Legislative

Assembly
of Ontario

Assemblée

législative
de l’Ontario

Votes and Proceedings

Procès-verbaux

No. 6

No 6

1st Session
42nd Parliament

1re session
42e législature

Thursday
July 19, 2018

Jeudi
19 juillet 2018

9:00 A.M.

9 H

PRAYERS

PRIÈRES

ORDERS OF THE DAY

ORDRE DU JOUR

Motion for an Address in Reply to the Speech of Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor at the Opening of the Session.

Motion portant l’Adresse en réponse au discours prononcé par Son Honneur la lieutenante-gouverneure à l’ouverture de la session.

Debate resumed and after some time,

Le débat a repris et après quelque temps,

At 9:15 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 42(a), the Deputy Speaker interrupted the proceedings and announced that there had been 12 hours of debate on the motion for an Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne, and the question would now be put.

On July 16, 2018, Mr. Downey moved, seconded by Ms. Ghamari, that an humble Address be presented to Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor as follows:

To the Honourable Elizabeth Dowdeswell, Lieutenant Governor of Ontario:

“We, Her Majesty’s most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Ontario, now assembled, beg leave to thank Your Honour for the gracious speech Your Honour has been pleased to address to us at the opening of the present Session.”

Vote deferred.

Le vote est différé.

At 9:15 a.m., the President of the Treasury Board indicated that no further morning business would be called and therefore the House recessed.

À 9 h 15, le Président du Conseil du Trésor a indiqué que l’ordre du jour de la séance du matin étant épuisé, la Chambre suspendait ses travaux.

10:30 A.M.

10 H 30

The Speaker informed the House,

Le Président a informé la Chambre,

That the following document was tabled:-

Que le document suivant a été déposé :-

Individual Members’ Expenditures for the fiscal year 2017-2018 (Sessional Paper No. 7).

Relevé des dépenses des députés pour l’exercice 2017-2018 (Document parlementaire no 7).

The Speaker addressed the House:-

Le Président s’adresse à la Chambre :-

I would like to take a few minutes to address the House on the issue of the participation of independent members in the debates of this House on government bills and substantive motions, and their participation in Members’ Statements.

Standing Order 22(d) states as follows:

When presented with a request from an independent member to speak in a regular debate which they are not otherwise excluded by Standing Order from participating in, it falls to the Speaker to determine whether and to what extent the independent member may participate.

Generally speaking, the Speaker will want to accommodate such requests, but only to the extent that an independent member’s ability to participate in the House is no more generous over time than that of any other member of the Assembly. Historically and numerically speaking, having an independent member in the House is a relative rarity and when it has occurred, it has generally been for relatively short periods of time. The present situation is not customary and there is scant precedent to assist me in guiding my decision in this matter.

In the current parliament, there is one Green Party independent member who has no party colleagues in the House, and there are 7 independent members who are affiliated with the Liberal party, although it is not for procedural purposes a recognized party under the Standing Orders. Since the outset of this parliament, the group of 7 Liberal members has been presenting itself to me as a cohesive group seeking to coordinate its parliamentary work as a caucus to the degree that will be possible for them.

Both the Green and Liberal party independents have given me requests in writing seeking the opportunity to participate in the 2 items of business that have been or are expected to be subject to debate during this summer sitting, namely the Throne Speech and Bill 2.

The Liberal group asked to be given a global amount of 50 minutes for them to allot among themselves for the Throne debate. I have acceded to this request, in the belief that 50 minutes for the 7 members was a reasonable amount of time, given the debate is 720 minutes in duration. On this formula, the Green independent was allotted 7 minutes, which he used.

I now have to decide how to exercise my discretion in permitting the independent members to participate during other proceedings such as Second Reading debates on government bills, which historically has represented the lion’s share of overall debate time, and debates on government substantive motions.

I believe that making a definitive, proactive decision will be of most benefit to the House, because it will provide clarity and predictability for both the independent members and the rest of the House on an ongoing basis, rather than being done on a case-by-case basis. To do this I have to make certain assumptions.

In the case of Second Reading debates on government bills, and debates on substantive government motions, I feel it is reasonable to calculate that the total amount of open debate time available for all members to participate will typically be at least 6.5 hours (390 minutes), since that is the point at which the government is able to make use of the procedural tool available to it under Standing Order 47 to allocate time to remaining stages of the proceeding.

Among 123 eligible members, 390 minutes represents approximately 3 minutes each. I am therefore prepared to permit a single one of the 7 Liberal independent members to speak for up to 20 minutes during the debate on Second Reading of any government bill, or on a substantive government motion. This 20-minute slot has to be used before speaking times reduce to 10 minutes under Standing Order 24(c), otherwise only 10 minutes is permitted, as for everyone else.

I will permit the Green independent member to speak for up to 3 minutes during the debate on Second Reading debate of any government bill, or on a substantive government motion, however, I will let that member forego participation in any single debate and save that unused time in a virtual “time bank” to accumulate to larger amounts of time, available to be used in debates in which he wants to make a more substantial contribution. However, the member may not speak for more than 20 minutes in any debate and, as with the Liberal independents, for not more than 10 minutes after Standing Order 24(c) has come into effect.

Under this admittedly mathematically blunt approach, independent members will have a reasonable opportunity to meaningfully participate, in a way that will be more predictable for the House to anticipate and for the Chair to facilitate, and to a degree that is proportional to their overall representation in the House.

I will leave it to the Presiding Officer in the Chair at the time to decide when to add these independent speaking slots into the normal rotation, albeit with as much relevant consultation among, and notice to, the players as is reasonably possible.

Dealing now with Members’ Statements, Standing Order 31(c) states:

For the duration of this summer sitting, I will permit one independent member, in turn each day, to make a Members’ Statement. When the House resumes sitting in the Fall Sessional Period, I will be exercising my discretion with respect to Members’ Statements under Standing Order 31(c) by following a repeating cycle that allows one Members’ Statement per day for 8 consecutive days to be given in turn by each of the independent members, if they advise me of their wish to do so, followed by a gap of one sitting week during which only members of recognized parties may make a Members’ Statement.

While the Standing Orders give me the discretion to arrange the participation of independent members in the way I have just described, the House of course is master of its own proceedings and I would fully welcome any recommendations the House might have in this regard if it feels a different scheme to provide for participation by the independent members would suit it better.

I thank all members for your attention.

ORAL QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS ORALES

DEFERRED VOTES

VOTES DIFFÉRÉS

Motion for an Address in Reply to the Speech of Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor at the Opening of the Session.

Motion portant l’Adresse en réponse au discours prononcé par Son Honneur la lieutenante-gouverneure à l’ouverture de la session.

Carried on the following division:-

Adoptée par le vote suivant :-

AYES / POUR - 66

Anand

Baber

Babikian

Bailey

Barrett

Bethlenfalvy

Bouma

Calandra

Cho (Scarborough North)

Cho (Willowdale)

Coe

Fee

Fullerton

Ghamari

Gill

Harris

Jones

Karahalios

Ke

Khanjin

Kramp

Lecce

Miller (Parry Sound–Muskoka)

Mitas

Mulroney

Nicholls

Oosterhoff

Pang

Park

Parsa

Pettapiece

Phillips

Piccini

Sandhu

Sarkaria

Simard

Skelly

Smith (Bay of Quinte)

Smith (Peterborough–Kawartha)

Surma

Tangri

Thanigasalam

Thompson

Tibollo

AYES / POUR - Continued

Crawford

Cuzzeto

Downey

Dunlop

Elliott

Fedeli

MacLeod

Martin

Martow

McDonell

McKenna

McNaughton

Rasheed

Rickford

Roberts

Romano

Sabawy

Triantafilopoulos

Wai

Walker

Yakabuski

Yurek

NAYS / CONTRE - 43

Andrew

Armstrong

Arthur

Begum

Bell

Berns-McGown

Bisson

Bourgouin

Burch

Coteau

Des Rosiers

Fife

Fraser

French

Gates

Gélinas

Glover

Gretzky

Harden

Hassan

Horwath

Hunter

Karpoche

Kernaghan

Lalonde

Mamakwa

Mantha

Miller (Hamilton East–Stoney Creek)

Monteith-Farrell

Morrison

Rakocevic

Sattler

Schreiner

Shaw

Singh (Brampton Centre)

Singh (Brampton East)

Stevens

Stiles

Tabuns

Taylor

Vanthof

West

Yarde

And it was,

Resolved, that an humble Address be presented to Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor as follows:-

“To the Honourable Elizabeth Dowdeswell, Lieutenant Governor of Ontario:

We, Her Majesty’s most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Ontario, now assembled, beg leave to thank Your Honour for the gracious speech Your Honour has been pleased to address to us at the opening of the present Session.”

The House recessed at 11:57 a.m.

À 11 h 57, la Chambre a suspendu la séance.

1:00 P.M.

13 H

PETITIONS

PÉTITIONS

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (Sessional Paper No. P-1) Ms. Karpoche.

Health and physical education curriculum (Sessional Paper No. P-2) Ms. Karpoche.

Hydro costs (Sessional Paper No. P-3) Mr. Mantha.

Loi sur le classement des films et l’usage du tabac (Document parlementaire no P-7) M. Mantha.

Hospital funding (Sessional Paper No. P-8) Mr. Miller (Parry Sound—Muskoka).

Legion halls (Sessional Paper No. P-9) Ms. Dunlop, Ms. Ghamari, Mr. Kanapathi, Mrs. Martin and Mr. Smith (Peterborough—Kawartha).

Drive Clean test (Sessional Paper No. P-11) Ms. Ghamari.

Le salaire minimum (Document parlementaire no P-12) M. Mantha.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

ORDRE DU JOUR

Second Reading of Bill 2, An Act respecting Hydro One Limited, the termination of the White Pines Wind Project and the labour disputes between York University and Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3903.

Deuxième lecture du projet de loi 2, Loi concernant Hydro One Limited, l’annulation du projet de parc éolien White Pines et les conflits de travail entre l’Université York et la section locale 3903 du Syndicat canadien de la fonction publique.

Debate arose and after some time the House adjourned at 6:00 p.m.

Il s’élève un débat et après quelque temps, à 18 h, la Chambre a ajourné ses travaux.

le président

Ted Arnott

Speaker