6. There are a number of motions, and we’ll take them in order.

Motion number 4, by the NDP: Mr. Tabuns.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I move that sub-subparagraph 1 i A of subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be amended by striking out “six children” and substituting “five children”.

We don’t believe that the increase is good for quality of care.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any comments to this motion? Hearing none, all those in favour of motion number 4, please?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare the motion lost.

I’m now moving on to motion number 5: Mr. Tabuns.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I move that sub-subparagraph 1 i B of subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“B. by two child care providers for no more than eight children, if the child care is provided at a premises that is operated under a co-operative model by parents of the children for whom the child care is provided.”

1420

Chair, I’m aware that there are some informal child care operations that are run by parents for their children. The ratio that I’ve suggested is consistent with the European Union’s one adult to four children, so a maximum of eight children or a minimum of two adults in attendance. I think this is of use to parents who come together to form their own daycare co-op.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any other comments? Hearing none, all those in favour of motion number 5?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare the motion lost.

Motion number 6: Mr. Tabuns.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I move that subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be amended by striking out “or” at the end of sub-subparagraph 1 i A and by striking out sub-subparagraph 1 i B.

Chair, I think the idea of groups of 12 children looked after by two caregivers is something that’s already been tried in Ontario, has failed, is associated with very low-quality child care and should be rejected.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any further comments? Hearing none, ready to vote? Shall NDP motion number 6 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare the motion lost.

Motion number 7: Mr. Dunlop.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Withdrawn.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Withdrawn? Okay.

Motion number 8 by the NDP: Mr. Tabuns

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Just one second. Because 5 failed, I will be moving this.

I move that subparagraph 1 iv of subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“iv. The group of children does not include,

“A. more than two children who are younger than two years old, or

“B. if the director authorizes under section 27 the provision of child care for more children who are younger than two years old, more than the number specified by the director.”

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any comments?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: No.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Hearing none, ready to vote?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Still on schedule 1, section 6—

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare the motion lost.

We’re now at motion number 9.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I withdraw, Chair.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Withdraw?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Yes. It’s redundant.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): With an explanation or no?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: No.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I’m now at motion number 10. Mr. Dunlop.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I move that subparagraph 1 iv of subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out.

Excuse me just a second here, Madam Chair.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any comments?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Yes, just one second here.

By eliminating the restrictions, we allow daycare providers and parents to decide what is best for their child. By the way, this amendment would remove the two-under-two provision completely. This would reduce the scope of any nanny state and allow for more individual freedom and choice. It would also help open up spaces for parents as they are not restricted by the number of young children they can have. They are, however, restricted in the total number of children they can have. Essentially, if a daycare provider is an excellent caretaker for infants, why should we restrict their ability to provide that care?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any further comment on motion number 10? Hearing none, all those in favour?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare the motion lost.

Motion number 11: Mr. Dunlop.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I move that subparagraphs 1 iv A and B of subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“A. more than two children who are younger than two years old, or”

The amendment would keep the two-under-two provision and extend it to it daycares that have multiple providers.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Are you going to withdraw?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Oh, I’m sorry. I apologize, Madam Chair and members of the committee. We withdraw that.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): You withdraw?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Yes. I apologize.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. We’re now at motion 12. Mr. Dunlop.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I’m having trouble keeping up now, we’re going through this so quickly.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I’m trying to use our time wisely. We have 54 minutes.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I move that subparagraphs 1 iv A, B and C of subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“A. in the circumstances described in subparagraph i A, more than one child who is younger than one year old,

“B. in the circumstances described in subparagraph i B, more than two children who are younger than one year old or, if a lesser number is prescribed, more than the prescribed number, or

“C. if the director authorizes under section 27 the provision of child care for more children who are younger than one year old than the number that applies for the purposes of subparagraph A or B, more than the number specified by the director.”

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I hate to interrupt you, but it said “sub-subparagraph i B” and “sub-subparagraph i A.” You only said “subparagraph.” I think you meant sub-subparagraph.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Yes, i B? Okay.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): You did?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Thank you. I’m sorry.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Go ahead. Any comments?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Yes. By changing the provision to one under one, it would actually allow for more children of all ages as there would be no limit in the number of children aged two years old. The bill correctly restricts the one-to-two-year-old category. Therefore, this amendment would increase the flexibility for parents and daycare providers while upholding the overall cap on the total number of children.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any further comment on motion 12? Hearing none, all those in favour?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare the motion lost.

Motion 13, a PC motion: Mr. Dunlop.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I move that subparagraphs—

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): It’s a sub-sub.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: What?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Sub-sub.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: What did I say?

Mrs. Gila Martow: It’s a sub-subparagraph.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Oh yeah, sorry. Okay. I’m reading too fast, here.

I move that sub-subparagraphs 1 iv A, B and C of subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“A. in the circumstances described in subparagraph”—

Mrs. Gila Martow: Sub-subparagraph.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Okay—“sub-subparagraph i A, more than two children who are younger than two years old,”—these bloody optometrists—“unless they are of common parentage,

“B. in the circumstances described in subparagraph”—

Mrs. Gila Martow: Sub-sub.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: —“sub-subparagraph i B, more than four children who are younger than two years old or, if a lesser number is prescribed, more than the prescribed number, unless they are of common parentage, or

“C. if the director authorizes under section 27 the provision of child care for more children who are younger than two years old than the number that applies for the purposes of sub-subparagraph A or B, more than the number specified by the director, unless the children who are younger than two years old are of common parentage.”

If I may, Madam Chair, the rationale is: By allowing for an exemption for siblings, parents will have an easier time finding spots for their children. Under the current provision, a family that has twins or multiple children under the age of two would have a difficult time getting into one daycare. They would have to find a daycare that has no children under two years of age currently and then occupy both spots. If there is already a child under two, it is very likely they would have to find two daycares for their children, making it difficult for pickups and drop-offs, payment etc. If a family has triplets, they would by law have to separate the daycares they are in because no single provider daycare can have three children under the age of two at once.

Mrs. Gila Martow: It’s discrimination.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Discrimination, yes.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any further comments? Hearing none, all those in favour of PC motion 13?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): PC motion 13 is defeated.

I now move to PC motion 14.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I move that sub-subparagraph 1 iv B of subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be amended by striking out “or, if a lesser number is prescribed, more than the prescribed number”.

1430

The rationale for that is, we’re in favour of the increased predictability that this amendment offers for child care providers, as it eliminates the government’s ability to quietly reduce the cap even further through regulation.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any further comments? Hearing none, all those in favour of PC motion 14?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare the motion lost.

PC motion 15.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I move that subparagraph 2 i of subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“i. The child care is provided for no more than five children.”

The rationale behind that is, we do not want the government further limiting the ability of unlicensed child care providers to provide a service to the public. If the parents want to use them, and the child care providers are doing a good job, we should not limit them further. If the government chooses to reduce the cap further, it would limit the number of spaces available. It also allows for predictability for the child care sector. That’s it.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Very good. Any more comments? Hearing none, all those in favour?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion 15 lost.

PC motion 16: Mr. Dunlop.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I move that subparagraph 2 iii of subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out.

The rationale for that is, by eliminating the restrictions, we allow daycare providers and parents to decide what is best for their child. This would reduce the scope of the nanny state and allow for more individual freedom and choice. It would also help open up spaces for parents, as they are not restricted by the number of young children they can have. They are, however, restricted in the total number of children they can have. Essentially, if a daycare provider is an excellent caretaker for infants, why should we restrict their ability to provide that care?

This motion is nearly identical to PC motion 10, but for unlicensed providers this time.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any other comments to PC motion 16? Hearing none, all those in favour of PC motion 16?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion 16 lost.

PC motion 17.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I move that subparagraph 2 iii of subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“iii. The group of children does not include more than one child who is younger than one year old.”

The rationale for that is that by changing the provision to one under one, it would allow for more children of all ages, as there would be no limit on the number of children aged one to two years old. The bill currently restricts the one-to-two-year-old category. Therefore, this amendment would increase the flexibility for parents and daycare providers while still upholding the overall cap on the number of children.

This motion is nearly identical to PC motion 12, but for unlicensed providers this time.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any more comments? Hearing none, all those in favour of PC motion 17?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion 17 lost.

PC motion 18.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I move that subparagraph 2 iii of subsection 6(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be amended by adding “unless they are of common parentage” at the end.

By allowing for an exemption for siblings, parents will have an easier time finding spots for their children. Under the current provision, a family that has twins or multiple children under the age of two would have a difficult time getting them into one daycare. They would have to find a daycare that has no children under two years of age currently and then occupy both spots. If there is already a child under two, it is very likely they would have to find two daycares for their children, making it difficult for pickups and drop-offs, payment etc. If a family has triplets, they would, by law, have to separate the daycares they are in because no single provider daycare can have three children under the age of two at once.

This motion is nearly identical to PC motion 13, but for unlicensed providers this time.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any more comments? Hearing none, all those in favour of PC motion 18?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion 18 lost.

PC motion 19.

Mrs. Gila Martow: I’ll take over so he has a bit of a break.

I move that subsection 6(5) of schedule 1 to the bill be amended by striking out “six years old” and substituting “four years old”.

The rationale is that by reducing the age, we are allowing daycare providers the potential to have more children in their total from families that actually pay for the service. Looking after your own child does not generate any revenue for the child care provider, so reserving a spot for their own kid essentially means providers are taking a loss until that child is old enough not to count against their cap. This change simply makes that change sooner.

It will also increase the number of spots available for parents who do not run a daycare.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any further comments? Hearing none, all those in favour of PC motion 19?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion 19 lost.

PC motion 20: Ms. Martow.

Mrs. Gila Martow: I move that subsection 6(5) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Children of the provider

“(5) For the purposes of counting children at a premises under paragraphs 1 and 2 of subsection (3), a child care provider’s own children who are at the premises and who exceed three in number shall be counted unless they are six years old or older.”

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any comments?

Mrs. Gila Martow: The rationale is this would essentially exempt all of the child care provider’s kids from counting against the cap. This opens up more spaces for other families, generates more revenue for the daycare provider and lessens the effect of the hard cap.

Also, it is very common for a mother to have multiple children close in age. If that’s the case, and they can only have five kids total, the daycare may only have two paying clients at one time. That’s hardly enough income to run a business.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any further comments? Hearing none, all those in favour of PC motion 20?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion 20 lost.

NDP motion 21.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: My previous motion failed. This is withdrawn.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Withdrawn. NDP motion 22.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Withdraw.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. I am at government motion 23. Mr. Crack.

Mr. Grant Crack: I hope everyone has a few minutes.

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): No, it’s a very long—would the committee—

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I’m at the will of the committee.

Mr. Grant Crack: No, I think it would be more than appropriate if I were to read it into the record. That’s fair.

I move that section 6 of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014, as set out in schedule 1 to the bill, be struck out and the following substituted:

“Prohibition—operation of child care centre

“6(1) No person shall operate a premises where child care is provided except under the authority of a licence to operate a child care centre.

“Same, premises specified in licence

“(2) Subject to section 26, a person who holds a licence to operate a child care centre is authorized to operate the centre only at the premises specified in the licence.

“Exceptions

“(3) Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of the provision of child care in any of the following circumstances:

“Home child care

“1. The child care provided at the premises meets the following criteria:

“i. The child care is provided,

“A. by one child care provider for no more than six children at any one time or, if a lesser number is prescribed in accordance with subsection (6), no more than the prescribed number of children at any one time, or

“B. if the regulations so provide, by two child care providers for no more than twice the number of children that applies for the purposes of sub-subparagraph A or, if a lesser number is prescribed, no more than the prescribed number of children.

“ii. There is an agreement between a home child care agency and the child care provider that provides for the agency’s oversight of the provision of care.

“iii. The home child care agency has been advised of all of the children at the premises.

“iv. The group of children does not include,

“A. in the circumstances described in sub-subparagraph i A, more than two children who are younger than two years old,

“B. in the circumstances described in sub-subparagraph i B, more than four children who are younger than two years old or, if a lesser number is prescribed, more than the prescribed number, or

1440

“C. if the director authorizes under section 27 the provision of child care for more children who are younger than two years old than the number that applies for the purposes of sub-subparagraph A or B, more than the number specified by the director.

“Unlicensed child care, five children or less

“2. The child care provided at the premises meets the following criteria:

“i. The child care is provided for no more than five children at any one time or, if a lesser number is prescribed by the regulations, no more than the prescribed number of children at any one time.

“ii. There is no agreement between a home child care agency and the child care provider that provides for the agency’s oversight of the provision of care.

“iii. The group of children does not include more than two children who are younger than two years old.

“In-home services

“3. The child care provided at the premises meets the following criteria:

“i. The child care is provided for a child at his or her home, or at another place where residential care is provided for the child.

“ii. There is an agreement between a home child care agency and the child care provider that provides for the agency’s oversight of the provision of care.

“iii. The home child care agency has been advised of all of the children at the premises.

“iv. Financial assistance is provided under this act for the child care.

“v. The child care meets any other criteria prescribed by the regulations.

“Prescribed circumstances

“4. The child care is provided by a person, at a premises, as part of a program or service or in any other circumstance prescribed by the regulations.

“Same, authorized recreational and skill building programs

“(4) If the regulations so provide, subsection (1) does not apply in respect of the provision of child care if the child care is provided as part of a program that meets the following criteria:

“1. The primary purpose of the program is to provide child care.

“2. The program includes, as a complementary purpose, activities that promote recreational, artistic, musical or athletic skills or provide religious, cultural or linguistic instruction.

“3. The program is not operated at a person’s home.

“4. The child care is provided only for children who,

“i. are six years old or older, or

“ii. if the child care is provided on or after September 1 in a calendar year, will attain the age of six in that year.

“5. The program meets any other criteria prescribed by the regulations.

“Children of the provider

“(5) For the purposes of counting children at a premises under paragraphs 1 and 2 of subsection (3), a child care provider’s own children who are at the premises shall be counted, except as follows:

“1. A child who is six years old or older shall not be counted on any day.

“2. If the child care provider provides care for fewer than two children who are younger than two years old and the child care provider meets the prescribed criteria,

“i. a child who is enrolled in and regularly attends full-day junior kindergarten or full-day kindergarten operated by a school board shall not be counted on any day within the school board’s school year, as defined in the Education Act, other than a day or part of a day prescribed by the regulations, and

“ii. a child who is of an age such that he or she would meet the eligibility requirements for enrolment in a full-day junior kindergarten or full-day kindergarten class operated by a school board and who is instead enrolled in and regularly attends a full-day program administered by a First Nation or by the government of Canada for First Nation children shall not be counted on any day within the school year that applies for the purposes of the program, other than a day or part of a day prescribed by the regulations.

“Home child care, number of children

“(6) Regulations made for the purposes of sub-subparagraph 1 i A of subsection (3) shall ensure that the number of children prescribed is more than the number of children for whom child care may be provided under subparagraph 2 i of subsection (3).

“Same, interpretation

“(7) For greater certainty, nothing in this section shall be interpreted as preventing an agreement between a home child care agency and a provider of home child care that provides that the number of children for whom the care is provided shall be less than the number of children that applies for the purposes of subparagraph 1 i of subsection (3).

“Para. 2 of subsection (3), interpretation

“(8) For greater certainty, the number of child care providers at a premises shall not affect the number of children for whom child care may be provided in the circumstances set out in paragraph 2 of subsection (3).

“Exception re unlicensed child care

“(9) If, on the day that the Child Care Modernization Act, 2014 receives royal assent, a child care provider provides child care for children at a premises in the circumstances described in subparagraphs 2 i and ii of subsection (3), then until the date mentioned in subsection (10), subparagraph 2 iii of subsection (3) and subsection (5) do not apply to the person in respect of those children.

“Same

“(10) For the purposes of subsection (9), the date is January 1, 2016 or, if a different date is prescribed by the regulations, the prescribed date.”

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any comments? Hearing none, all those in favour of government motion number 23?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

Nays

Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare the motion carried.

Shall schedule 1, schedule 6, as amended, be carried?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 6, as amended, carried.

Conscious of time: Schedule 1, sections 7 to 17 have no amendments, so I propose that we vote on schedule 1, sections 7 to 17 as one block.

Shall schedule 1, sections 7 to 17 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, sections 7 to 17 carried.

I’m at schedule 1 still. I’m at section 18, and I call NDP motion number 24: Mr. Tabuns.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I move that subsection 18(1) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Duty to report certain matters to director

“(1) If, in the course of providing child care or in the course of employment, it comes to the attention of a child care provider or an employee of a child care provider that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that there is an imminent threat to the health, safety or welfare of any child for whom child care is provided, the person shall immediately report the suspicion and the information on which it is based to a director.”

Simply put, those who are in a child care centre have a responsibility to keep their eyes open for potential safety risks to children and to report them.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any further comments? Hearing none, all those in favour of NDP motion number 24?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 24 lost.

Shall schedule 1, section 18 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Carried.

I’m now at section 19 of schedule 1. PC motion number 25: Mr. Dunlop? No, Mrs. Martow.

Mrs. Gila Martow: I move that paragraph 3 of subsection 19(1) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out.

The rationale is, the purpose of this section is to increase transparency regarding which daycares have good track records and which don’t. However, this is an unfair practice as there’s no expiry date on these notices. If a daycare is penalized in 2014, their notice will remain online in perpetuity no matter what actions they take to fix the issue at hand.

This also requires that the postings go up once a daycare receives a notice of an offence but not once convicted. If an appeal or investigation finds there actually was no offence, the notice will be rescinded and thus taken off the Internet, but this is after the fact. Essentially, this issue is “guilty until proven innocent,” and it may unnecessarily tarnish the reputation of good daycare providers.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any further comments? Hearing none, all those in favour of PC motion number 25?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion number 25 lost.

1450

NDP motion number 26: Mr. Tabuns.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I move that subsection 19(1) of schedule 1 to the bill be amended by adding the following paragraphs:

“5. Each inspection report prepared under section 33.

“6. A summary of each refusal to issue or to renew a licence or revocation of a licence under section 23.”

Simply, Chair, parents need to know what’s going on in their daycares, their child care centres. The postings should be going up so that parents can see very easily what’s going on.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any further comment to NDP motion number 26? Hearing none, all those in favour of NDP motion number 26?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 26 lost.

NDP motion number 27: Mr. Tabuns.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Withdrawn.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Withdrawn?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Yes, with 26 gone.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. PC motion number 28?

Mrs. Gila Martow: Withdrawn.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Withdrawn?

Government motion number 29: Mr. Crack.

Mr. Grant Crack: I move that subsections 19(2) to (7) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014, as set out in schedule 1 to the bill, be struck out and the following substituted:

“Same

“(2) The minister may publish the following on a government website:

“1. A summary of each proposal to refuse to issue or renew a licence or to revoke a licence under section 23, unless the refusal or revocation was not carried out.

“2. A summary of each restraining order made under section 38.

“3. Any other information prescribed by the regulations.

“Other publications

“(3) A director may publish anything set out in subsection (1) or (2) in any other manner or medium that the director considers appropriate.

“Content

“(4) A summary required to be published under this section shall include any information prescribed by the regulations.

“Timing

“(5) The following rules apply with respect to the timing of the publication of information under subsection (1) or (2):

“1. A summary of a compliance order shall be published within 30 days after the day the order is made.

“2. A summary of a proposal to refuse to issue or renew a licence or to revoke a licence shall not be published before the time for requiring a hearing as provided for under subsection 23(4) expires, or, if a hearing is required, until the matter in issue has been finally determined.

“3. A summary of an administrative penalty shall not be published before,

“i. the time for requiring a review as provided for under subsection 39(7) expires, or

“ii. if a review is required, until the designated senior employee has made a decision.

“Length of publication

“(6) The following rules apply for determining how long the information described in subsection (1) shall remain on the website:

“1. A summary described in subsection (1) shall remain on the website for at least 12 months after the day it is published, subject to paragraph 2.

“2. If the order, penalty or conviction to which a summary relates is rescinded or overturned, the summary described in subsection (1) shall be removed from the website promptly.

“3. After the expiry of the 12-month period referred to in paragraph 1, a summary described in subsection (1) may be removed from the website, subject to paragraph 4.

“4. Summaries described in subsection (1) shall not be removed from the website in the prescribed circumstances.

“Posting of information

“(7) A director may post a copy of a summary described in subsection (1) or (2) in a conspicuous place at a child care centre, the premises where a home child care agency is located or any other premises where child care is provided if the subject matter of the publication is connected to the centre, agency or other premises.”

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any comments? Hearing none, shall government motion number 29 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare government motion number 29 carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 19, carry as amended?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 19, carried as amended.

I’m now at a new section: section 19.1 of schedule 1 and NDP motion number 30. Mr. Tabuns.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I move that schedule 1 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Prohibition—fees for waiting list placement

“19.1 No person shall charge a fee for the placing of a child’s name on a waiting list for the provision of child care.”

I think it’s fairly straightforward, Chair. We’ve heard presentations before this committee that people are having to pay money to have their name on a waiting list. It speaks to the desperation of parents who need decent child care. That activity should be prohibited.

I gather we’ve only got four minutes left where legislators can comment on anything, and then we’re going straight to a vote. It’s always a pleasure to see open government at work, Madam Chair.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any further comments? Hearing none, all those in favour of NDP motion number 30?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow, Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 30 lost.

I’m now at section 20 of schedule 1 and PC motion number 31.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Just read it?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Please.

Mrs. Gila Martow: No rationale?

I move that subsection 20(3) of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any comments?

Mrs. Gila Martow: Oh, so we can read the rationale; we just can’t comment? Is that it?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Absolutely.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Sorry. Essentially this is government regulation saying when and where a daycare can and can’t open. This does not need to be in the bill, and daycares will not have clients if they open in areas that do not need the service. This is over-regulation and it’s not a pivotal amendment for the party, so debate on this topic should be constrained. “See motion number 31, as both accomplish the same goals,” according to this.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Very good. Any further comments? Seeing none:

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion number 31 lost.

Now, shall section 20 of schedule 1 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 20, carried.

Sections 21 and 22 have no amendment. Can we vote on both of them together?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 21 and section 22 of schedule 1 carried.

Still in schedule 1: We are at section 23 and PC motion number 32. Mrs. Martow.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Schedule 1, clause 3(1)(f)? Is that what we’re on?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Clause 23, yes.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Yes? Okay. I move that subsection 23(1) of schedule 1 to the bill be amended by adding “or” at the end of clause (e) and by striking out clause (f).

And there is no rationale.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Any comments? Hearing none, all those in favour of PC motion number 32?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion number 32 lost. We have one minute left for PC motion number 33. Mrs. Martow?

Mrs. Gila Martow: Section 1, clause 23(2)—

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: We withdrew that.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Sorry. Withdrawn.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): It’s withdrawn?

Mrs. Gila Martow: Yes.

1500

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. Ready to vote on schedule 1, section 23?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 23 of schedule 1 carried. Thank you.

It is my duty to inform you that it is now 3 o’clock. As per the order coming from the House, it says that any division—sorry. I’ll read it.

The time now being 3 o’clock, pursuant to the order of the House dated November 5, 2014, I am required to interrupt the proceedings and shall, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto.

From this point forward, those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved.

Any divisions—and we already know that we do—that is, recorded votes—required shall be deferred until all remaining questions have been put and taken in succession, with a 20-minute waiting period allowed, pursuant to standing order 129(a). So you’re allowed to ask for one.

I’m going to consult with the Clerk for one minute because, given that I already know that you want all recorded votes—we’re supposed to do the recorded votes at the end, but given that they’re all going to be at the end, do I just—

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): All right. There was a request to have a recorded vote on each and every one of them, so we will go in the order that they present.

I am to inform you that if you wish to take up the opportunity for a 20-minute recess, now is the time or forever—or until 6 o’clock—hold your peace.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Let’s get it done, then.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Let’s get it done?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: It’s a sham anyway.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. Ready?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Let’s get down to one of the receptions. They have lots of wine and stuff.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): And drown our sorrows. All right.

We are still in schedule 1. We are at section 24.

Section 24 has no amendments. So I ask, shall schedule 1, section 24, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 24 of schedule 1 carried.

I am now at schedule 1, section 25. There is a government motion, motion number 34: Subsection 25(6) of schedule 1 to the bill, “Application of subsections 23(10) and (12).”

Shall government motion number 34 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare government motion number 34 carried.

We now move to the vote on section 25 of schedule 1.

Should schedule 1, section 25, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 25, carried, as amended.

Schedule 1, section 26, has no amendments.

Shall schedule 1, section 26, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 26, carried.

I’m now at schedule 1, section 27. Motion number 35, which is a PC motion—

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Withdrawn.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Withdrawn.

NDP motion number 36: Subsection 27(1) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 27(1) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 36 lost.

NDP motion number 37: Subsection 27(2) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 27(2) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 37 lost.

PC notice of—

Mrs. Gila Martow: Withdrawn.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Withdrawn.

It’s now time to vote on section 27. Shall schedule 1, section 27, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 27, carried.

I’m now at schedule 1, section 28. NDP motion number 39: Subsection 28(1) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 28(1) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 39 carried.

NDP motion number 40: Subsection 28(6) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 28(6) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 40 lost.

It’s now time to vote on schedule 1, section 28, as amended. Shall schedule 1, section 28, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 28, carried as amended.

We are now on a new section, section 28.1, and that’s NDP motion number 41: Section 28.1 of schedule 1 to the bill (section 28.1 of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 41 lost.

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I am recently informed that there was a ruling on NDP motion 41 that reads as follows: This motion is out of order because it contravenes standing order 57, which reads, “Any bill, resolution, motion or address, the passage of which would impose a tax or specifically direct the allocation of public funds, shall not be passed by the House unless recommended by a message from the Lieutenant Governor, and shall be proposed only by a minister of the crown.”

1510

For you listening, it means you cannot ask for money. That was the ruling.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: But it was voted on and it failed—

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Yes, it ended up in the same place. But, apparently, I was to put this on the record.

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): All right. We’re now at section 29 of schedule 1, and I’m looking at NDP motion 42. It reads as follows: Section 29 of schedule 1 to the bill (section 29 of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

All in favour of NDP motion 42?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion 42 carried.

That concludes section 29. Shall schedule 1, section 29, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 29 carried, as amended.

I’m still at schedule 1; I’m now at section 30. There are no amendments.

Shall schedule 1, section 30 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 30 of schedule 1 carried.

I’m now at section 31 of schedule 1 and government motion 43. The motion reads: Clause 31(1)(e) of schedule 1 to the bill.

Shall government motion 43 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare government motion 43 carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 31, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 31 carried, as amended.

I’m still at schedule 1. I’m looking at sections 32, 33, 34 and 35. Those have no amendments. Are you ready to vote on them as a group? Okay.

Shall sections 32 to 35 of schedule 1 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare sections 32 to 35 of schedule 1 carried.

I’m now at section 36 of schedule 1 and government motion 44: Section 36 of schedule 1 to the bill.

All those in favour of government motion 44?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare government motion 44 carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 36 carry, as amended?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 36 of schedule 1 carried as amended.

I’m now at section 37 of schedule 1. That’s NDP motion number 45: Clause 37(5)(b) of schedule 1 to the bill (clause 37(5)(b) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Shall NDP motion number 45 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 45 lost.

PC motion number 46: Schedule 1, subsections 37(7) and (8).

Shall PC motion number 46 carry?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion number 46 lost.

Government motion number 47: Section 37 of schedule 1 to the bill.

Shall government motion number 47 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare government motion number 47 carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 37, carry as amended?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 37, carried as amended.

I’m now at section 38. There are no amendments. Shall schedule 1, section 38 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 38 carried.

I’m now at section 39 of schedule 1, PC motion number 48.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Withdrawn.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Withdrawn.

PC motion number 49: Schedule 1, subsection 39(5).

Shall PC motion number 49 carry?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion number 49 lost.

PC motion number 50: Schedule 1, clause 39(6)(c).

Shall PC motion number 50 carry?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow, Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion number 50 lost.

PC motion number 51.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Motions 51 and 52 are both withdrawn.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Withdrawn?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Yes.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): We’re at government motion number 53: Subsection 39(10) of schedule 1 to the bill.

Shall government motion number 53 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare government motion number 53 carried.

We now have PC motion number 54.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Madam Chair, 54 to 58, we’d like to withdraw them all.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Fifty-four to 58?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Fifty-four to 58, yes.

Interjection: Withdrawn?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Withdraw, yes. Then, of course, that would include 59 as well.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): And 59?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: And 60.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): And 60?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: So right to 60, yes.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. Duly noted.

We are now at section 39 of schedule 1. Shall schedule 1, section 39, carry as amended?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 39 carried, as amended.

1520

I’m now at section 40. There are no motions to sections 40, 41, 42, 43 or 44. Are you ready to vote on those sections as a group?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Amendment 61 speaks to sections 43 and 44.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): They have withdrawn notice 61.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: It’s withdrawn.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Sorry, I missed—I got up to 60. Thank you.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. So are we comfortable voting on schedule 1, sections 40, 41, 42, 43 and 44 as a group?

Mr. Vic Dhillon: Yes.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): There are no motions to any of those. Shall schedule 21, sections 40 to 44 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare sections 40, 41, 42, 43 and 44 of schedule 1 carried.

I’m now at section 45 of schedule 1. That’s government motion number 62. Everybody is still with me?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Yes.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. Section 45 of schedule 1 to the bill.

Shall government motion number 62 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Interjection.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Sorry, I should have abstained. It’s okay. My fault.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): You’re all good?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Yes.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): We’re all good. I declare government motion number 62 carried.

I’m now calling the vote on schedule 1, section 45, as amended. Shall schedule 1, section 45, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 45 of schedule 1, as amended, carried.

Are we ready to vote on sections 46, 47 and 48 to schedule 1, that have no amendment, as a group?

Interjection: Yes.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): All right. Shall schedule 1, sections 46, 47 and 48 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare sections 46, 47 and 48 of schedule 1 carried.

I’m now at section 49 of schedule 1. We’re looking at NDP motion number 63: Clause 49(1)(e) of schedule 1 to the bill (clause 49(1)(e) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Shall NDP motion number 63 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 63 lost.

We’re now at NDP motion number 64: Clause 49(1)(f) of schedule 1 to the bill (clause 49(1)(f) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Shall NDP motion number 64 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 64 carried.

We’re now looking at section 49 of schedule 1. Shall schedule 1, section 49, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 49 carried, as amended.

I’m now at section 50 of schedule 1, ready to call the vote. Shall schedule 1, section 50 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 50 of schedule 1 carried.

I’m now at section 51 of schedule 1, looking at NDP motion 65: Subsection 51(2) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 51(2) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Shall NDP motion number 65 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion 65 lost.

We’re now at NDP motion 66: Subsection 53(1) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 53(1) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Mr. Grant Crack: Madam Chair, point of order.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Point of order, yes.

Mr. Grant Crack: Maybe I missed something. After the previous NDP motion was defeated, should we not be carrying schedule 1, section 51, without amendment?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): We are still in section—

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): There was a little mishap that happened on my sheet. Very good of you to catch this.

So forget about NDP motion 66—

Mr. Peter Tabuns: For the moment.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): —for the moment. It will come back.

For now, we are dealing with section 51 of schedule 1. Shall schedule 1, section 51, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 51, carried.

I see no motions for section 52. Shall schedule 1, section 52, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 52, carried.

Now I’m at section 53, and I’m looking at NDP motion 66. Sorry for the confusion. Is everybody good? Okay. Subsection 53(1) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 53(1) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Shall NDP motion 66 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion 66 lost.

I’m now looking at NDP motion 67: Clause 53(1)(e) of schedule 1 to the bill (clause 53(1)(e) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion 67 carried.

It is now time to vote on section 53. Shall schedule 1, section 53, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 53, carried as amended.

1530

I’m now looking at section 54—I’m still in schedule 1—NDP motion 68. Everybody still with me? All right.

Interjections.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): NDP motion number 68, Subsection 54(1) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 54(1) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014): I have the duty to inform you that this motion is out of order because it contravenes standing order 57, which reads—should I still read standing order 57, or do you all know what it is about?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: It’s a money bill.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): It’s a money bill.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: And you’d be well advised to pass this.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): You would be wise, but unfortunately, I declared it out of order.

We’re moving right along to NDP motion number 69: Subsection 54(2) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 54(2) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Shall NDP motion number 69 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 69 lost.

I’m now at NDP motion number 70: Subsection 54(2.1) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 54(2.1) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Shall NDP motion number 70 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 70 lost.

Shall schedule 1, section 54 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 54 carried.

I’m now at section 55 of schedule 1. We have government motion number 71: Subsection 55(4) of schedule 1 to the bill.

Shall government motion number 71 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare government motion number 71 carried.

Shall section 55 of schedule 1 carry, as amended?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 55 of schedule 1 carried, as amended.

I’m now at section 56, still in schedule 1. I’m looking at NDP motion number 72: Clause 56(d) of schedule 1 to the bill (clause 56(d) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Should NDP motion number 72 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 72 lost.

I’m now at NDP motion number 73: Clause 56(d) of schedule 1 to the bill (clause 56(d) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Shall NDP motion number 73 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 73 lost.

NDP motion number 74: Clause 57(e) of schedule 1 to the bill (clause 57(e) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Shall NDP motion number 74 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Crack, Dunlop, Martow, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): All those opposed?

Mr. Grant Crack: Which one are we at?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Motion 74.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): We’re at NDP motion number 74.

Mr. Grant Crack: Oh. I think we missed—

Mr. Granville Anderson: We missed one, yes.

Mrs. Laura Albanese: Yes. We missed the motion to carry without amendments.

Mr. Grant Crack: Schedule 56.

Mr. Granville Anderson: Is it 56?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Oh, yes. How come that happened again?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: If that’s not what was called, what was called?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): What was called was NDP motion number 57. You’re absolutely right.

I’ll finish the vote: All those opposed?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Yes, those who didn’t previously vote in favour can vote “opposed.”

Mr. Grant Crack: Point of order, Madam Chair.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Point of order.

Mr. Grant Crack: Could you please explain where we’re at?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): We are at NDP motion number 57, although I forgot to call for the vote on 56.

Interjections.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Now we have created false hope, my friend.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: What’s 57 again? I’m sorry, you mentioned 57?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Yes, I did, because on my lovely little sheet here, it had been put under section 56.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Oh, okay, that’s what you meant, not motion 74. I’m sorry.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): No. It is motion 74.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: All right. Thank you.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): So opposed to NDP motion 74? I think some of you voted twice.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Yes, some people voted twice. I think there needs to be clarity on that.

Mr. Grant Crack: Point of order, Madam Chair: I have a question.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Give me one second with the Clerk, then a point of order.

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. Point of order, Mr. Clark.

Mr. Grant Crack: Crack, thank you.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Crack. I always want to do that.

Mr. Grant Crack: I have hair, thank you.

Laughter.

Mr. Grant Crack: Mr. Clark doesn’t have hair.

What is the process if we’ve missed schedule 1, section 56? Do we not have to do it section by section? Is that not the proper protocol?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): The proper approach would have been for me, after NDP motion 73, to call the vote on schedule 1, section 56. That would have been the proper way of doing things. Unfortunately, I did not. I called NDP motion number 74, then called the vote on 74.

I will ask if the members, when you voted in favour, knew what they were voting for. Did you know that you were voting on NDP motion 74?

Mr. Grant Crack: Madam Chair, I can only speak for myself, but I was voting on schedule 1, section 56, to carry without amendments. That’s what I was voting on, so I apologize. Maybe the other members can speak for themselves.

Mr. Vic Dhillon: Well, the same.

Mrs. Amrit Mangat: The same.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. The three Liberal members who voted in favour did not know what they were voting on. Given this, I will take you at your word.

Mr. Tabuns, you had a point of order?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Well, I do. If you interrogated every legislator on what their state of mind was when they voted on something, very few votes would actually get through. There may be a wide variety of vote-changing.

Madam Chair, you were pretty clear. You called the vote on motion 74. I voted, these two members voted and two of those members voted. You were recording the votes. People do have to follow the bouncing ball. In this case, they voted in favour. Since they voted that way, then in fact, we’re in the middle of a vote. I’d urge you to complete the vote.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I have completed the vote. When I asked for who was opposed, I got people voting twice, which led me to believe, “Did you know what you were voting for?” They clarified that they thought they were voting on schedule 1, section 56, to carry.

1540

You are honourable members. I take it that if you tell me that you did not follow the ball, but thought you were voting on schedule 1, section 56, that I will finish the vote on—everybody listen good—NDP motion number 74.

We’re voting on NDP motion number 74. We will take the vote over.

Who is in favour of NDP motion number 74? I’m out of order, but I’m finishing the vote. NDP motion 74: Who is in favour? Opposed to NDP motion number 74?

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Oh, yes, read out the names.

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow, Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): All right.

We are now coming back to where we should have been, which is schedule 1, section 56.

Shall schedule 1, section 56, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I now declare section 56 of schedule 1 carried.

We’re at section 57 of schedule 1, which had one amendment, NDP motion number 74, which we voted for in advance. It’s just so that everybody stays awake in this very boring process. I like to mix it up a bit.

We now have already voted on NDP motion 74 that had to do with section 57.

Ready to vote.

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Just to remind everybody, NDP motion 74 was lost. We’re now voting.

Shall schedule 1, section 57, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 57, carried.

I am now at section 58, looking at NDP motion number 75. Is everybody still there?

Subsection 58(1) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 58(1) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014): Shall NDP motion number 75 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 75 lost.

I’m now at NDP motion number 76: Subsection 58(3) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 58(3) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Shall NDP motion number 76 carry?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow, Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 76 lost.

We’re now voting on schedule 1, section 58. Shall schedule 1, section 58, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 58, carried.

Given that there are no amendments to sections 59, 60 and 61, I ask that we deal with them as a group. All good?

Interjection.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Is ours the only one on 62? Because we’re withdrawing it.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): You’re withdrawing?

Mrs. Gila Martow: We’re withdrawing 77, and that’s 62, so we can add it to the vote.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Is everybody comfortable to vote on schedule 1, sections 59, 60, 61 and 62?

All those in favour?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare sections 59, 60, 61 and 62 of schedule 1 carried.

I’m now at section 63. We have government motion 78: Section 63 of schedule 1 to the bill.

Shall government motion 78 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare government motion 78 carried.

Shall schedule 1, section 63 carry, as amended?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 63 of schedule 1 carried, as amended.

I’m now at section 64 and I’m looking at NDP motion 79: Subsection 64(2) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsection 64(2) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014).

Shall NDP motion 79 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion 79 lost.

Shall schedule 1, section 64 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 64 carried.

I’m now looking at sections 65, 66, 67 and 68. Given that there are no amendments to those four sections, is it the pleasure of the committee that we deal with all four of them together?

Shall schedule 1, sections 65, 66, 67 and 68 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare sections 65, 66, 67 and 68 of schedule 1 carried.

I’m now looking at a new section, 68.1, with government motion 80. Government motion 80 creates: Section 68.1 of schedule 1 to the bill.

Shall government motion 80 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare government motion 80 carried.

I’m now looking at section 69—

Mr. Vic Dhillon: Sixty-eight.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): We voted on 68 already and it carried.

Interjections.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): We just voted on 68.1.

Interjections.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): No, it’s a new section. We don’t vote on a section that is new; we only vote on sections that were in the original bill, I’m told. All good? We did the same thing before.

Schedule 1: sections 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75 and 76 have no motions. Is the group willing to deal with them as a group?

Shall schedule 1, section 69 all the way to section 76 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare sections 69 to 75 of schedule 1 carried.

1550

Interjection: Seventy-six.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I always do that, don’t I? Sixty-nine to 76 are carried.

We’re now looking at section 77, and I’m looking at government motion number 81. Everybody’s good?

Section 77 of schedule 1 to the bill: Shall government motion number 81 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

M^me France Gélinas: I declare government motion number 81 carried.

We’re now voting on schedule 1, section 77. Shall schedule 1, section 77 carry, as amended?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 77, schedule 1 carried, as amended.

We’re now looking at section 78. There are no amendments. Shall schedule 1, section 78 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 78 carried.

I’m now looking at schedule 1. We’re at section 79 and we’re looking at NDP motion number 82. All good?

Section 79 of schedule 1 to the bill (section 79 of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014). Shall NDP motion number 82 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 82 lost.

Shall schedule 1, section 79 of the bill carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 79 of the bill carried.

I’m now looking at section 80, which has no amendments. Shall schedule 1, section 80 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 80 carried.

I’m now looking at section 81 and PC motion number 83. Schedule 1, subclause 81(1)(e)(iii): Shall PC motion number 83 carry?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare PC motion number 83 lost.

I’m now looking at NDP motion number 84: clause 81(1)(e) of schedule—

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Withdraw.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Pardon me?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Withdraw. It’s redundant because of earlier losses.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay.

I’m now looking at government motion number 85: Subsection 81(1) of schedule 1 to the bill. Shall government motion number 85 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare government motion number 85 carried.

I’m looking at NDP motion number 86. Subsections 81(2.1) and (2.2) of schedule 1 to the bill (subsections 81(2.1) and (2.2) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014). Shall NDP motion number 86 carry?

Ayes

Dunlop, Martow, Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare the motion lost.

I’m now looking at schedule 1, section 81. Shall schedule 1, section 81 carry, as amended?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 81 carried, as amended.

I am now looking at a new section, 81.1, with a motion from the NDP: Section 81.1 of schedule 1 to the bill (section 81.1 of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014). Shall NDP motion number 87 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 87 lost.

I am now looking at schedule 1, sections 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87 and 88, which don’t have any motions. Is it the will of the committee that sections 82 to 88 be voted on as a group? Okay. Shall schedule 1, sections 82 to 88 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, sections 82 to 88 carried.

Still in schedule 1, I am looking at section 89, government motion 88. Everybody still with me? Section 89 of schedule 1 to the bill. Shall government motion 88 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare government motion 88 carried.

I am now looking at section 89. Shall schedule 1, section 89, carry as amended?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 89 of schedule 1 carried as amended.

I am now looking at section 90; section 90 has no amendments. Shall schedule 1, section 90, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1, section 90, carried.

Shall schedule 1, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 1 carried as amended.

I am now looking at schedule 2, sections 1 and 2. There are no motions for schedule 2, section 1 or 2. Is it the will of the group that we deal with them together? Very good. Shall schedule 2, sections 1 and 2 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 2, sections 1 and 2, carried.

Shall schedule 2 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 2 carried.

I am now looking at schedule 3. Schedule 3, sections 1 and 2, have no amendments. Is it the will of the group that we deal with them together? Okay. Shall schedule 3, sections 1 and 2, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 3, sections 1 and 2, carried.

I am now looking at schedule 3, section 3. We’re looking at government motion number 89: Subsection 3(6) of schedule 3 to the bill.

1600

Shall government motion number 89 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare government motion 89 carried.

Shall schedule 3, section 3, carry as amended?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 3 of schedule 3 carried as amended.

We’re now looking at schedule 3 from section 4 all the way to section 12. I see no motion.

Mr. Granville Anderson: To 35.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): You are right: To 35. Is it the will of the group that we deal with them as a group?

Interjections.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): All right. Shall schedule 3, sections 4 all the way to 35, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 3, section 4, to and including 35, carried.

Shall schedule 3, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 3 carried as amended.

I’m now looking at schedule 4. Schedule 4 has no motion for sections 1 and 2. Is it the will of the group that we vote on them together?

Interjections.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Shall schedule 4, sections 1 and 2 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 4, sections 1 and 2 carried.

Don’t worry, Garfield. I’m just as confused as you are.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: It would have been better in Timmins.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): It would have been.

All right, I’m looking at schedule 4, section 3. I’m looking at NDP motion 90. Section 3 of schedule 4 to the bill (subsection 171(1) of the Education Act): Shall NDP motion number 90 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion 90 carried.

Shall schedule 4, section 3 carry as amended?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 3 of schedule 4 carried as amended.

I’m now looking at schedule 4, section 4. Shall schedule 4, section 4 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare section 4 of schedule 4 carried.

I’m now looking at section 5 of schedule 4, with NDP motion 91: Subsection 5(2) of schedule 4 to the bill (subsection 259.1(1) of the Education Act). Shall NDP motion 91 carry?

Ayes

Tabuns.

Nays

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Dunlop, Mangat, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion 91 lost.

I’m now looking at schedule 4, section 5. Shall schedule 4, section 5 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 4, section 5, carried

I am now looking at schedule 4. Sections 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 have no amendments.

Is it the will of the group that we vote on them as a group?

Interjections.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): It’s not on my little sheet there, but I see it.

We would vote on schedule 4, sections 7, 8, 9 and 10.

Is it the will of the group that we deal with them as a group?

Interjections.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): And 11? Yes, and 11.

Everybody is clear? We’re voting on schedule 4, sections 7 to 11, including 11.

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Sections 6 to 11. God, I’ll get this right: schedule 4, sections 6 to 11.

Thank you, everybody, for your understanding.

Are you ready to vote?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 4, sections 6 to 11, carried.

We are now dealing with section 11.1, which is NDP motion number 92.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: And a very good motion.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): And a very good motion, I’m told: Section 11.1 of schedule 4 to the bill (section 260.5.3 of the Education Act).

The Clerk has given me this little note to read. It reads as follows: “This motion is out of order because it contravenes standing order 57, which reads”—do you dispense me from reading, or would you like to hear it?

Mr. Grant Crack: Dispense.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I will give you a Coles Notes: It deals with money. Therefore, it has been ruled out of order. Everybody’s good with that?

Interjections.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare NDP motion number 92 out of order.

We are now at schedule 4. Sections 12, 13, 14 and 15 have no amendments. Is it the wish of the group that we deal with them together?

Interjections.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Okay. Shall schedule 4, sections 12, 13, 14 and 15, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 4, sections 12, 13, 14 and 15 carried.

Shall schedule 4, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I am now looking at schedule 5—

Interjections.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare it carried. I declare schedule 4 carried, as amended.

Everybody ready to move on to schedule 5?

Schedule 5 has two sections, section 1 and section 2. Neither one of them has motions. Are you ready to deal with both of them together? Yes?

Shall schedule 5, sections 1 and 2, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 5, sections 1 and 2, carried.

We are now voting on schedule 5. Shall schedule 5 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 5 carried.

1610

I’m now looking at schedule 6. Sections 1 to 10 have no motions. Is it the will of the group that we deal with them together?

Interjections: Yes.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): All right. Shall schedule 6, sections 1 to and including 10, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 6, sections 1 to and including 10, carried.

I’m now looking at schedule 6. Shall schedule 6 carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare schedule 6 carried.

I’m now looking at the preamble. There is PC motion number 93—I’m told to slow down, and I’m getting a little note. That’s never good.

All right, PC motion number 23, which deals with the preamble.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Ninety-three.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Ninety-three, which deals with the preamble: This motion is out of order because it seeks to amend the preamble to the bill. A substantive amendment to the preamble is admissible only if it is rendered necessary by amendment made to the bill.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: Point of order.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Point of order, Mr. Dunlop.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: There is precedent to revise the preamble if the wording does not have a direct impact or reference to the bill and what the bill does. In our opinion, a bill on Ontario daycares should not discuss federal funding levels, as they are not mentioned anywhere in the bill, or discuss full-day kindergarten, as daycare and kindergarten are separate programs that are only linked once to show the age of a child. Both the federal government and full-day kindergarten are extraneous information. It’s here for political gain, not because it has to deal with the actual bill.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I will quickly consult with the Clerk and get back to you in one second.

On advisement from the Clerk, I’m told that the changes that were made were not substantive enough to become admissible for changes to the preamble. Thank you for your point of order.

I’m now calling the vote. Shall the preamble to the bill carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare the preamble of the bill carried.

We’re now dealing with the title. Shall the title of the bill carry?

Mr. Vic Dhillon: Chair?

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Point of order, Mr. Dhillon.

Mr. Vic Dhillon: Were we not supposed to consider sections 1, 2 and 3 as a—

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): We’ve dealt with the preamble already.

Mr. Vic Dhillon: We dealt with it. Okay, that’s fine.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): PC motion number 93 was ruled out of order.

Mr. Vic Dhillon: Yes, that’s fine.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): All good? Okay.

I have called the question: Shall the title of the bill carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare the title of the bill carried.

Shall Bill 10, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I declare Bill 10 carried.

Shall I report the bill, as amended, to the House?

Ayes

Albanese, Anderson, Crack, Dhillon, Mangat, Tabuns.

Nays

Dunlop, Martow.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I shall report the bill, as amended, to the House.

I will end by thanking all of you for your indulgence with a few numbers that didn’t spit out properly, but it’s done. I don’t think I have any more closing remarks, so unless there are any closing remarks from any of the members—

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Thank you, Chair.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): You’re very welcome.

Mr. Clark on a point of order.

Mr. Grant Crack: Mr. Crack.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): Crack. Well, I end the way I started.

Mr. Grant Crack: I think you did a wonderful job, Madam Chair. I just wanted to congratulate you on that and moving the business ahead very quickly. I’d also like to congratulate the Clerk for all the recorded votes and the great job she did at calling the names.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): I always call him “Grant.” This is what the problem is.

Mr. Grant Crack: That’s fine.

The Vice-Chair (M^me France Gélinas): By his first name, I have no problem. Last name? Not so good.

Any other comments? Seeing none—oh, I get to play this again: We’re done.

The committee adjourned at 1616.

CONTENTS

Monday 24 November 2014

Child Care Modernization Act, 2014, Bill 10, Mrs. Sandals / Loi de 2014 sur la modernisation des services de garde d’enfants, projet de loi 10, Mme Sandals SP-95

STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL POLICY

Chair / Président

Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto–Danforth ND)

Vice-Chair / Vice-Présidente

M^me France Gélinas (Nickel Belt ND)

Mr. Granville Anderson (Durham L)

Mr. Vic Dhillon (Brampton West / Brampton-Ouest L)

Ms. Christine Elliott (Whitby–Oshawa PC)

M^me France Gélinas (Nickel Belt ND)

Mrs. Marie-France Lalonde (Ottawa–Orléans L)

Mrs. Amrit Mangat (Mississauga–Brampton South / Mississauga–Brampton-Sud L)

Mrs. Gila Martow (Thornhill PC)

Mrs. Kathryn McGarry (Cambridge L)

Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto–Danforth ND)

Substitutions / Membres remplaçants

Mrs. Laura Albanese (York South–Weston / York-Sud–Weston L)

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

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North / Simcoe-Nord PC)

Ms. Harinder Malhi (Brampton–Springdale L)

Ms. Eleanor McMahon (Burlington L)

Clerk / Greffière

Ms. Valerie Quioc Lim

Staff / Personnel

Ms. Catherine Oh, legislative counsel