CONTENTS
Thursday 21 April 1994
Residents' Rights Act, 1993, Bill 120, Ms Gigantes / Loi de 1993 modifiant des lois en ce qui concerne les immeubles d'habitation, projet de loi 120, Mme Gigantes
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT
*Chair / Président: Brown, Michael A. (Algoma-Manitoulin L)
*Vice-Chair / Vice-Président: Daigeler, Hans (Nepean L)
Arnott, Ted (Wellington PC)
Dadamo, George (Windsor-Sandwich ND)
*Grandmaître, Bernard (Ottawa East/-Est L)
*Johnson, David (Don Mills PC)
Mammoliti, George (Yorkview ND)
*Mills, Gordon (Durham East/-Est ND)
Morrow, Mark (Wentworth East/-Est ND)
Sorbara, Gregory S. (York Centre L)
Wessenger, Paul (Simcoe Centre ND)
White, Drummond (Durham Centre ND)
*In attendance / présents
Substitutions present / Membres remplaçants présents:
Mathyssen, Irene (Middlesex ND) for Mr Dadamo
Wilson, Gary, (Kingston and The Islands/Kingston et Les Iles ND) for Mr Morrow
Winninger, David (London South/-Sud ND) for Mr Mammoliti
Clerk / Greffier: Carrozza, Franco
Staff / Personnel: Gottheil, Joanne, legislative counsel
The committee met at 1018 in committee room 1.
RESIDENTS' RIGHTS ACT, 1993 / LOI DE 1993 MODIFIANT DES LOIS EN CE QUI CONCERNE LES IMMEUBLES D'HABITATION
Consideration of Bill 120, An Act to amend certain statutes concerning residential property / Projet de loi 120, Loi modifiant certaines lois en ce qui concerne les immeubles d'habitation.
The Chair (Mr Michael A. Brown): The purpose of the committee meeting this morning is to consider Bill 120. As members know, we are now operating under a motion that was passed by the Legislature. It really demands that there be only one motion put and that the committee now report. Could I have someone make that motion, please?
Mr Gordon Mills (Durham East): So moved.
The Chair: Mr Mills has moved that the committee now report.
Mr Hans Daigeler (Nepean): Should we debate that motion?
The Chair: The motion is debatable.
Mr Bernard Grandmaître (Ottawa East): Huh huh.
Mr Gary Wilson (Kingston and The Islands): Thank you, Mr Grandmaître.
Mr David Johnson (Don Mills): I'll second that.
Mrs Irene Mathyssen (Middlesex): Whose gargle was that on Hansard?
The Chair: Order. I would point out to members that the motion of the House deems that this is reported, regardless of what we do today.
Mr Grandmaître: It was expected. As usual, the government is showing, "Let's consult with the people and let's try to inform the House of our good intentions," but when it comes to the real debate, the real crunch, the government does its own thing and introduces time allocation or closure. The opposition is getting used to this kind of attitude, an attitude that has been denounced not only by members of this House but by the general public, especially in Ottawa-Carleton.
This is the second blow that the Ottawa-Carleton area has received in the last couple of days. As you know, the Minister of Housing, the minister responsible for eastern Ontario or Ottawa-Carleton, Ms Gigantes, wanted closure or time allocation on Bill 143. Now that same minister is doing the same thing with Bill 120.
Bill 120 will affect citizens not only in the Ottawa-Carleton area but right across this province. We've heard, time and time again, how disappointed people were for the lack of consultation with the non-profit groups, especially the non-profit groups, insisting that they come under the LTA, the Landlord and Tenant Act, and the Rent Control Act, and also affecting private enterprise, the privately owned health care operators.
As I say, it's expected. I know the government has an agenda, but I think it shows the mismanagement of government. When they can't succeed in convincing this House, then they simply give up and introduce time allocation, prohibiting the approving of a consultative process. We simply have to go along, but I want to be on record that I denounce the attitude of the government. We don't have much of a choice.
Mr David Johnson: Many of the comments that Mr Grandmaître has made spring to my mind as well. I think the government should sit back and look to see how it has managed not only this issue but some other issues.
This bill originally came forward as Bill 90 but didn't get any priority or attention. It then was reconstituted as Bill 120. Mr Grandmaître has mentioned another bill, the Ottawa-Carleton bill, that went through the same process and came forward as Bill 77 -- what's this? "There's not enough" --
Mrs Mathyssen: Give it to the Chair. Read it into the record. Hold it up.
Mr David Johnson: Do I read that in too?
Mr Grandmaître: Could we get a copy of this?
Mr David Johnson: At any rate, to keep it short, Mr Chair -- and it's probably a sensible suggestion, because I'm sure nobody really cares what we say here today -- the government is pushing through something that it didn't give priority to, that it didn't properly plan.
Even when I think in terms of the available dates that this committee could have debated this bill, the first Thursday was lost, and I think there was another Thursday when we took only a half a day. As a matter of fact, I think there were two Thursdays that were lost. There was the one before Good Friday. I suppose it's routine that you don't meet before Good Friday. I don't know, but I was here, I could have met. There were other days when we could have met.
But the government showed, as far as I could see, no particular inclination to use all available time. It showed more initiative in terms of bringing in closure than trying to properly manage this issue. Mr Grandmaître was very true: That not only pertains to this bill, but it pertains to Bill 143. I just hope that the members sit back and look at that. I know the people of Ontario understand that. They see through this. Hopefully, the government members will.
Mr Mills: Not out my way they don't.
Mr David Johnson: Maybe not for Gord. Gord's a good fellow; I'll recognize Gord. But the rest of the government --
Interjections: Oh, oh.
Mr David Johnson: Well, maybe with one or two exceptions here. The government as a whole is in deep trouble. They're not managing their issues. We have some fine people here.
Mr David Winninger (London South): I left the committee for four weeks. I came back and you were still on the same section.
Mr Grandmaître: That's because we were waiting for you.
Mr David Johnson: Other than that, I've gone on record. What's the point? Closure has been brought in on this. It's a sham. Let's get on with it. You have a busy schedule today.
Mrs Mathyssen: Just very briefly, it seems to me that this bill had full debate at second reading. It had four weeks of public hearings in the committee stage and 22 hours of clause-by-clause. I must add that the committee was only able to get to section 2 in 22 hours. I haven't done the multiplication on this in terms of how long it would take to get to the end of the bill based on 22 hours for one and half sections, but I don't think any of us have that many years left in our lives. I think we must get on with it now.
Mr Winninger: We may not live that long.
Mrs Mathyssen: The only obstruction to democracy has come from the opposition in terms of this kind of dragging the process out. It's time to get on with it. I'm very pleased to see that we are indeed getting on with the job that we were asked to do.
Mr Mills: I'm not going to prolong this agony here today and I'm not going to repeat some of the statistics that my colleague has already said into the record, but I think that the opportunity to debate this issue was ample and I think we had a uniqueness in this committee in that the Minister of Housing was here so much of the time that it set a precedent. I haven't seen other ministers of the crown appear at a committee like she did.
Having said all of that, I want to take up on the comment of my colleague opposite about the perception of the public. There is a point in time when one has to get on with the business of governing. I think we reached that brick wall. We have come to understand that some of my honourable colleagues on the opposite side have decided that we will not proceed with this bill because of their stalling tactics. I'll remind the members of this committee of exactly the job that they did on Bill 21.
You have to take a stand, reach a point and say, "If you won't allow us to govern, there's only one way we can do it," and that's with what we've done here. It's regrettable, in my opinion, that we have to resort to that, but you cannot go on like this. The public that I deal with in my riding who watch the proceedings in the House are absolutely fed up with the stalling tactics and the stupidity.
I got a number of calls over Bill 119, which was stalled last week on procedural tactics. It was absolutely, in my opinion, diabolical when we have a real health problem in this country vis-à-vis smoking and the Conservative Party stood on its high horse and derailed that. Is it any wonder that we do have closure?
Mr Winninger: Touché.
Mr David Johnson: It had to do with jobs; 1,500 people are going to lose their jobs.
The Chair: Further discussion? If not, shall Mr Mills's motion that the committee now report carry?
All in favour, put up your hand.
Mr David Johnson: Could we have a recorded vote?
The Chair: A recorded vote has been requested.
Ayes
Mathyssen, Mills, Wilson (Kingston and The Islands), Winninger.
The Chair: Opposed?
Nays
Daigeler, Grandmaître, Johnson (Don Mills).
The Chair: The motion is carried.
That completes this morning's agenda. The committee will stand in adjournment till the call of the Chair.
The committee adjourned at 1027.