CONTENTS
Tuesday 18 December 1990
Organization
Adjournment
STANDING COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
Chair: White, Drummond (Durham Centre NDP)
Vice-Chair: Morrow, Mark (Wentworth East NDP)
Carr, Gary (Oakville South PC)
Chiarelli, Robert (Ottawa West L)
Fletcher, Derek (Guelph NDP)
Harnick, Charles (Willowdale PC)
Mathyssen, Irene (Middlesex NDP)
Mills, Gordon (Durham East NDP)
Poirier, Jean (Prescott and Russell L)
Sorbara, Gregory S. (York Centre L)
Wilson, Fred (Frontenac-Addington NDP)
Winninger, David (London South NDP)
Clerk: Freedman, Lisa
Staff: Swift, Susan, Research Officer, Legislative Research Service
The committee met at 1600 in room 228.
ORGANIZATION
The Chair: The purpose of our meeting today, obviously, is detailed in the agenda. There are two subcommittee reports. We also have to look at the budget and, of course, the sitting implications of the things we will be hearing. I will read Report of the Subcommittee 1.
"It was agreed that should Bill 17, An Act to amend the Law related to the Enforcement of Support and Custody Orders, be referred to the standing committee on administration of justice, the committee will consider the bill in the following manner:
"(a) The bill will be considered for up to three weeks during the winter recess.
"(b) The committee will conduct public hearings and clause-by-clause consideration of the bill.
"(c) The clerk of the committee will be authorized to place advertisements in all English/French daily papers across Ontario and in French weeklies if time permits.
"(d) The text of the ad will include a brief summary of the bill which will read, `The principal purpose of the bill is to provide for automatic deduction of support payments from the income of people required to pay support.'
"(e) In addition to members of the public who respond to the ad, the committee will invite the following individuals/groups to appear: the Attorney General, SCOE, family law bar, Ontario Federation of Labour, Canadian Federation of Independent Business, Ontario Chamber of Commerce, Ontario Association of Interval and Transition Houses, Canadian Bankers' Association (or another group that can speak to the administrative aspects of the bill).
"(f) Groups will be afforded 15/30/45 minutes at the discretion of the clerk except for the Attorney General and representatives from SCOE, who will be invited for up to one half-day each.
"(g) The clerk is instructed to draft a new budget for consideration by the committee.
"(h) The clerk will request the presence of ministry staff to monitor the hearings and be available to answer questions.
"(i) Groups who request an appearance before the committee after the deadline has passed will be scheduled as time allows."
Any comments on that report?
Mr F. Wilson: One comment on (f), that groups will be afforded 15, 30 or 45 minutes. Am I to deduce from that that the clerk will be setting the hours of same?
The Chair: I believe 15 minutes is the regular time for a single individual, 30 minutes for a group and 45 minutes for an umbrella group such as the Ontario Federation of Labour or some other large group which represents several small groups.
Mr F. Wilson: And this will be preordained beforehand so we are quite aware of it?
The Chair: Yes. Any further questions? Can I entertain a motion to accept this report?
Mr F. Wilson: I move that.
The Chair: All in favour? Carried.
Motion agreed to.
The Chair: Report of the Subcommittee 2 --
Mr F. Wilson: I move that there be unanimous consent for this, please.
The Chair: Any discussion? Would you direct them, please?
Clerk of the Committee: What essentially is being asked for is unanimous consent to withdraw the old NDP designation so this new designation can be substituted. In order to withdraw it, unanimous consent of the committee is required.
The Chair: And there was all-party agreement of the subcommittee on that point.
Mr F. Wilson: I move unanimous consent to withdraw them.
The Chair: Thank you. All in favour? Carried unanimously.
Motion agreed to.
The Chair: I would like to read Report of the Subcommittee 2.
"The subcommittee met Monday 17 December 1990 pursuant to standing order 123 to consider a report to the committee on the following matter designated by Mr Morrow, pending unanimous consent for withdrawal of the original designation, for consideration by the committee:
"The current status of court reform, and more particularly a consideration of the timing and implementation of phase II reform as it concerns family law jurisdiction.
"This issue is to be considered for a period of 12 hours.
"The list of witnesses will be determined by the subcommittee prior to 18 January 1991.
"The hearings are to commence during the break period between the new year and the spring sitting of the House.
"Consideration of this designation shall follow the designations by the official opposition and the third party.
"This report shall be deemed adopted at the first meeting of the standing committee on administration of justice to be convened in 1991."
Mr Winninger: Do you need a motion on this?
The Chair: No, it is simply received, and therefore accepted. Any further comments or discussion on that report?
Mr Carr: On the second to last point, "Consideration of this designation shall follow the designations by the official opposition and the third party," will that change the order?
The Chair: Mr Carr is quite right. The order should be "the third party and the official opposition," as that is the order we accepted at our last meeting. Is that slight amendment acceptable? It seems to be.
Mr F. Wilson: That was part of it. The second part is that there are some members here who were not present when the manoeuvre we just performed was explained. Is it appropriate to re-explain why we withdrew the first subcommittee report and read the second?
Clerk of the Committee: The three parties designated standing order 123 designations about two weeks ago, and because Bill 17 will probably be referred to this committee, it made the NDP designation redundant. In order for the NDP to withdraw its designation, it required unanimous consent. Also, because this committee cannot receive a report of the subcommittee within the last eight sessional days, that is why we will deem this report adopted in 1991; we cannot deem it adopted today.
The Chair: But the designation is for --
Clerk of the Committee: The designation is a 1990 designation. A matter is designated at the time the subcommittee meets and comes up with its report. The subcommittee did that yesterday, so it qualifies as a 1990 designation.
The Chair: Further discussion? You also have before you a revised budget which speaks to the anticipated hearings in the intersession. I believe, as was indicated, it was unlikely that it would be travel-allotted unless there was a tremendous demand from various regions.
Mr Poirier: Which would surprise us, right? We do not expect it? Have you heard anything about it?
Clerk of the Committee: When I was going to the subcommittee, Mr Sorbara wanted us to visit two regions outside Toronto, and the cost to move this committee plus the French interpreters is about $25,000 a day. So we will advertise throughout Ontario, but we may consider paying the expenses to bring witnesses into Toronto. Travel is built into the budget, you will note, because there was a request from the subcommittee to build it in, but that may or may not happen.
The Chair: Any further discussion on the budget? Questions?
Mr Fletcher: I will move the budget, if you like.
The Chair: Mr Fletcher moves adoption of the budget in the amount of $170,200 and that it be presented to the Board of Internal Economy.
All in favour of the bud et as proposed?
Motion agreed to.
Mr Mills: When are we going to establish the dates we are going to be here? Looking ahead, I would like to have some idea of what my schedule is going to be. I just wondered when we are going to make that decision.
The Chair: I believe that if these reports are accepted we would be requesting six weeks of meeting time. Traditionally, that is somewhat excessive in the intersession, but I am wondering, Mr Mills, do you have a specific period you are concerned about? Perhaps we could append that concern if we have agreement from others.
Mr Mills: I would like to not meet the week preceding the school break to facilitate some sort of vacation.
The Chair: So essentially that is not meeting at all in March.
Mr Mills: I am not saying that: the week prior to the school break. The school break is the second week, is it not? The 11th. I see, the House is back after that. I suppose that is what I would be seeking, that we not meet after the end of February, but I suppose there is some provision that you can get a substitute to come in for you. I just want to know the dates. I am not asking this committee to work around my schedule, but if I knew the dates, then I could arrange perhaps with other people.
Mr Fletcher: On the same point, if we could have the information well in advance.
Clerk of the Committee: Following tradition, you will probably get the information Thursday afternoon. There has to be a motion in the House. The motion is yet to be drafted and yet to be on the order paper, and until it is actually passed in the House it changes moment by moment.
The Chair: Somewhat at the discretion, I understand, of the House leader. But at the moment we are looking at the month of February as meeting times, not March. Hopefully, that would remain the time. I doubt that we would be sitting for much more than three weeks in toto.
Mr Poirier: You doubt that we will be sitting more than three weeks in the winter recess in toto.
The Chair: I understand that is the general experience.
Clerk of the Committee: We have asked for three weeks, one week for each of the standing order designations, and will just ask, if it has been passed by the committee, for an additional three weeks for SCOE, which is six weeks. Chances are we will not receive six weeks. Just so the committee knows, public bills take precedence over standing order 123 designations.
Mr Poirier: I will be gone on parliamentary business from 30 January to 13 February, but I will have a replacement.
The Chair: Any further business? Hearing none, I move that we adjourn, until February undoubtedly.
The committee adjourned at 1613.