The committee met at 0901 in committee room 1.

Correctional Services Transformation Act, 2018 Loi de 2018 sur la transformation des services correctionnels

Consideration of the following bill:

Bill 6, An Act to enact the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Act, 2018 and the Correctional Services and Reintegration Act, 2018, to make related amendments to other Acts, to repeal an Act and to revoke a regulation / Projet de loi 6, Loi édictant la Loi de 2018 sur le ministère de la Sécurité communautaire et des Services correctionnels et la Loi de 2018 sur les services correctionnels et la réinsertion sociale, apportant des modifications connexes à d’autres lois et abrogeant une loi et un règlement.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you, colleagues. We are here for clause-by-clause consideration, as you know, of Bill 6, An Act to enact the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Act, 2018 and the Correctional Services and Reintegration Act, 2018, to make related amendments to other Acts, to repeal an Act and to revoke a regulation.

We have a number of amendments before us. We will, as is the usual procedure, stand down sections 1, 2 and 3 and move directly into considering the schedules.

We’re in schedule 1. To date, we have not received any amendments for sections 1 to 10, so I will seek your consent to consider them all en bloc. Do I have that consent?

Mr. Arthur Potts: Consent given.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): That was informed consent, Mr. Potts?

Mr. Arthur Potts: Yes, Chair.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you. We will now consider sections 1 to 10 ensemble. Those in favour of sections 1 to—

Ms. Soo Wong: Can we have a recorded vote when we vote on this—

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Say again?

Interjections.

Ms. Soo Wong: Oh, schedule—okay.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Yes. Those in favour, in schedule 1, of sections 1 to 10, if any? Those opposed? Carried.

All right. We will now proceed to—shall schedule 1, as amended, carry?

Mr. Arthur Potts: Can we have a recorded vote?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Shall schedule 1 carry? That will be the recorded vote.

Ayes

Crack, Potts, Rinaldi, Wong.

Nays

McDonell, Natyshak.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Schedule 1 carries.

We now proceed to schedule 2. There are no amendments to date to section 1, so we’ll proceed immediately to the vote, unless there are comments of any nature. Therefore, those in favour of schedule 2, section 1? Those in favour? Those opposed? Schedule 2, section 1 carries.

We’ll now proceed to the first amendment before the committee, which is in schedule 2, section 2. Government motion 1: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that the definition of “health care service team” in section 2 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “services” before “to inmates”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments of any kind before we proceed to the vote? All right. Seeing none, we will proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 1, as read, section 2, “health care service team”? Those opposed? Government motion 1 carries.

Government motion 2: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that the definition of “inmate” in section 2 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “receives an adult sentence within the meaning of that act” at the end and substituting “is confined in a correctional institution pursuant to that act”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 2? If not, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 2? Those opposed? Government motion 2 carries.

Government motion 3: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that the definition of “mental health care service team” in section 2 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “services” before “to inmates”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments? We will proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 3? Those opposed? Government motion 3 carries.

Government motion 4: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that the definition of “restrictive confinement” in section 2 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “for a period of time or in a manner that is more restrictive than the standard in general population housing” and substituting “for a period of time that is longer than the standard in general population housing”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 4? Those opposed? Government motion 4 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 2, as amended, carry? Carried.

There are no amendments received to date to the next section. Shall schedule 2, section 3 carry? Carried.

We’ll proceed now to schedule 2, section 4. Government motion 5: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that subsection 4(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “First Nations, Inuit or Métis community” in the portion before clause (a) and substituting “First Nation, Inuit or Métis community”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no questions, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 5? Those opposed? Government motion 5 carries.

Government motion 6: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that section 4 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection:

“Records of contractor

“(3.1) If a prescribed contractor, or a contractor that operates a facility designated as a community resource centre under section 19, is not an institution within the meaning of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act or the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, or is not subject to comparable legislation in another jurisdiction, then,

“(a) the contractor’s records that are related to the services provided by the contractor are, for the purposes of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, deemed to be in the custody and control of the ministry; and

“(b) the minister shall impose terms and conditions in the contract or agreement to address,

“(i) access to the records of the contractor for the purpose of discharging the obligations of the ministry in relation to clause (a), and

“(ii) the protection of personal information in the custody or control of the contractor that is related to the services provided by the contractor.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 6? Those opposed? Government motion 6 carries.

NDP motion 7: Mr. Natyshak.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: I move that section 4 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection:

“Same

“(3.1) Despite subsections (1) and (2), the minister and employees of the ministry shall not enter into a contract or agreement with the crown in right of Canada respecting the detention of individuals pursuant to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Canada).”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): The floor is open for comments. Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: The government will be voting against this motion because the proposed amendment fails to contemplate that there could be situations other than long-term detention of immigration detainees. Currently, provincial institutions assist with facilitating transportation for a range of individuals in different types of custody depending on the circumstances. For example, if the detainee is picked up in the evening, it may be in the best interest of the individual to be held overnight in a provincial facility, rather than forcing a federal entity to leave an individual in the back seat of a car while they sort out the logistics.

The federal government does not currently have the infrastructure to appropriately hold the immigration detainees who are currently in our provincial facilities. In the current circumstances, there is a risk that the federal correctional institution would be the easiest and most readily available alternative to the provincial institutions. This could be worse for individuals as they would be still imprisoned and most likely be held further from friends, family and community support.

As we work towards a responsible solution to this issue, we have to ensure that immigration detainees will benefit from the full protection in the proposed legislation. I know that the third party—and we heard from witnesses. The government recognizes that this is a challenge—the impact of holding immigration detainees in provincial correctional facilities.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any further comments on NDP motion 7 before we proceed to the vote? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of NDP motion 7? Those opposed? NDP motion 7 falls.

Government motion 8: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that paragraph 3 of subsection 4(5) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “or investigation” after “inspection”.

0910

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 8 of subsection 4(5), paragraph 3? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 8? Those opposed? Government motion 8 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 4, as amended, carry? Carried.

Now that we’re on schedule 2, section 5: Government motion 9 is contingent of the passage of government motion 13. In fact, the next five amendments are contingent on the passage of government motion 13, so we’ll proceed to government motion 13. Ms. Wong for government motion 13, which is on subsection 5(9).

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that section 5 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection:

“Unit of the ministry

“(9) The unit of the ministry mentioned in this section is,

“(a) the unit of the ministry prescribed under paragraph 7 of subsection 208(1) of the Police Services Act, 2018 for the purposes of that act; or

“(b) if a unit of the ministry is not prescribed under paragraph 7 of subsection 208(1) of the Police Services Act, 2018, a unit of the ministry prescribed under this act.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Are there any comments on government motion 13? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 13? Those opposed? Government motion 13 carries.

That now enables the previous five amendments. We’ll now proceed to government motion 9: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that section 5 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection:

“Practices and procedures

“(4.1) The minister may only use personal information under subsection (1) if the unit of the ministry referred to in subsection (9) has put in place practices and procedures,

“(a) to protect the privacy of the individuals whose personal information the minister uses, and to maintain the confidentiality of the information; and

“(b) that are approved by the Information and Privacy Commissioner.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Further comments on government motion 9? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 9? Those opposed? Government motion 9 carries.

Government motion 10: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that subsection 5(5) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “a prescribed unit of the ministry” in the portion before clause (a) and substituting “the unit of the ministry referred to in subsection (9)”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 10? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 10? Those opposed? Government motion 10 carries.

Government motion 11, on subsection 5(5.1): Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that section 5 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection:

“No other uses and disclosures permitted

“(5.1) Despite any other provision in this act or the Freedom of lnformation and Protection of Privacy Act, the unit of the ministry referred to in subsection (9) shall not use or disclose personal information referred to in subsection (1) for the purpose referred to in that subsection, except as authorized by this section or section 6 or as required by law.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Further comments on government motion 11? Yes, Mr. McDonell.

Mr. Jim McDonell: What’s the purpose of this motion here?

Ms. Soo Wong: The amendment sets limits on what type of personal information can be used or disclosed—which is critically important; we heard it from the Privacy Commissioner—by the prescribed unit. The rules respecting the use and disclosure of personal information are required to ensure that all personal information is protected and only used for authorized purposes only. That’s what the Privacy Commissioner has asked.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Mr. Walker.

Mr. Bill Walker: Can you just share with us what the difference is from what it was, since this is an amendment to your own bill? Why wasn’t this covered in the very first place? Why are you now amending it? What’s the purpose of that?

Ms. Soo Wong: We also heard from the witnesses—one of them is the Privacy Commissioner. I could refer to the staff. Is there any staff over here?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Welcome. You know the drill. Please introduce yourself.

Ms. Marnie Corbold: Hello. My name is Marnie Corbold. I’m a lawyer with the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services. Do you need the spelling of the name now, or could I pass a card up after? Do it after?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Just aim yourself at the mike a little.

Ms. Marnie Corbold: There?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Yes, thanks.

Ms. Marnie Corbold: Sorry, the question was?

Mr. Bill Walker: Just what the difference is from the original to now—what the correction is, what the amendment is.

Ms. Marnie Corbold: Right. This is a new provision; this was not in there before. I think that during the consultations, the IPC indicated they wanted this further protection added. It’s an explicit provision that, in theory, would override—sorry. Under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, there are circumstances where personal information could be disclosed, so this puts an absolute bar on personal information being disclosed.

Mr. Bill Walker: Okay. Thank you.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no further concerns, we’ll proceed to the vote on government motion 11. Those in favour of government motion 11? Those opposed? Government motion 11 carries.

Government motion 12, schedule 2, subsection 5(6): Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that subsection 5(6) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “The prescribed unit of the ministry” at the beginning and substituting “The unit of the ministry referred to in subsection (9)”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 12? Those opposed? Government motion 12 carries.

We’ve already dispatched government motion 13. Therefore, shall schedule 2, section 5, as amended, carry?

Interjection: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Recorded vote.

Ayes

Crack, Delaney, Mangat, Rinaldi, Wong.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Those opposed? Schedule 2, section 5, as amended, carries.

We’ll now proceed to the next motion. Schedule 2, subsection 6(1), government motion 14: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that subsection 6(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “to the prescribed unit under subsection 5(5)” at the end and substituting “to the unit of the ministry referred to in subsection 5(9)”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 14? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 14? Those opposed? Government motion 14 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 6, as amended, carry?

Ms. Soo Wong: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Recorded vote.

Ayes

Crack, Delaney, Mangat, Rinaldi, Wong.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Those opposed? Schedule 2, section 6, as amended, carries.

We’ll now proceed to government motion 15: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Information and Privacy Commissioner’s review of practices

“6.1(1) The Information and Privacy Commissioner,

“(a) may, from time to time, review the practices of the minister to determine if the requirements of sections 5 and 6 have been met; and

“(b) shall review the practices and procedures referred to in subsection 5(4.1) every three years after they are first approved under clause 5(4.1)(b) and, after the review, the commissioner may renew the approval.

“Duty to assist

“(2) The minister shall co-operate with and assist the Information and Privacy Commissioner in the conduct of a review under subsection (1).

“Powers of Information and Privacy Commissioner

“(3) The Information and Privacy Commissioner may require the production of such information and records under the custody or control of the minister as are relevant to the subject matter to the review.

“Obligation to assist

“(4) If the Information and Privacy Commissioner requires production of information or a record under subsection (3), the minister shall provide it to the Information and Privacy Commissioner and, at the request of the Information and Privacy Commissioner, shall provide whatever assistance is reasonably necessary, including using any data storage, processing or retrieval device or system to produce a record in readable form.

“Orders

“(5) If, after giving the minister an opportunity to be heard, the Information and Privacy Commissioner determines that a practice contravenes section 5 or 6, the Information and Privacy Commissioner may order the minister to do any of the following:

“1. Discontinue the practice.

“2. Change the practice as specified by the Information and Privacy Commissioner.

0920

“3. Destroy personal information collected or detained under the practice.

“4. Implement a new practice as specified by the Information and Privacy Commissioner.

“Limit on certain orders

“(6) The Information and Privacy Commissioner may order, under paragraph 2 or 4 of subsection (5), no more than what is reasonably necessary to achieve compliance with sections 5 and 6.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Ms. Wong, I need you to reread the top of the page, right after “Powers of Information and Privacy Commissioner,” number 3.

Ms. Soo Wong: The powers of the Information and Privacy Commissioner? That section?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): The whole thing.

Ms. Soo Wong: Okay, the whole thing.

“Powers of Information and Privacy Commissioner

“(3) The Information and Privacy Commissioner may require the production of such information and records under the custody or control of the minister as are relevant to the subject matter of the review.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): I need you to reread under “Orders,” number 3, where it says “destroy.”

Ms. Soo Wong: Do I read the whole section?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Just “destroy.”

Ms. Soo Wong: “3. Destroy personal information collected or detained under the practice.”

Mr. Lou Rinaldi: “Retained.”

Ms. Soo Wong: Oh, sorry.

“3. Destroy personal information collected or retained under the practice.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you, Ms. Wong.

Now that we have agreed upon the text, I officially rule it out of order as a scope-of-bill issue, introducing a level of oversight for the Information and Privacy Commissioner that was originally not contemplated.

Ms. Wong and then Mr. McDonell.

Ms. Soo Wong: Then, Mr. Chair, I’m going to seek unanimous consent from the committee, and I can explain why.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Unanimous consent for what?

Ms. Soo Wong: For this section. Because you ruled it out of order, I am seeking unanimous consent from the committee.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Do I have unanimous consent to be able to consider it? That’s fine. You have unanimous consent. Go ahead.

Ms. Soo Wong: Thank you. I just wanted to make sure it’s on record. The reason why we are putting this in is because it was requested by the commissioner himself. That’s the reason why. I’m just putting it on the record.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Yes, Mr. McDonell.

Mr. Jim McDonell: I guess I’m wondering how the government, after so many years of the reports and the news, can rush a bill through the last day with 113 amendments. You haven’t consulted with people. You ignored most of the report that was put in. Look at the amendments—a government bill with 113 amendments. It’s the third time since Christmas that I’ve seen a bill go through that has had over 100 amendments. I think we had one that almost had 200 amendments. Is there any consultation done before?

We just went through the elevator and credit legislation, and the ministry said, “We’re going to do the consultation after we pass the bill.” Who does that in government? Who does the stakeholder consultation after they issue the bill? We see that over and over again.

Of course, you come in here and say you’re listening to stakeholders, but this should be done before. We’ve got sections you can’t add unless you get unanimous consent to the bill. It’s just crazy.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you, Mr. McDonell.

Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I beg to differ, Mr. Chair. I think the committee—

Interjection.

Ms. Soo Wong: First of all, Mr. Sapers’s report just came out recently. The opposition is known to criticize the government when we don’t listen when witnesses come before this committee. Therefore, when we have an officer of the Legislature, like a commissioner, asking us to insert this motion, you would be criticizing us if we didn’t listen. So would the public. At the end of the day, the Sapers report just came out. Yes, you may have seen this stuff; so have I, as the parliamentary assistant to the minister. But I think I beg to differ in saying that we are doing this at the last minute etc. Consultation does take time. At the end of the day, this bill has been asked for and therefore we are responding.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Mr. McDonell?

Mr. Jim McDonell: I guess that’s our point. This whole ministry has been a mess for 10 years. You rush out a report at the last minute and your legislation goes out. Where were you for the last 10 years? This has been no secret. I hear on the news and on the radio every day about inmates and showers, lack of mental health—and then you rush something through. You’ve got to time-allocate it to get it into the session. It’s a matter of doing things right. I don’t disagree that you should be putting this in, but you should have consulted with them before you did the bill. These are sections that if your ministries are supposed to be working collaboratively—we’re not seeing that. I guess that’s our complaint.

You look at the number of amendments to a government bill—typically, on a controversial bill, you’d see a lot more. We just don’t think any tinkering is going to fix this bill.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any further comments on government motion 15, on schedule 2, section 6.1? If not, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 15? Those opposed? Government motion 15 is carried.

We’ll now proceed to schedule 2, on section 6.2, government motion 16: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Offence

“6.2(1) No person shall,

“(a) wilfully use or disclose personal information in contravention of section 5 or 6; or

“(b) wilfully fail to comply with an order made by the Information and Privacy Commissioner under paragraph 1 or 3 of subsection 6.1(5).

“Penalty

“(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable,

“(a) in the case of a first offence, to a fine of not more than $25,000; or

“(b) in the case of a second or subsequent offence, to a fine of not more than $50,000.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 16? If none, we’ll proceed to—yes, Mr. Natyshak?

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Can you explain to us how this motion will prohibit incidents like the one that we found with Adam Capay and the whistle-blower protection that existed that allowed members and the public to learn of the conditions under which Mr. Capay was held?

Ms. Soo Wong: The amendment will ensure the appropriate recourse in not complying with an order made by the Information and Privacy Commissioner. This added accountability measure will minimize the risk of breaching the information and privacy of individuals.

I think the key piece here is, first of all, personal and private information should never be shared. Second of all, hopefully, with a very steep fine, that will be a deterrent—if not the first time, the second time. These are not little fines. These are substantial, significant fines. The amendment will entrust that the ministry that handles personal information would be accountable to the orders of the Information and Privacy Commissioner.

I’m going to turn to the staff in terms of information. In the history of this ministry, I would say that the situation the member opposite is inquiring—this is probably the only time I’m aware of in my seven years of as an MPP. Maybe the staff can—

Mr. Taras Natyshak: So my question would be to counsel. It seems as though this provision or this motion conflicts with whistle-blower protection. It puts a chilling effect on those who would have some cognizance of situations that are existing and would be required to divulge some form of personal information, mainly the name of the person or the inmate, again in the context of Adam Capay. This would put them into a liable position. I’m wondering how you square that balance between whistle-blower protection and the provisions given under this motion.

Ms. Marnie Corbold: I haven’t looked at this ahead of time, unfortunately, but the Public Service of Ontario Act does have whistle-blower provisions there. I don’t know off the top. I’d have to look at how that provision is framed with respect to privacy provisions that might exist in an act. I don’t have the answer, off the top, to your question. That act allows for disclosure in certain cases, so I would look to that.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: It seems as though there’s a little bit of a loophole here that might put a chilling effect on anyone wanting to raise any concerns internally.

0930

Ms. Marnie Corbold: I can’t say without looking at that other piece of legislation.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any further comments on government motion 16?

Ms. Soo Wong: Chair, I just want to make sure that—I think that the member opposite is inquiring that if there is a whistle-blower issue in terms of disclosure, within the context of this proposed motion it will allow some sharing of information, in terms of oversight, with the Information and Privacy Commissioner. Am I correct?

Ms. Marnie Corbold: You are correct.

Ms. Soo Wong: For the purpose of sharing information only exclusively with the Information and Privacy Commissioner in terms of releasing information so that he can investigate—because it’s not disclosure to the whole public, in terms of the media or anybody else, but exclusively for the Information and Privacy Commissioner. Am I correct?

Ms. Marnie Corbold: You’re correct. Ms. Wong is correct that this section is limited to disclosure under sections 5 and 6.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): We’ll proceed now, if there are no further comments, on government motion 16, on schedule 2, section 6.2. Those in favour of government motion 16? Those opposed? Government motion 16 carries.

Government motion 17, on section 6.3: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Review of information provisions

“6.3(1) The minister shall ensure that a review of sections 5 to 6.2 and any regulations relating to those sections is commenced within two years after the day subsection 5(1) comes into force.

“Consultation with the Information and Privacy Commissioner

“(2) The person conducting the review shall consult with the Information and Privacy Commissioner.

“Report

“(3) The person conducting the review shall provide the minister with a report on the review and the minister shall publish the report.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 17? Mr. Walker.

Mr. Bill Walker: Is there any specific reason why a two-year time frame?

Ms. Soo Wong: Good question. I think it will provide time because this is very complicated reporting. At the end of the day, it does give the minister time.

Just think about it: We are going through an election right now. Taking on this information, the minister will need some time—and then protection of information and privacy is serious. And it also allows us to engage with the Information and Privacy Commissioner, because it takes time to talk to him.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Mr. Walker.

Mr. Bill Walker: In the spirit of good governance and always being clear and concise, is there also a provision that that would be an ongoing review of that legislation?

Ms. Soo Wong: I believe this other section of the motion talks about the timeline of the review and annual review. This is just one very specific section. You’ll see the timeline on the other section.

Mr. Bill Walker: Thank you.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): We’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 17? Those opposed? Government motion 17 carries.

We’ll consider the next two sections en bloc. Shall schedule 2, section 7 and schedule 2, section 8 carry?

Ms. Soo Wong: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Recorded vote? Fair enough. Let’s break it up, then.

Shall schedule 2, section 7 carry?

Ayes

Crack, Delaney, Mangat, Rinaldi, Wong.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Those opposed? Schedule 2, section 7 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 8 carry?

Ayes

Crack, Delaney, Mangat, Rinaldi, Wong.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Those opposed? Schedule 2, section 8 carries.

We’ll proceed now to schedule 2, subsection 9(1), government motion 18: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that subsection 9(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “and procedures”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 18? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 18? Those opposed? Government motion 18 carries.

Government motion 19, on subsection 9(2): Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that subsection 9(2) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Redactation

“(2) The minister may redact the policies, but only to the extent necessary to protect the security of the correctional institution or the safety of persons.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Ms. Wong, can you say the word “redaction”?

Ms. Soo Wong: “Redaction”; sorry.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you. Any comments on government motion 19? Mr. McDonell.

Mr. Jim McDonell: Yes. I guess we get a little nervous about the word “redact” in any government policy—

Mr. Bill Walker: And “whiteout.”

Mr. Jim McDonell: —and “whiteout,” because we’ve seen them be very good at it since I’ve been here, with the removal of information.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any further comments? Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: As a government, we are committed to making sure that all our correctional services policies are publicly available; however, there are exceptional situations where redaction of the policy is required for safety and security reasons. You know that.

Mr. Bill Walker: We know a lot of things.

Mr. Lou Rinaldi: Too much.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): We’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 19? Those opposed? Government motion 19 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 9, as amended, carry? Carried.

We’ll proceed now to the next bloc—schedule 2, section 10, government motion 20: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that section 10 of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Annual publication of data, information and plan

“10(1) The minister shall, at least once per calendar year, publish on a website of the government of Ontario,

“(a) data or other information that includes,

“(i) statistics regarding,

“(A) the operation of correctional institutions and the supervision of individuals under community supervision in the previous calendar year,

“(B) the use of segregation and restrictive confinement in the previous calendar year, and

“(C) any other prescribed topics, and

“(ii) demographic information about individuals under community supervision and inmates in the previous calendar year;

“(b) information regarding the implementation of this act, including,

“(i) the timelines for proclaiming any unproclaimed provisions of this act, and

“(ii) the timelines for reducing the number of correctional institutions prescribed under subsection 57(4), 58(5), 59(4) or 63(9);

“(c) a plan for achieving the timelines set out in subclauses (b)(i) and (ii);

“(d) the status of the implementation of plans under clause (c) in previous years, including what progress was made and what milestones were achieved; and

“(e) any other prescribed content.

“Personal information excluded

“(2) This section does not authorize the disclosure of personal information.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): I need you, Ms. Wong, to read section (d) again.

Ms. Soo Wong: “(d) the status of the implementation of plans made under clause (c) in previous years, including what progress was made and what milestones were achieved; and”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you. Comments on government motion 20? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. All in favour of government motion 20? Those opposed? Government motion 20 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 10, as amended, carry? Carried.

We’ll proceed now to the next bloc, which is schedule 2, section 11, government motion 21: Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I move that section 11 of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Review of act

“11(1) The minister shall conduct a comprehensive review of this act on or before every fifth anniversary of the day this section comes into force.

“Subject matter

“(2) The review must include consideration of

“(a) any unproclaimed provisions of this act; and

“(b) the prescription of correctional institutions under subsections 57(4), 58(5), 59(4) and 63(9).

“Public consultation

“(3) In conducting the review, the minister shall, in accordance with the regulations, consult with members of the public, including,

“(a) current inmates;

“(b) former inmates;

“(c) First Nations, Inuit and Métis individuals; and

“(d) members of groups that are disproportionately disadvantaged by or over-represented in the correctional system.

“Report

“(4) The minister shall, in accordance with the regulations, report the results of the review to the public, and the report must include,

“(a) an explanation of why any unproclaimed provisions of this act remain unproclaimed; and

“(b) an explanation of why any correctional institutions prescribed under subsection 57(4), 58(5), 59(4) or 63(9) continue to be so prescribed.”

0940

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 21? Mr. McDonell.

Mr. Jim McDonell: Is there any oversight over this, or is it strictly that we have to take the word of the ministry? Over the last few years, we have seen many things left out of reports, or not written. But is there allowance for the Ombudsman or Auditor General to have a review of the information to make sure it’s all-inclusive?

Ms. Soo Wong: The focus here is requiring the minister to respond to the amendments that right now we are voting on, to undertaking ongoing engagements of certain groups every five years. In my seven years here, Mr. Chair, I’ve never seen a bill have a very definitive time review on a regular basis, in making sure that any unproclaimed sections of the act be brought forth and shared with the public and making sure the minister can explain why those sections are not proclaimed.

The thing is that the Information and Privacy Commissioner has every right to do what he or she does on a regular basis, going forward. The fact of the matter here is that I know the minister, our current minister right now, consults, and I could turn to the staff—she does consult with the Information and Privacy Commissioner on a regular basis on different things. I would say that there are always concerns that those over-marginalized, over-represented in the facility have never been heard or—how would I say this? Making sure their voices are being heard in those regular reviews.

So I’m going to turn to staff: In terms of the minister’s role, she consults with the Information and Privacy Commissioner on a regular basis. Am I correct to say that?

Ms. Marnie Corbold: It’s not really a legal question, but my understanding is that she does.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Mr. McDonell.

Mr. Jim McDonell: I think, as we’ve said, there are major problems with the correctional system’s lack of facilities and lack of staff, and this bill does not address that. We’ve seen reports and news article after news article about just an embarrassment to the Ontario government and the people of Ontario that people could be held up in solitary confinement for months on end. The minister gets reports on it—many times ignored. We see correctional officers come through here and talk about the lack of training. One of the officers here, for 25 years, had never received mental health training.

This is not going to fix it in this bill. The organization is just a mess. The privacy commissioner—releasing personal information is important, but it does not fix the problem.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: I beg to differ to the member’s comments, okay? This is the first time that a government recognized mental health. As a former registered nurse, I have always known that mental health was part of the comprehensive health of any individual. Okay? So let’s call it the way it is. For the first time, a government—previous governments have never recognized mental health, whether it’s mental health in our schools or mental health in our correctional facilities.

For the first time, this government is recognizing it. We just passed motion 20. It talks about an annual review. What’s the purpose of the information? That data holds everybody accountable. Data is there for a purpose, my friend, okay? I know, where I come from, with data in the health care sector, it has improved practice, and more importantly it’s making sure of evidence-based practice. You don’t have data for the sake of reporting. You have data to improve care and improve services and making sure there is safety. So I beg to differ.

I want to say to all three parties that this is the first time in my seven years, again, for the record, that I’ve seen a government bill that has defined that, every five years, there will be a comprehensive look at the legislation on all the stuff we have passed, and making sure that the minister has to defend why any unproclaimed act wasn’t proclaimed. We haven’t seen that before. So thank you.

Mr. Jim McDonell: I guess that’s our complaint: Where have you been for 15 years? Mental health has been front and centre. Until we came out with our platform last fall and we added mental health, you guys were nowhere on the scene. Some 90% of the inmates in Kenora have a mental health issue. This is not something that just came up.

Yes, it’s wonderful that in the last days of your government, you’re going to rush out and challenge, that you’re the first people to jump on this. People have been telling you for years, and you’ve ignored them. You’re even going back here, and the amendments—it’s just like somebody identified that you missed it, and you’re throwing in 113 amendments. Where did this bill come from?

To say that you’re the first in with mental health—you’ve been on this file for 15 years. It’s an embarrassment. Half of the deputants who came in here talked about problems with mental health. These were not secrets. Where have you been? News report after news report—

Interjection.

Mr. Jim McDonell: Well, you have to start addressing it. You have to start putting money into it. Yes, you included it in this year’s budget for next year. But after 15 years, and Bell Let’s Talk and all the programs—mental health has not been a secret. To say now that you’re jumping in, and trying to get points for it—it’s a little late in the system.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any further comments, Mr. McDonell? Anyone? All right. We’ll proceed now to the vote on government motion 21. Those in favour of government motion 21? Those opposed? Government motion 21 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 11, as amended, carry? Carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 12 carry? Carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 13 carry? Carried.

We’ll proceed now to the next block, which is schedule 2, subsection 14(4), government motion 22.

Mr. Bob Delaney: I move that subsection 14(4) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Required training

“(4) Independent regional chairs and members of the review roster shall not exercise any of their powers or duties under this act unless they have,

“(a) completed the prescribed training with respect to human rights and systemic racism;

“(b) completed training that promotes recognition of and respect for,

“(i) the diverse, multiracial and multicultural character of Ontario society, and

“(ii) the rights and cultures of First Nation, Inuit and Métis peoples; and

“(c) completed training respecting administrative law, including training respecting procedural fairness; and

“(d) completed any other prescribed training.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any comments on government motion 22? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 22? Those opposed? Government motion 22 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 14, as amended, carry? Carried.

We’ll now proceed to the next block, which is schedule 2, section 14.1, government motion 23.

Mr. Bob Delaney: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Protection from personal liability

“14.1(1) No action or other proceeding may be instituted against an independent regional chair, a disciplinary hearings officer or a member of an independent review panel for any act done in good faith in the exercise or intended execution of the person’s duty or for any alleged neglect or default in the execution in good faith of the person’s duty.

“Crown liability

“(2) Despite subsections 5(2) and (4) of the Proceedings Against the Crown Act, subsection (1) does not relieve the crown of liability in respect of a tort committed by a person mentioned in subsection (1) to which the crown would otherwise be subject.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Are there further comments on government motion 23? If there are no comments on government motion 23, those in favour of government motion 23? Those opposed? Government motion 23 carries.

We’ll now proceed to schedule 2, section 14.2, government motion 24: Mr. Delaney.

0950

Mr. Bob Delaney: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Protection from giving testimony

“14.2 An independent regional chair, a disciplinary hearings officer or a member of an independent review panel shall not be required to give testimony in any proceeding with respect to information obtained by him or her in the course of exercising a power or performing a duty under this or another act.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Further comments on government motion 24? Mr. Walker.

Mr. Bill Walker: Could you just provide the rationale for that?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: Just for the question: This is actually a technical amendment to ensure consistency with other statutes related to the tribunal. More importantly, the amendment would provide the independent regional chair, a disciplinary hearings officer or a member of the independent review panel protection from giving testimony.

Mr. Bill Walker: Thank you, but what’s the rationale for not giving testimony if you’re actually having concerns and challenges, particularly in a court situation? I know that there’s a lot going on in that area on your side of the House, but can you share why we would not have that?

Ms. Soo Wong: I’m going to turn to the staff. They’re going to give you some operation issues.

Ms. Marnie Corbold: This is a standard provision for tribunals: that if they are hearing matters in the hearing context, they can’t, then, be called to give evidence about what they heard in the course of that hearing process. It’s a very standard provision.

Mr. Bill Walker: Okay. Thank you.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Are there any further comments on government motion 24? If not, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 24? Those opposed? Government motion 24 carries.

We’ll now proceed to schedule 2, subsection 15(4), government motion 25: Mr. Delaney.

Mr. Bob Delaney: I move that subsection 15(4) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Required training

“(4) A member of a community advisory board shall not exercise any of their powers or duties as member of a community advisory board unless they have,

“(a) completed the prescribed training with respect to human rights and systemic racism;

“(b) completed training that promotes recognition of and respect for,

“(i) the diverse, multiracial and multicultural character of Ontario society, and

“(ii) the rights and cultures of First Nation, Inuit and Métis peoples; and

“(c) completed any other prescribed training.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any further comments on government motion 25? Mr. Walker.

Mr. Bill Walker: It seems there is a lot of focus on training, which, obviously, we would support. Do you have defined limitations as far as budget, to be able to make sure that can happen? Do you have a time frame, and you have some deliverables that will be tracked and monitored to ensure that that happens? Because if every single person is going to get—and I’m not certain how well it’s defined, what that training shall be comprised of.

I would like to understand just what the magnitude of that is on the budget, because what we’re hearing from people on the floor, who are actually in the institutions, is that there’s not enough resourcing. There’s not enough funding given to them. They’re getting layered with more reporting, and now you’re going to spend a whole bunch of money? I’m not, again, averse to training; that’s obviously a good thing. But have you defined it? Is it within the budget anywhere, how much of that will be allotted for that specific training?

Ms. Soo Wong: We’ll turn to the staff, because this is really an operation question. I’m going to turn to the staff—if there are any comments about the budget.

Ms. Marnie Corbold: I don’t think this is a legal question. I don’t know if others are able to speak to it.

Mr. Bill Walker: Is it within my purview, Mr. Chair, to ask that someone from the government provide that before we finish this session?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): I believe that’s being attempted now.

Could you introduce yourself, please?

Mr. Robert Bonofiglio: It’s Robert Bonofiglio from the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services.

This training is specific to the community advisory boards. These are the boards associated with each institution that provide recommendations to the minister and the ministry on the operations of those specific institutions. The training has not yet been developed. More work is needed with all of our partners in terms of developing the training, but it’s specific—

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Sorry. Could you just introduce yourself one more time with a clear last name and the designation?

Mr. Robert Bonofiglio: It’s Robert Bonofiglio. It’s B-O-N-O-F-I-G-L-I-O. I’m the manager of policy at the ministry.

The training is specific to the community advisory boards and will be developed over time through engagement with our partners, including our First Nation, Métis and Inuit partners. This is not specific to front-line staff. It’s specifically for the community advisory boards.

Mr. Bill Walker: I fully understand, and thank you very much for that point of clarification.

I guess my concern, again, is that you’re bringing out legislation, and you don’t have training in place. My question is really specific to: How much has been allotted to ensure that training can be in place? Because one of the concerns we keep hearing with much of the legislation is, “We’re going to do it through regulation; we’re going to do it later.” And you’re coming out with things that aren’t defined. Much of this reform is left to future regulation. We cannot support a reform of corrections which fails to define many of its provisions, such as an independent review panel, the meaning of “serious misconduct,” new minimum living conditions, new security classification for inmates and the new internal complaints process.

Now we have training—which I get and I fully am supportive. But it’s interesting to me—and it’s not anything to you—that a government is bringing out legislation that says, “You have to have mandatory training,” which you haven’t developed and there are no parameters. One of the concerns we have is that we keep seeing cost overruns and we keep seeing huge expenses being incurred. This, again, is going to be something that if you’re going to do it, I would have thought that there would be a budgetary line item that said, “We’re going to do this and there’s going to be a defined timeline of when we’ll have this.”

It’s our job as opposition to hold the government to account when they come out with legislation like this. It’s not described and it’s not defined. So I find it very interesting that we can’t know how much it’s going to cost to do this and when it will be done.

Mr. Robert Bonofiglio: We already do provide training for our community advisory board members. We’re just enshrining the requirements for training in the legislation. Before we get too far ahead of ourselves, we do feel that we need to consult with our partners on what this training should entail. That work will be done following passage of the legislation. Again, we do provide the training already.

Mr. Bill Walker: But how do you provide the training if you said you don’t even have it defined?

Mr. Robert Bonofiglio: There is existing training. These new requirements will be in legislation, so we will be developing a new training program for our community advisory board members.

Mr. Bill Walker: Is there anything that prohibits the community advisory person from beginning their duties if this training is not in place?

Mr. Robert Bonofiglio: I’m not sure how it works currently, but going forward, with the legislation, they will need to be trained before they can become community advisory board members.

Mr. Bill Walker: Again, I get back to: If that was going to take you six months or eight months or a year to develop, does that mean everything gets held up because those people aren’t able to do their job?

Mr. Robert Bonofiglio: No, the existing arrangement will continue until the legislation is proclaimed into force. That will give us time to develop the training and ensure that the community advisory board members are trained before they begin their duties.

Mr. Bill Walker: Mr. Chair, it would be my suggestion that it would be incumbent upon the government of the day to set some timelines to ensure that the public feels comfortable that that is going to be done in a timely manner and it’s going to be done in a process that’s actually going to respect the advisory committee members’ ability to do their job.

Putting regulations in, again, that are not enforceable and putting yourself in non-compliance—it’s, again, what our critic has been telling us. There are 113 amendments to your own bill, and yet something as fundamental as training isn’t defined as to when that process will be done and how many dollars will be spent to do that. I think those are pretty standard questions that the public expects us to be asking.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: Mr. Chair, in the 2018 budget, if you look, there is a substantial increase and investment in the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services. That investment will be addressing some of these concerns that the member opposite is asking for in terms of investment in corrections, in terms of training—we know, not just for this particular board, but we have to provide training even to front-line officers, as you know.

The 2018 budget, for the first time, has a significant increase in terms of MCSCS. I just wanted to put that on the record.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Mr. Walker.

Mr. Bill Walker: It only then reinforces my concern that you are putting a significant investment in the budget when you can’t define when the training is going to be completed or how much it’s going to cost. If you are going to go to that length and you are going to try to suggest to us that it’s that important—and again, we’re talking on behalf of the many staff who have met with us, saying, “There’s not a lot of increase to the front-line staffing”—here’s a lot of money that is significant, you’re saying, but you can’t define when it will happen or how much it will cost.

Ms. Soo Wong: Mr. Chair, this particular motion deals specifically—not with the correctional officers or the parole officers. This deals specifically with the community advisory board. That’s what he has stated. This has nothing to do with correctional officers. This has nothing to do with parole officers. This is a board that will be supporting and working with the minister.

This is no different than when we passed legislation recently dealing with condominiums. All condominium boards now have to be trained, right?

It was staggered in terms of implementation that we’re phasing in to allow that training. I heard that from the staff. But what is described here is making sure that training must include diversity and a multiracial and multicultural piece and reflect a diverse Ontario. This is what I’m saying: that no training should be just willy-nilly—“Just go home and read a book.” It has to be very clearly reflective of Ontario.

1000

Mr. Bill Walker: I respectfully understand all of that. What I’m suggesting to you is that it’s very interesting, particularly when you use the words “significant investment,” that you wouldn’t have taken the time as a government to define that and have a schedule that says, “It will be done by,” and, “We will spend this much money on it.” Then the people who are actually applying for these advisory positions would feel much more comfortable about what they’re walking into and what they’re going to be provided. I think it’s incumbent upon you to provide that specific training quickly and timely, particularly when they’re sitting in an advisory capacity, to be able to help the people who are in need.

Ms. Soo Wong: This is my last comment, Mr. Chair. The fact that in the previous motion we just approved the annual data collection and reporting—there is, every five years, reporting by the minister. The previous motion we just passed in this committee clearly shows that there is a reporting mechanism, there is an expectation of the minister and her or his ministry to complete what is being asked of them.

Mr. Bill Walker: Chair, I’m trying to draw the parallel. I’m the long-term-care, seniors and accessibility critic. The government of the day came out and said, “We’re going to redevelop 30,000 beds.” They’ve had 15 years to do it, and they’re at 30%. Again, in estimates for two years I’ve been asking, “Where was the plan, when were you going to do it and what were the costs going to be?” None of that is there.

I’m just showing a bit of a track record, that yet again, coming out with legislation, 113 amendments to your own bill, and you can’t define to me something as significant and important as training, when it will be done and how much it’s going to cost. I think those are pretty fundamental questions. I’m not here to belabour it and argue with you. I’m just making a point that I find it very interesting that you’ve done a bill with 113 amendments and you’re saying that training is absolutely critical but you can’t tell me—is that going to be developed in six months? Is it going to be two and a half years to do this consultation process? And again, how much is it going to cost?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Are there any further comments? Mr. McDonell.

Mr. Jim McDonell: Yes. My concern is on two things. One is that you talk about some important issues—human rights—but you’re not talking about any operational training. The other thing is, you’re saying that the advisory board can’t function until it gets this training. When this bill receives royal assent, these rules come into play. I’m just concerned that this could take a while. You’ve got an advisory board there in name only and unable to fulfill their roles.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any further comments? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 25? Those opposed? Government motion 25 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 15, as amended, carry? Carried.

With the will of the committee, we’ll consider the next seven sections en bloc, as we’ve received no amendments to date. They are schedule 2, sections 16 to 22, inclusive. Shall they carry? Carried.

We’ll now proceed to schedule 2, section 23, government motion 26: Mr. Delaney.

Mr. Bob Delaney: I move that section 23 of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“First Nations, Inuit and Métis Individuals

“First Nations, Inuit and Métis Advisory Committee

“23(1) The Lieutenant Governor in Council shall establish a First Nations, Inuit and Métis Advisory Committee.

“Members

“(2) The Lieutenant Governor in Council shall appoint the members of the committee, who must be First Nations, Inuit or Métis individuals with knowledge of or experience with the justice system.

“Function

“(3) The committee shall provide advice to,

“(a) the minister, regarding the provision of correctional services to First Nations, Inuit or Métis individuals under community supervision and inmates; and

“(b) the prescribed person, regarding other matters affecting First Nations, Inuit or Métis individuals in the justice system.

“Meetings

“(4) The committee shall meet at the prescribed frequency.

“Engagement

“(5) The committee shall engage regularly with First Nations, Inuit and Métis communities and other appropriate persons or organizations with knowledge of First Nations, Inuit and Métis matters.

“Minister’s response

“(6) The minister shall acknowledge and respond to the advice that the committee provides to the minister.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Are there any further comments on government motion 26? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 26? Those opposed? Government motion 26 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 23, as amended, carry? Carried.

Schedule 2, clause 24(b), government motion 27: Mr. Delaney.

Mr. Bob Delaney: I move that the English version of clause 24(b) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “person’s” and substituting “individual’s”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 27? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 27? Those opposed? Government motion 27 carries.

Schedule 2, section 24, as amended: Shall it carry? Carried.

The next block, schedule 2, subsection 25(1), government motion 28: Mr. Delaney.

Mr. Bob Delaney: I move that subsection 25(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “to First Nations, Inuit or Métis inmates” at the end and substituting “to inmates”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 28? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 28? Those opposed? Government motion 28 carries.

Subsection 25(2), schedule 2, government motion 29: Mr. Delaney.

Mr. Bob Delaney: I move that the French version of subsection 25(2) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “et dont les services ont été demandés par un détenu” after “métis”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Since there are no comments, we’ll proceed—Mr. Walker?

Mr. Bill Walker: Can you please translate?

Mr. Bob Delaney: Okay. I’d like to defer to ministry staff for the precise translation.

Ms. Marnie Corbold: I’m afraid I cannot do a precise translation.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): It’s “and of the services demanded or asked for by the detainee person” after the word “métis.”

“Et dont les services ont été demandés”—of the services which have been asked for or demanded by the detained person—“détenu”—after the word “métis.”

Mr. Bill Walker: Thank you, Chair.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): De rien.

Any further comments on government motion 29? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 29? Those opposed? Government motion 29 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 25, as amended, carry? Carried.

We’ll proceed now to the new schedule 2, section 25.1, government motion 30: Mr. Delaney.

Mr. Bob Delaney: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“First Nations, Inuit and Métis healing

“25.1(1) Every superintendent shall make appropriate traditional First Nations, Inuit and Métis healing services and supports available to inmates.

“Not available

“(2) If an inmate requests services and supports referred to in subsection (1) that are not available, the superintendent shall take reasonable steps to find a resource to facilitate the services and supports.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 30? Mr. Walker.

Mr. Bill Walker: Are there any parameters around this? Again, I’m back to thinking from a budget perspective. Are you having a budgetary line that’s in there to maybe be able to support this, so that we know what that may in fact cost—or the ability to be able to provide that?

Ms. Soo Wong: Can I turn to the staff to answer this question?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Yes, certainly.

Ms. Marnie Corbold: Again, it’s not a legal issue. I don’t know if anyone else can assist.

Mr. Robert Bonofiglio: This is another one where we need further engagement with our First Nation, Inuit and Métis partners to determine the healing services that we will deliver in our institutions. Obviously, we already provide access to elders and to native inmate liaison officers. So a lot of this is happening already. We’re just enshrining the fact that we will be providing healing services, in legislation. We’re already doing a lot of this. Our intention is to do more, but we would obviously need to consult with our partners before proceeding any further with this one.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): I’m sorry. Once again, you need to introduce yourself each time.

Mr. Robert Bonofiglio: Oh, sorry. It’s Robert Bonofiglio, from the ministry.

Mr. Bill Walker: Mr. Chair, part of my asking this is that when I first came through the doors as a legislator, my understanding of legislation was that it’s supposed to be clear and unambiguous. When we see things like this, it becomes this: What’s the time factor? So that person who needs whatever that service may be, I think, is entitled to have some kind of a definition of how long that may take.

I think, as the taxpayer, particularly—because there has been significant overspending by this government—we need to understand that there are some parameters, so that we understand: Is this going to be potentially a $50,000 cost, or could it be a $5-million cost? I’m not saying that it should or shouldn’t be; we just need to be able to define that.

Those types of things are what I am being asked, certainly, by the constituents in Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound, and across the province. Our job is to hold the government to account and say, “Define that.” When you’re bringing this in, my expectation—it’s not to you as a staff member; it’s the government that I’m focusing my thoughts at—is that you need to be able to define clearly what that expectation should be. Whether it’s the person needing the service or the people defending or the people in the institution, they need to understand.

To my good colleague across the floor: She said that this has nothing to do with the front-line officers, but that’s what we hear from them: All this money over here gets spent, but they don’t get the increases to be able to be staffed to the extent that they believe. They feel that they’re put in unsafe situations and they’re put in situations where they don’t have the resourcing.

This is why I ask this. If this becomes a big, big budget item—and, again, I’m not saying that it shouldn’t be or couldn’t be—it does have an impact over here in the operational. Because if that envelope is not getting more money because this is—and I really have a struggle with the timeline, because if this takes a long period of time to get done and the due-course process is held up because of it, then I think that’s our job to hold it to account and say, “It has to be done within an XYZ time frame.” I would have hoped that, in the consultation, that would have been addressed.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: With regard to the timeline, we know that, for the inmates in our provisional facilities, it’s two years less a day. Let’s call it the way it is. We would not know, for every inmate, what their healing service needs are, if they’re Métis or indigenous. Like the health care plan, like any request, it has to be very individualized and it has to be respectfully consulted, like the staff just talked about. When you provide services, it varies: a female inmate versus a male inmate; different age groups; different needs.

I hear the concern from the member opposite, Mr. Chair. These are very specific operations that you are asking us about. As a parliamentarian, I am concerned about them in terms of budget, in terms of making sure that we meet the budget line. I’m also very mindful that every inmate is in our facilities for two years less a day. In those less than two years, it is my expectation, as it is yours, to make sure that those very specific culturally required services, like a healing service or whatever health services or spiritual needs they need—they need to be respected or listened to.

In this case, asking for specific timelines in terms of how much it costs—I couldn’t tell you. The staff has to consult, because we may have to bring in an elder. Here in the city of Toronto—I have several correctional facilities in the city of Toronto; I’m just going to use them as an example—they may come from another area of northern Ontario and they have asked for a specific elder to be brought in from up north. I’ve seen it, because I’ve visited the Toronto East Detention Centre. So my question has to be asked.

You are concerned; so am I. I’m not diminishing your questioning. But the fact that you asked for specific lines—how much it is; when it is implemented. I know that these inmates are here two years less a day. It is my expectation—in this motion we just passed, there is annual reporting of data and demographics and then making sure every five years. I don’t know what more specifics you are looking for.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Mr. McDonell.

Mr. Jim McDonell: I certainly have some concerns. It doesn’t define what you’re talking about as far as appropriate healing services and supports. We see and hear about people every day with approved drugs who can’t get them approved if they’re different. There’s a case of someone being prescribed a 20-milligram drug and the doctor wanting to provide 30 milligrams, and they couldn’t because they wouldn’t approve the 10 milligrams, only the two 20 milligrams. It’s going to take months and months to get an answer on a basic health issue that is affecting somebody’s livelihood who’s not an inmate.

Here, you’re not even defining it. Does somebody have to apply for this? Where are the conditions or some type of definition of what services you’re providing? Because we see that, on basic medication, it’s a mess. On this great pharmacare-plus, people are waiting and waiting for answers and not being paid. Because there’s no definition, it’s got to be sitting in a bureaucrat’s office for months. By the time they get an answer, they will be out, if it’s two years less a day.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): I’m going to recess now until 2 p.m. As you know, we’re back here, and time allocation kicks in at 4 p.m. Thanks, colleagues.

The committee recessed from 1014 to 1400.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you, colleagues. We reconvene clause-by-clause consideration of Bill 6, An Act to enact the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Act, 2018 and the Correctional Services and Reintegration Act, 2018, to make related amendments to other Acts, to repeal an Act and to revoke a regulation.

We have government motion 30 before us. We’ll proceed to the vote, unless there are any issues.

By the way, I’d also just respectfully remind colleagues that you don’t need to read punctuation—commas, brackets etc.—unless you feel obligated, to ensure accuracy.

Government motion 30 is on the floor. Are there any further comments on government motion 30? Seeing none, we’ll now proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 30? Those opposed? Government motion 30 carries.

The next three sections are without amendment, so we’ll consider them, with the will of the committee, en bloc. Therefore, shall schedule 2, sections 26, 27, 28, carry? Carried.

We’ll move to the next section, which is schedule 2, section 28.1, government motion 31: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Powers of Ombudsman

“28.1 A contractor is deemed to be a public sector body for the purpose of sections 19 and 25 of the Ombudsman Act.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 31? Opposed? Government motion 31 carries.

We will consider, with the will of the committee, the next four sections. They did not receive amendments to date. They are: 29, 30, 31, 32. Shall those sections, so named, carry—of schedule 2? Carried.

We’ll now consider schedule 2, section 33, government motion 32: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 33(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “and” at the end of clause (h) and by adding the following clause:

“(h.1) the availability of the health care service team and the mental health care service team, and the process for accessing a member of the health care service team or a member of the mental health care service team; and”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you for your enunciation, Mr. Potts.

Any comments on government motion 32? Seeing none, those in favour of government motion 32? Those opposed? Government motion 32 is carried.

Government motion 33, schedule 2, subsection 33(2): Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 33(2) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Accessibility of information

“(2) If the inmate has low literacy or has a disability, the information referred to in subsection (1) must be provided in an accessible format that takes their low literacy or disability into account in accordance with the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 and the regulations made under that act.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 33? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 33? Those opposed? Government motion 33 is carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 33, as amended, carry? Carried.

Shall schedule 3, section 34 carry? Carried.

Next section, which is schedule 2, subsection 35(2), government motion 34: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that section 35 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection:

“Prohibition on certain transfers

“(2) An inmate detained in a correctional institution that is not prescribed under subsection 57(4), 58(5), 59(4) or 63(9) shall not be transferred to a correctional institution that is prescribed under one or more of those subsections primarily because of the fact that the institution is prescribed.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 34? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 34? Those opposed? Government motion 34 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 35, as amended, carry? Carried.

With the will of the committee, we’ll consider the next three sections en bloc. They are schedule 2, sections 36, 37 and 38. Shall they carry? Carried.

The next section is schedule 2, subsection 39(1), government motion 35: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 39(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “custody at” before “the correctional institution” in the portion before paragraph 1.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 35? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 35? Those opposed? Government motion 35 carries.

Government motion 36: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 39(3) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Release on weekend or holiday

“(3) If an inmate would be released from custody on a weekend or holiday, the superintendent shall consider whether to grant a temporary absence to the inmate under section 89 prior to the weekend or holiday for a rehabilitation or reintegration, medical or humanitarian reason.

“Same, factors

“(4) In considering whether to grant the temporary absence referred to in subsection (3), the superintendent shall consider whether the temporary absence would assist the inmate’s reintegration by facilitating access to transportation, lodging or any other service necessary for the inmate’s reintegration.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 36? Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: Oh, not comments. I’m getting ahead—

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Okay. Those in favour of government motion 36? Those opposed? Government motion 36 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 39, as amended, carry? carried.

The next item is schedule 2, section 39.1, government motion 37: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Assistance upon release from custody—court

“39.1(1) The minister shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that an inmate who is transferred to court from a correctional institution and then released from custody at court has reasonable and timely access to,

“(a) such prescribed essential items of his or her personal property in the care and control of the correctional institution as he or she has need of upon release;

“(b) if the inmate has need of them,

“(i) clothing suitable to the season, and

“(ii) appropriate medication prescribed by a health professional; and

“(c) other prescribed items.

“When proactive efforts required

“(2) Making the items available for collection at the correctional institution is insufficient if, in the circumstances of the inmate, it would be unreasonable to expect him or her to return to the correctional institution on his or her own to collect the items.

“Other entities’ duties

“(3) Such other members of the executive council as may be prescribed, and such other entities as may be prescribed, shall also make reasonable efforts to ensure the reasonable and timely access if making the items available for collection at the correctional institution is insufficient.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 37? Seeing none, I’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 37? Those opposed? Government motion 37, carried.

With the will of the committee, we’ll consider the next nine sections en bloc, as we have not received any amendments to date. They are schedule 2, sections 42 to 48, inclusive. Shall those sections so named carry? Carried.

We now proceed to schedule 2, subsection 49(1), government motion 38: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 49(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Health care services

“(1) Every inmate shall be provided with access to health care services and to the health care service team and the mental health care service team in a manner that responds to their health needs and promotes their well-being, including,

“(a) the treatment of disease or injury;

“(b) health promotion;

“(c) disease prevention;

“(d) dental care;

“(e) vision care;

“(f) hearing care;

“(g) mental health and addictions care;

“(h) medication prescribed by a health professional;

“(i) traditional First Nations, Inuit and Métis healing and medicines; and

“(j) any other prescribed health care services.”

Am I allowed to amend this, to take the “s” out of First Nations in the amendment?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): No, Mr. Potts. Regrettably, you cannot. We have a hard deadline because of the time allocation. That’s my understanding. What was your request?

Mr. Arthur Potts: We’ve been taking the “s” off of First Nations throughout. Am I not right?

Interjection: You’re right. It’s a typo.

Mr. Arthur Potts: It’s a typo?

1410

Interjection.

Mr. Arthur Potts: It’s not a typo. I apologize—no need.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Well, first of all, yes, clearly it’s not a typo. There are many First Nations. You don’t want to start a battle on that one.

In any case, government motion 38: any other comments? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote—in plural, with an “s.” Those in favour of government motion 38? Those opposed? Government motion 38 carries.

The next item is government motion 39: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 49(3) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “superintendent” in the portion before paragraph 1 and substituting “minister”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any comments before we proceed to the vote? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 39? Those opposed? The government motion is carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 49, as amended, carry? Carried.

We will consider the next five sections en bloc, with the will of the committee. They are schedule 2, sections 50 to 54, en bloc. Shall they carry? Carried.

We will now consider the next item, which is schedule 2, subsection 55(4), government motion 40: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 55(4) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Certain visitors

“(4) In addition to the visits under subsection (1), every inmate shall be provided the opportunity to receive an unlimited number of visits during reasonable hours from,

“(a) a probation and parole officer under this act;

“(b) a probation officer under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017;

“(c) a parole supervisor under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (Canada);

“(d) a volunteer providing programs or services;

“(e) a diplomatic or consular official;

“(f) a lawyer or articling student;

“(g) a recognized religious or spiritual leader, including a First Nations, Inuit or Métis elder or spiritual advisor; or

“(h) another prescribed person.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 40? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 40? Those opposed? Government motion carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 55, as amended, carry? Carried.

The next item in this section has no amendments; therefore, shall schedule 2, section 56 carry? Carried.

The next item is schedule 2, clause 57(3)(c), government motion 41: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that clause 57(3)(c) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“(c) has a mental disorder, or an intellectual disability, that meets the prescribed conditions;”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 41? Those in favour of government motion 41? Those opposed? Government motion 41 carries.

Schedule 2, clause 57(3)(e), government motion 42: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that clause 57(3)(e) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“(e) has a mobility impairment that meets the prescribed conditions.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 42? Mr. McDonell.

Mr. Jim McDonell: What’s the change for? Where will these things be defined if not in regulations?

Ms. Soo Wong: I didn’t hear the question, sorry.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Sorry, could you repeat—

Mr. Jim McDonell: Where will they be defined?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: The intent of this amendment is to prohibit an individual who has a mobility impairment that meets the prescribed conditions from being placed in a condition that constitutes segregation. We are prohibiting segregation for our most vulnerable inmates, including those with mobility impairments, that meet the prescribed conditions. That’s what we’re trying to do.

Mr. Arthur Potts: They’re prescribed in regulations. That’s the answer.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any further comments? All right. Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote on government motion 42. Those in favour? Those opposed? Government motion 42 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 57, as amended, carry? Carried.

We’ll consider the next two en bloc, with the will of the committee. Therefore, shall schedule 2, sections 58 and 59 carry? Carried.

The next item is schedule 2, subsection 60(2.1), government motion 43: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that section 60 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection:

“Same

“(2.1) For the purpose of subsection (2), all other options includes the transfer of the inmate to another correctional institution that satisfies the criteria set out in section 35.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 43? Those opposed? Government motion 43 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 60, as amended, carry? Carried.

We will consider the next two en bloc. Therefore, shall schedule 2, sections 61 and 62 carry? Carried.

The next item is schedule 2, subsection 63(1), government motion 44: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 63(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Health care in segregation

“(1) When an inmate is being held in conditions that constitute segregation, the superintendent and a member of the health care service team shall visit the inmate on a daily basis and the member of the health care service team shall assess the inmate whenever the member considers it to be necessary.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 44? If none, we will proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 44? Those opposed? Motion 44 carries.

Government motion 45, subsection 63(3): Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 63(3) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Minimum visits

“(3) Even if a referral has not been made under subsection (2), the superintendent shall ensure that any inmate held in conditions that constitute segregation is visited by a member of the mental health care service team to review and assess the inmate’s mental health at least once every five days.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Government motion 45: Comments? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 45? Those opposed? Motion 45 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 63, as amended, carry? Carried.

Next item: no amendments received to date. Therefore, shall schedule 2, section 64 carry? Carried.

Next item is schedule 2, subsection 65(4.1), government motion 46: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that section 65 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection:

“Referral every subsequent five days, prescribed correctional institution

“(4.1) If the inmate is held in conditions of confinement that constitute segregation for non-disciplinary reasons for 15 consecutive days in a correctional institution that is prescribed under subsection 58(5), the superintendent shall, on that 15th day and every five days thereafter during the period of consecutive days that the inmate remains held in such conditions, refer the matter to the independent regional chair to have a review hearing before an independent review panel.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any further comments on government motion 46. Seeing none—Mr. Potts?

Mr. Arthur Potts: No, no.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): No. Therefore, those in favour of government motion 46? Those opposed? Government motion 46 carries.

Schedule 2, subsection 65(4.2), government motion 47: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that section 65 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection:

“Transfers do not constitute break in segregation

“(4.2) For the purposes of this section, a transfer of an inmate who was held in conditions that constitute segregation in one correctional institution to a different correctional institution does not constitute a break in his or her consecutive days of being held in conditions that constitute segregation.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 47? If none, we will proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 47? Those opposed? Government motion 47 carries.

Schedule 2, subsection 65(5), government motion 48: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 65(5) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “subsection (3) or (4)” in the portion before clause (a) and substituting “subsection (3), (4) or (4.1)”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 48? If none, we will proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 48? Those opposed? Government motion 48 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 65, as amended, carry? Carried.

Next item: no amendments. Shall schedule 2, section 66 carry? Carried.

Next item is schedule 2, subsection 67(1), government motion 49: Mr. Potts.

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: We switched. We’re just seeing if you’re awake.

I move that subsection 67(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Review of hearings

“(1) If a case is referred to an independent regional chair under section 65 or 66, the chair shall, in accordance with the regulations, convene an independent review panel composed of members listed on the review roster to initiate a review hearing of the matter no later than five days after the case is referred or such earlier time as may be prescribed.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Ms. Sandals, I need you to read “Review hearings” again. The phrase “Review hearings.”

Mrs. Liz Sandals: The phrase? “Initiate a review hearing”?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Just say the words “Review hearings.”

Mrs. Liz Sandals: “Review hearings.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): I do thank you. Any further comments on government motion 49? Seeing none, we will proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 49? Those opposed? Government motion 49 carries.

Government motion 50, subsection 67(3): Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subsection 67(3) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “hold” and substituting “initiate”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments on government motion 50, we will proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 50? Those opposed? Government motion 50 carries.

Schedule 2, subsections 67(5.1) and (5.2), government motion 51: Ms. Sandals.

1420

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that section 67 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsections:

“Public hearing

“(5.1) The review hearing shall be open to the public, subject to any prescribed limits.

“Telephone and video conferences

“(5.2) A review hearing is deemed to be open to the public if the public can access it by,

“(a) telephone;

“(b) videoconference; or

“(c) a prescribed method.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any further comments on government motion 51? We’ll proceed, then, to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 51? Those opposed? Government motion 51 carries.

The next item: schedule 2, subsections 67(9.1) and (9.2), government motion 52: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that section 67 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsections:

“Viewing of a correctional institution

“(9.1) If, in the opinion of the panel, a viewing of all or part of a correctional institution is necessary to determine the issues before the panel, the panel shall inform the superintendent of the correctional institution.

“Same, superintendent

“(9.2) The superintendent shall facilitate the viewing in accordance with such requirements as may be prescribed and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Further comments on government motion 52? If not, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 52? Those opposed? Government motion 52 carries.

Schedule 2, the section that we’re at, clause 67(11)(a), government motion 53: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that clause 67(11)(a) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“(a) provide the inmate and the superintendent with written reasons for the decision as soon as possible, but no later than four days after the day of the decision and, at the inmate’s request, shall provide the inmate with a reasonable number of copies; and”

Nothing else follows.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any comment on government motion 53? If there are no further comments, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 53? Those opposed? Government motion 53, carried.

The next item: subsection 67(17), government motion 54: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subsection 67(17) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Superintendent’s compliance

“(17) The superintendent shall comply with a decision made under this section, including the timelines set out in the decision, as soon as possible after receiving notice of the decision, but is not required to comply with any portion of a decision if,

“(a) the superintendent would be required to use force on an inmate who does not intend to comply with the security measures that are necessary to safely implement that portion of the decision; or

“(b) it would require the superintendent to contravene section 57, 58 or 59.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any comments on government motion 54? We’ll now proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 54? Those opposed? Government motion 54 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 67, as amended, carry? Carried.

The next item: schedule 2, section 67.1, government motion 55: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Review of restrictive confinement

“67.1 If an inmate is held in conditions of confinement that constitute restrictive confinement that lasts more than 21.5 hours a day for five consecutive days, an independent review panel shall,

“(a) be convened by the prescribed process; and

“(b) review the matter in the prescribed manner.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Further comments on government motion 55? If none, we’ll proceed, then, to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 55? Those opposed? Government motion 55 carries.

The next item: schedule 2, section 67.2, government motion 56: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Communicable Diseases Orders

“Communicable diseases orders

“67.2 In the event of a conflict between this part and an order made under part IV of the Health Protection and Promotion Act, the order made under part IV of the Health Protection and Promotion Act prevails.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 56? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 56? Those opposed? Government motion 56 carries.

We’ll consider the next five sections en bloc, with the will of the committee, as we have not received any amendments to date. Therefore, shall schedule 2, sections 68 to 72, inclusive, carry? Carried.

Next item: schedule 2, subsections 73(10) and (11), government motion 57: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subsections 73(10) and (11) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Written reasons

“(10) The disciplinary hearings officer shall,

“(a) prepare written reasons for the decision noting the nature of the allegation, the arguments and explanations presented by the inmate, if any, and the decision, reasons and any disciplinary measure imposed;

“(b) provide the written reasons for the decision to the inmate and the superintendent as soon as possible, but no later than four days after the day of the decision; and

“(c) at the inmate’s request, provide the inmate with a reasonable number of copies.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are any comments on government motion 57? If not, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 57? Those opposed? Government motion 57, carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 73 carry, as amended? Carried.

We’ll consider the next 10 sections, with the will of the committee, en bloc. They are schedule 2, sections 74 to 83, inclusive. Shall they carry? Carried.

We’ll now proceed to the next item, which is schedule 2, section 84, government motion 58: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that section 84 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “every member of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and every judge of a court in Ontario is entitled” and substituting “every member of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, every judge of a court in Ontario and every prescribed person is entitled”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any comments on government motion 58? If not, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 58? Those opposed to government motion 58? Carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 84, as amended, carry? Carried.

Schedule 2, clause 85(1)(a), government motion 59: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that clause 85(1)(a) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “avoid an immediate threat to discipline and order” at the beginning and substituting “enforce discipline and maintain order”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 59? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 59? Those opposed? Government motion 59 carries.

Next item: schedule 2, clause 85(1)(b), government motion 60: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that clause 85(1)(b) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “immediate”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 60? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 60? Those opposed? Government motion 60 carried.

Next item, schedule 2, clause 85(3)(a), government motion 61: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that clause 85(3)(a) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “immediately file” at the beginning of the portion before subclause (i) and substituting “as soon as possible, file”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 61? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 61? Those opposed? Government motion 61 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 85, as amended, carry? Carried.

Next item: schedule 2, subsection 86(2), government motion 62: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subsection 86(2) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Labour, childbirth, etc.

“(2) No instruments of restraint shall be used on an inmate,

“(a) during labour if, in the opinion of a physician, nurse, midwife or prescribed health care practitioner, the use of instruments of restraint during that period would compromise the health of the inmate or the inmate’s baby;

“(b) during childbirth; and

“(c) within 48 hours after giving birth or such longer period after giving birth as a physician, nurse, midwife or prescribed health care practitioner may recommend if, in the opinion of the physician, nurse, midwife or prescribed health care practitioner, the use of instruments of restraint during that period would compromise the health of the inmate or the inmate’s baby.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 62? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 62? Those opposed? Government motion 62 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 86, as amended, carry? Carried.

We’ll consider, with the will of the committee, the next seven sections en bloc, as we have not received any amendments. Therefore, shall schedule 2, sections 87 to 93, inclusive, carry? Carried.

We’ll now proceed to the next item, which is schedule 2, clause 94(3)(f), government motion 63: Ms. Sandals.

1430

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that clause 94(3)(f) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “or medical quarantine” after “concern”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 63? If there are none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Shall government motion 63 carry? Those in favour? Those opposed? Government motion 63 carries.

We’ll now consider schedule 2, subsection 94(4), government motion 64: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subsection 94(4) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “or medical quarantine” after “concern”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 64? If there are none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 64? Those opposed? Government motion 64 carries.

Next item: schedule 2, subsection 94(4.1), government motion 65. Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that section 94 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection:

“Communication with lawyer

“(4.1) Despite clause (3)(c), the superintendent shall do their best to facilitate an inmate’s timely communication with his or her lawyer.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 65? If there are none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 65? Those opposed? Government motion 65 carries.

Next item: schedule 2, subsection 94(6), government motion 66. Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subsection 94(6) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “or need for medical quarantine” after “concern”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments? We’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 66? Those opposed? Government motion 66 carries.

Next item: schedule 2, clause 94(7)(a), government motion 67: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that clause 94(7)(a) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“(a) immediately prepare a written report containing the reasons for the lockdown and other prescribed information and send it to the deputy minister and the inspector general; and”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Ms. Sandals, could you read the last clause again, after “(a)”?

Mrs. Liz Sandals: “(a) immediately prepare a written report containing the reason for the lockdown and other prescribed information and send it to the deputy minister and the inspector general; and”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you. Comments on government motion 67? If there are none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 67? Those opposed? Government motion 67 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 94, as amended, carry? Carried.

There are no amendments on schedule 2, section 95. Shall it carry? Carried.

Next item: schedule 2, subsection 96(1), government motion 68: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subsection 96(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “the minister shall notify” and substituting “the minister shall immediately notify”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 68? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 68? Those opposed? Government motion 68 carries.

Schedule 2, subsections 96(4.1), (4.2), (4.3), government motion 69: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that section 96 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsections:

“Notification that next of kin, etc. may request copy of superintendent’s report

“(4.1) After receiving the report referred to in subsection (3), the minister shall notify the next of kin or other persons specified by the inmate that a copy of the report will be provided to them if they request it.

“Copy of superintendent’s report to next of kin, etc.

“(4.2) The minister shall provide a copy of the report referred to in subsection (3) to the next of kin or other persons specified by the inmate if the next of kin or other person, as the case may be, requests it.

“Personal information in report

“(4.3) Any disclosure of personal information under subsection (4.2) shall be deemed to be in compliance with clause 42(1)(e) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 69? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 69? Government motion 69 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 96, as amended, carry? Carried.

We’ll consider the next seven sections en bloc for the vote. The committee has not received any amendments to date. Therefore, shall schedule 2, sections 97 to 103, inclusive, carry? Carried.

Next item is schedule 2, subsection 104(1), government motion 70: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subsection 104(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “may” and substituting “shall”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 70? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 70? Those opposed? Government motion 70 carries.

The next item is schedule 2, subsection 104(2), government motion 71: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subsection 104(2) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “may” and substituting “shall”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 71? Those opposed? Government motion 71 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 104, as amended, carry? Carried.

With the will of the committee, we’ll consider the next four sections en bloc. Shall schedule 2, sections 105 to 108 carry? Carried.

The next item is schedule 2, section 109, government motion 72: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that the definition of “inspector” in section 109 of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 72? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 72? Those opposed? Government motion 72 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 109, as amended, carry? Carried.

The next item is schedule 2, clause 110(1)(c), government motion 73: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that clause 110(1)(c) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “inspection or an” before “investigation”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 73? There being none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 73? Those opposed? Government motion 73 carries.

Next item is schedule 2, subsections 110(2), (2.1), (2.2), government motion 74: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 110(2) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Appointment of inspectors and investigators

“(2) The chief of investigations may appoint inspectors and investigators to conduct inspections or investigations under subsection (1) on his or her behalf.

“Certificate of appointment

“(2.1) The chief of investigations shall issue to every inspector and investigator a certificate of appointment.

“Limitation on authority

“(2.2) The chief of investigations may, in the inspector and investigator’s certificate of appointment, limit the inspector and investigator’s authority in such manner as the chief of investigations considers necessary or advisable.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Government motion 74: any comments? Otherwise, we’ll be proceeding to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 74? Those opposed? Government motion 74 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 110, as amended, carry? Carried.

With the next item, there are no amendments to date. Shall schedule 2, section 111 carry? Carried.

The next item is schedule 2, clause 112(2)(e), government motion 75: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that clause 112(2)(e) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “segregation and restrictive confinement” and substituting “segregation, restrictive confinement and lockdowns”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 75? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 75? Opposed? Government motion 75 carries.

Next item is schedule 2, subsection 112(3), government motion 76: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 112(3) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “or investigations” after “inspections”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 76? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 76? Those opposed? Government motion 76 is carried.

Next item is schedule 2, subsection 112(6), government motion 77: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 112(6) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “and investigator” after “inspector”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments? We’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 77? Those opposed? Government motion 77 is carried.

Next item is schedule 2, subsection 112(7), government motion 78: Mr. Potts.

1440

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 112(7) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Required training

“(7) The inspector general, and any deputy inspectors general, shall not exercise any of their powers or duties under this act unless they have,

“(a) completed the prescribed training with respect to human rights and systemic racism;

“(b) completed training that promotes recognition of and respect for,

“(i) the diverse, multiracial and multicultural character of Ontario society, and

“(ii) the rights and cultures of First Nation, Inuit and Métis peoples; and

“(c) completed any other prescribed training.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any comments on government motion 78? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 78? Those opposed? Government motion 78 is carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 112, as amended, carry? Carried.

We’ll consider, with the will of the committee, the next three sections en bloc, not having received any amendments. They are schedule 2, sections 113 to 115, inclusive. Shall they carry? Carried.

The next item: schedule 2, section 116, government motion 79: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that section 116 of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Inspector general inspectors and investigators

“116(1) The inspector general may appoint inspectors and investigators to conduct the inspections and investigations referred to in subsection (2).

“Power to inspect and investigate

“(2) The inspector general may cause an inspection or investigation to be conducted by an inspector and investigator for the purpose of ensuring that the correctional services employees are complying with this act, the regulations and the ministry correctional policies and procedures.

“Required training

“(3) An inspector and investigator appointed under this section shall not exercise any of his or her powers or duties under this act unless he or she has,

“(a) completed the prescribed training with respect to human rights and systemic racism;

“(b) completed training that promotes recognition of and respect for,

“(i) the diverse, multiracial and multicultural character of Ontario society, and

“(ii) the rights and cultures of First Nation, Inuit and Métis peoples; and

“(c) completed any other prescribed training.

“Same

“(4) The inspectors and investigators shall not conduct inspections or investigations for the purpose of determining whether a correctional services employee has engaged in conduct that contravenes their prescribed code of conduct.

“Inspector general and deputies are inspectors and investigators

“(5) The inspector general and any deputy inspectors general are, by virtue of their office, inspectors and investigators.

“Certificate of appointment

“(6) The inspector general shall issue to every inspector and investigator a certificate of appointment.

“Limitation on authority

“(7) The inspector general may, in the inspector or investigator’s certificate of appointment, limit the inspector and investigator’s authority in such manner as the inspector general considers necessary or advisable.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Mr. Potts, can I get you to please read item (7)? Just read that again.

Mr. Arthur Potts: “(7) The inspector general may, in the inspector and investigator’s certificate of appointment, limit the inspector and investigator’s authority in such manner as the inspector general considers necessary or advisable.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you.

Comments on government motion 79? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 79? Those opposed? Government motion 79 is carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 116, as amended, carry? Carried.

The next item is schedule 2, subsection 117(1), government motion 80: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 117(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “or investigation” after “inspection”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 80? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 80? Those opposed? Government motion 80 is carried.

Schedule 2, subsection 117(2), government motion 81: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 117(2) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding “or investigation” after “inspection”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 81? We’ll proceed, then, to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 81? Those opposed? Government motion 81, carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 117, as amended, carry? Carried.

The next item: schedule 2, section 118, government motion 82: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that section 118 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “inspector or investigator” wherever it appears in the portion before clause (a) and substituting in each case “inspector and investigator”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 82? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 82? Those opposed? Government motion 82, carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 118, as amended, carry? Carried.

The next item is schedule 2, section 119, government motion 83: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that section 119 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “inspector or investigator” wherever it appears and substituting in each case “inspector and investigator”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 83? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 83? Those opposed? Government motion 83 carries.

The next item: schedule 2, subsection 119(8), government motion 84: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I’m going to withdraw that motion.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you, Mr. Potts.

Shall schedule 2, section 119, as amended, carry? Carried.

The next item: schedule 2, section 120, government motion 85: Mr. Potts

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that section 120 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “inspector or investigator” wherever it appears and substituting in each case “inspector and investigator”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 85? There are none. We’ll proceed, then, to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 85? Those opposed? Government motion 85 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 120, as amended, carry? Carried.

The next item: schedule 2, subsection 121(1), government motion 86: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 121(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “inspector or investigator” in both places it appears and substituting in each case “inspector and investigator”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 86? If there are none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 86? Those opposed? Government motion 86 carries.

The next item: schedule 2, subsection 121(3), government motion 87: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that subsection 121(3) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Code of conduct

“(3) If, in the course of an inspection or investigation under this part, an inspector and investigator appointed by the inspector general reasonably suspects that a correctional services employee may have contravened their prescribed code of conduct, the inspector and investigator shall notify the inspector general, who shall notify the chief of investigations.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 87? Those opposed? Government motion 87 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 121, as amended, carry? Carried.

The next item, which is schedule 2, section 122, government motion 88: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that section 122 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “inspector or investigator” in both places it appears and substituting in each case “inspector and investigator”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 88? Those opposed? Government motion 88 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 122, as amended, carry? Carried.

The next item: schedule 2, section 123, government motion 89: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that section 123 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “inspector or investigator” and substituting “inspector and investigator”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments on government motion 89, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 89? Those opposed? Government motion 89 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 123, as amended, carry? Carried.

The next item: schedule 2, section 124, government motion 90: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that section 124 of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Results of Inspector General Inspection or Investigation

“Results of inspection or investigation

“124(1) An inspector and investigator appointed by the Liberal”—sorry.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: You’re obviously thinking about canvassing.

Mr. Arthur Potts: “124(1) An inspector and investigator appointed by the inspector general who completes an inspection or investigation under this part shall report his or her findings to the inspector general.

“Inspector general’s notification

“(2) Unless the regulations provide otherwise, the inspector general shall notify the subject of the inspection or investigation of the findings in the report.

“Publication

“The inspector general shall publish the report made under subsection (1) in accordance with the regulations.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you, Mr. Potts. Yes, as you clearly know, these are non-partisan amendments. I need you to read the publication item again.

Mr. Arthur Potts: “Publication

“(3) The inspector general shall publish the report made under subsection (1) in accordance with the regulations.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 90? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 90? Those opposed? Government motion 90 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 124, as amended, carry? Carried.

With the will of the committee, we’ll consider the next two sections—no amendments received. They are, therefore, schedule 2, sections 125 and 126. Shall they carry? Carried.

The next item: schedule 2, subsection 127(1), government motion 91: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I withdraw that.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you, Mr. Potts.

The next item: schedule 2, subsection 127(2), government motion 92: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I withdraw that.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you, Mr. Potts.

The next item: schedule 2, subsection 127(3), government motion 93.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I would like to withdraw that.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you, Mr. Potts.

Next item: schedule 2, subsection 127(4), government motion 94.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I withdraw that as well.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you, Mr. Potts.

Those in favour of schedule 2, section 127? Those opposed? Schedule 2, section 127 falls.

1450

We will consider the next two sections en bloc, as we have not received amendments. Therefore, shall schedule 2, sections 128 and 129 carry? Carried.

The next item is schedule 2, section 129.1, government motion 95: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Employees

“129.1 Such employees as are considered necessary for the proper conduct of the affairs of the board may be appointed under part III of the Public Service of Ontario Act, 2006.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Government motion 95: Any comments? If none, we will proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 95? Those opposed? Government motion 95 carries.

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Interlude of indeterminate length.

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Next item: schedule 2, section 129.2, government motion 96: Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Protection from personal liability

“129.2(1) No action or other proceeding may be instituted against a member of or employee in the board for any act done in good faith in the exercise or intended execution of the person’s duty or for any alleged neglect or default in the execution in good faith of the person’s duty.

“Crown liability

“(2) Despite subsections 5(2) and (4) of the Proceedings Against the Crown Act, subsection (1) does not relieve the crown of liability in respect of a tort committed by a person mentioned in subsection (1) to which the crown would otherwise be subject.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 96? If there are none, we will proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 96? Those opposed? Government motion 96 carries.

Next item: schedule 2, section 129.3, government motion 97. Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following section:

“Protection from giving testimony

“129.3 A member of or employee in the board shall not be required to give testimony in any proceeding with respect to information obtained by him or her in the course of exercising a power or performing a duty under this or another act.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments on government motion 97, we will proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 97? Those opposed? Government motion 97 carries.

We will now consider the next three sections en bloc, not having received amendments. Schedule 2: Shall sections 130 to 132, inclusive—that’s three sections—carry? Carried.

Next item: schedule 2, section 133, government motion 98. Mr. Potts.

Mr. Arthur Potts: I move that section 133 of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Reviews and hearings

“Imprisonment less than six months

“133(1) Where an inmate is serving a term of imprisonment of less than six months, the following rules apply:

“1. The inmate may apply to the board for parole at any time.

“2. The inmate is not entitled to a hearing before the board.

“Imprisonment six months or more but less than specified duration

“(2) Where an inmate is serving a term of imprisonment of six months or more but less than the duration specified under subsection (4), the following rules apply:

“1. The board shall consider the inmate for parole before the parole eligibility date, whether or not the inmate has applied for parole.

“2. The inmate is entitled to waive in writing being considered for parole.

“3. The inmate is entitled to a hearing before the board unless the inmate waives in writing being considered for parole.

“4. The inmate is entitled to waive in writing the right to a hearing before the board, but if the inmate withdraws the waiver before the board makes a decision regarding the parole, the board shall proceed to conduct a hearing of the matter.

“Imprisonment of the specified duration or more

“(3) Where an inmate is serving a term of imprisonment of the duration specified under subsection (4) or more than that duration, the following rules apply:

“1. The board shall consider the inmate for parole before the parole eligibility date, whether or not the inmate has applied for parole.

“2. The inmate is entitled to a hearing before the board.

“3. The inmate is entitled to waive in writing the right to a hearing before the board, but if the inmate withdraws the waiver before the board makes a decision regarding the parole, the board shall proceed to conduct a hearing of the matter.

“Specified duration

“(4) The specified duration referred to in subsections (2) and (3) is 12 months or such shorter duration as may be prescribed.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 98? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 98? Those opposed? Government motion 98 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 133, as amended, carry? Carried.

We’ll consider, with the will of the committee, the next seven sections en bloc. Therefore, shall schedule 2, sections 134 to 140, inclusive, carry? Carried.

Next item: schedule 2, section 141, government motion 99: Mr. Potts.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: Mrs. Sandals.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that section 141 of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Appointment of probation and parole officers

“141(1) Such probation and parole officers as are considered necessary for the purposes of this act shall be appointed under part III of the Public Service of Ontario Act, 2006.

“Jurisdiction

“(2) Every probation and parole officer appointed in accordance with subsection (1) is a probation and parole officer in and for the province of Ontario and shall perform his or her duties in such part of Ontario as is assigned from time to time by the minister.

“Same

“(3) Every probation and parole officer appointed in accordance with subsection (1) is a probation officer for the purposes of,

“(a) the Provincial Offences Act, the Child and Family Services Act and any other act of the Legislature; and

“(b) the Criminal Code (Canada) and the Youth Criminal Justice Act (Canada).”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments on government motion 99, we will proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 99? Those opposed? Government motion 99 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 141, as amended, carry? Carried.

Next item: schedule 2, subsection 142(1). NDP motion 100: Mr. Natyshak.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: I move that subsection 142(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Duties of probation officer

“(1) It is the duty of a probation officer,

“(a) to supervise individuals under community supervision and to monitor and enforce their compliance with the terms and conditions of orders to which they are subject, in a manner consistent with the officer’s assessment of any risk posed by or any needs of the individuals;

“(b) to provide an individual under community supervision with effective correctional intervention, rehabilitative supervision and rehabilitative programming through the development of an individualized case management plan;

“(c) to comply with any direction made to the probation officer by a court in a probation order or in a conditional sentence order;

“(d) to support the reintegration of inmates and individuals under community supervision;

“(e) to procure and report to a court such information pertaining to an individual found to have committed an offence as the court may require for the purpose of making a disposition of the case;

“(f) to make recommendations in the report referred to in clause (e) as to the disposition of the case upon being requested by the court; and

“(g) to provide relevant information to the board for the board’s review and consideration, at the board’s request and as otherwise appropriate.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any further comments on NDP motion 100? Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: Our government will be voting against this motion. We just approved the previous motion, number 99, that talks about probation officers, to include parole officers. This particular motion only talks, very specifically, about probation officers. Our motion subsequent to the motion from the member opposite will talk about the duties of probation officers and parole officers. And in motion 101, which is coming after this one, we have substantial, equivalent language. That’s why we will be voting against this motion.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Mr. Natyshak.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Thank you to Ms. Wong. I do understand that the government has a motion, 101, following this motion, that deals with essentially the same issue. What I am told is that our motion is better, so you should vote for our motion.

That being said, Chair, I’d ask for a recorded vote.

1500

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Recorded vote on NDP motion 100.

Are there any other comments on NDP motion 100? If not, we’ll proceed to the vote.

Ayes

McDonell, Natyshak, Walker.

Nays

Berardinetti, Mangat, Potts, Sandals, Wong.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): NDP motion 100 falls.

We now proceed to the next item, which is schedule 2, section 142, government motion 101: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that section 142 of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“Duties of probation and parole officer

“142(1) It is the duty of a probation and parole officer,

“(a) to supervise individuals under community supervision and enforce the orders respecting individuals under community supervision, based on a probation and parole officer’s assessment of risk and need;

“(b) to provide an individual under community supervision with effective correctional intervention and rehabilitative programming through the development of an individualized case management plan;

“(c) to comply with any direction made to the probation and parole officer by a court in a probation order or conditional sentence order;

“(d) to support the reintegration of inmates and individuals under community supervision;

“(e) to procure and report to a court such information pertaining to a person found to have committed an offence as the court may require for the purpose of making a disposition of the case;

“(f) to make recommendations in the report referred to in clause (e) as to the disposition of the case upon being requested by the court;

“(g) to provide relevant information to the board for the board’s review and consideration, at the board’s request and whenever appropriate.

“Variation of direction

“(2) Where a probation and parole officer is of the opinion that compliance with a direction issued by a court is inconvenient or impossible, the probation and parole officer may apply to the court for a variation of its direction, and the court, upon consideration of the reasons for the application, may vary its direction to the probation and parole officer as it considers appropriate under the circumstances.

“Duties assigned by minister

“(3) In addition to the duties of a probation and parole officer referred to in subsection (1), a probation and parole officer shall perform such other duties as are assigned by the minister.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any comments on government motion 101? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 101? Those opposed? Government motion 101 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 142, as amended, carry? Carried.

We will proceed now to consider the next section, having not received any amendments. Schedule 2, section 143: Shall it carry? Carried.

The next item is schedule 2, subsection 144(1), government motion 102: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that paragraph 6 of subsection 144(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “prescribing the nature of personal information about individuals that may be disclosed under this act” at the beginning and substituting “prescribing the nature of information that may be disclosed under subsection 8(2)”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 102? We’ll then proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 102? Those opposed? Government motion 102 carries.

Schedule 2, subsection 144(1), government motion 103: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subsection 144(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following paragraph:

“19.1 clarifying, for the purpose of subsection 49(1), the meaning and scope of the terms used in that subsection;”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 103? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 103? Those opposed? Government motion 103 carries.

Schedule 2, subsection 144(1)—the next item is government motion 104: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that paragraph 21 of subsection 144(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 104? Those opposed? Government motion 104 carries.

The next item is schedule 2, subsection 144(1), government motion 105: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subsection 144(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following paragraph:

“30.1 requiring an independent review panel to consider an inmate’s prior placements in conditions that constitute segregation, including those that happened before subsection 67(2) came into force, as part of determining whether it is reasonable to continue holding the inmate in conditions that constitute segregation;”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments? None? We’ll proceed, then, to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 105? Those opposed? Government motion 105 carries.

Next item: schedule 2, subsection 144(1), government motion 106: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subparagraph 36 ii of subsection 144(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“ii. providing a process to appeal or to review a decision to hold an inmate in conditions that constitute restrictive confinement, and”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments on government motion 106, we’ll proceed, then, to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 106? Those opposed? Government motion 106 carries.

Next item: schedule 2, subsection 144(1), government motion 107: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that paragraph 57 of subsection 144(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “inspectors or investigators” in both places it appears and substituting in each case “inspectors and investigators”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments on government motion 107, we’ll proceed, then, to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 107? Those opposed? Government motion 107 carries.

Next item: schedule 2, subsection 144(1), government motion 108: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that paragraphs 61 and 62 of subsection 144(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted:

“61. governing notice and reports under section 124 and reports under section 126, including governing the manner of the publication of the reports;

“62. governing the publication of directions issued under section 125, including,

“i. prescribing the period within which the inspector general must publish the directions, and

“ii. governing the manner of publication of the directions;”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments on government motion 108, we’ll proceed, then, to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 108? Those opposed? Government motion 108 carries.

Next item: schedule 2, subsection 144(1), government motion 109: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that paragraph 67 of subsection 144(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “probation officers, parole officers” and substituting “probation and parole officers”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments on government motion 109, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 109? Those opposed? Government motion 109 carries.

Next item: schedule 2, subsection 144(1), government motion 110: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that subsection 144(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following paragraph:

“69.1 exempting such part of a correctional institution as is designated as a psychiatric facility under the Mental Health Act from a specified requirement imposed by this act or a regulation made under this section in such circumstances as may be prescribed and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed or providing that a specified provision of this act or a regulation made under this section does not apply to that part of the correctional institution in such circumstances as may be prescribed and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed;”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments on government motion 110, we’ll proceed, then, to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 110? Those opposed? Government motion 110 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 144, as amended, carry? Carried.

Next item: no amendments received to date; therefore, shall schedule 2, section 145 carry? Carried.

Next item: schedule 2, subsection 146(4.1), government motion 111: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that section 146 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection:

“(4.1) Subsection 35(2) of this act is repealed.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Comments on government motion 111? If none, we’ll proceed, then, to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 111? Those opposed? Government motion 111 carries.

1510

Next item: schedule 2, subsections 146(8.1) and (8.2), government motion 112: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that section 146 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsections:

“(8.1) Subsection 65(4.1) of this act is repealed.

“(8.2) Subsection 65(5) of this act is amended by striking out ‘subsection (3), (4) or (4.1)’ in the portion before clause (a) and substituting ‘subsection (3) or (4)’.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments on government motion 112, we will proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 112? Those opposed? Government motion 112 carries.

Schedule 2, subsections 146(8.3), (8.4) and (8.5), government motion 113: Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that section 146 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsections:

“(8.3) Section 67.1 of this act is amended by striking out ‘21.5’ and substituting ‘21’.

“(8.4) Section 67.1 of this act is amended by striking out ‘21’ and substituting ‘20.5’.

“(8.5) Section 67.1 of this act is amended by striking out ‘20.5’ and substituting ‘20’.”

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): If there are no comments, we’ll proceed to the vote on government motion 113. Those in favour of motion 113? Those opposed? Government motion 113 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 146, as amended, carry? Carried.

We’ll now proceed to the next item, which is schedule 2, subsection 147(2), government motion 114—

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Pardon me?

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I said, couldn’t we just say “renumber”?

Laughter.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Apparently not. Otherwise, I would be very pleased to.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: In that case, Chair, I move that subsection 147(2) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “Subsections 146(5), (6), (7), (8) and (9)” at the beginning and substituting “Subsections 146(4.1), (5), (6), (7), (8), (8.1), (8.2) and (9)”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): By the way, just to let you know, procedurally, my Clerk gets upset if I even omit “schedule 2” each time.

We are now on government motion 114. Is there any discussion? If none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 114? Those opposed? Government motion 114 carries.

Shall schedule 2, section 147, as amended, carry? Carried.

Shall schedule 2, section 148, carry? Carried.

We are now on schedule 2, preamble, clause (f), government motion 115—the last amendment. Ms. Sandals.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I move that the English version of clause (f) of the preamble to schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out “First Nations, Inuit and Métis people” and substituting “First Nation, Inuit and Métis peoples”.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Any comments on government motion 115? Mr. McDonell.

Mr. Jim McDonell: We’ve been putting the “s” on “Nations.” Wouldn’t you want that—

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Pardon me?

Mr. Jim McDonell: The “s” on “Nations,” “Nation” versus “Nations”—just to be consistent.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I think by putting an “s” on “peoples,” it’s multiple First Nations and various groups of Inuit and Métis.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Ms. Wong.

Ms. Soo Wong: Mr. Chair, the ministry has been advised by the Ministry of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation that “peoples” with an “s” is the proper term. So we’re going to take the advice from that ministry.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Are there any further comments on government motion 115? Seeing none, we’ll proceed to the vote. Those in favour of government motion 115? Those opposed? Government motion 115 carries.

Shall schedule 2, preamble, as amended, carry? Carried.

This is a vote now for the entire schedule—

Ms. Soo Wong: Recorded vote, please.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Recorded vote. Shall schedule 2, as amended, carry?

Ayes

Berardinetti, Mangat, Potts, Sandals, Wong.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Those opposed? Schedule 2, as amended, carries.

We will now consider schedule 3. There are 17 sections for which we have not received any amendments. Therefore, with the will of the committee, we will consider—

Interjection.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Fine. Shall schedule 3, sections 1 to 17, inclusive, carry? Carried.

Therefore, shall schedule 3—

Mr. Arthur Potts: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Recorded vote. Shall schedule 3 carry?

Ayes

Berardinetti, Mangat, Potts, Sandals, Wong.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Those opposed? Schedule 3 therefore carries.

We now revert to page 1. Shall section 1 carry? Carried.

Shall section 2 carry? Carried.

Shall section 3 carry? Carried.

Shall the title of the bill carry? Carried.

Shall Bill 6, as amended, carry?

Mr. Jim McDonell: Chair?

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Yes?

Mr. Jim McDonell: I’m just wondering—the bill has been changed so much with 113 government amendments—if we could just recirculate it. Should we not do stakeholder hearings again? I mean, the bill is completely different now than it was.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): You’re welcome to propose that. I’ll seek unanimous consent. Perhaps we can run into June, if you’d like.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I have a sense that that would be rather untimely and we would not report back as scheduled.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): I respectfully suggest that you pursue that with the House leader’s office.

Mr. Jim McDonell: Okay. I guess the point is that we see there are so many changes and it’s hardly the bill that we started with.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Thank you. Any further comments?

The item with reference to the bill: Shall Bill 6, as amended, carry?

Ms. Soo Wong: Recorded vote.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Recorded vote.

Ayes

Berardinetti, Mangat, Potts, Sandals, Wong.

Nays

McDonell, Walker.

The Chair (Mr. Shafiq Qaadri): Bill 6, as amended, carries.

Shall I report the bill, as amended, to the House? All those in favour? Those opposed? I will therefore report the bill to the House.

Colleagues, this concludes not only justice policy, but also my tenure as your Chair in the 41st Parliament. I thank you for your co-operation and endurance. Thank you, colleagues. We are adjourned.

The committee adjourned at 1517.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE POLICY

Chair / Président

Mr. Shafiq Qaadri (Etobicoke North / Etobicoke-Nord L)

Vice-Chair / Vice-Président

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest / Scarborough-Sud-Ouest L)

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest / Scarborough-Sud-Ouest L)

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

Mr. Jim McDonell (Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry PC)

Mr. Arthur Potts (Beaches–East York L)

Mr. Shafiq Qaadri (Etobicoke North / Etobicoke-Nord L)

Mr. Ross Romano (Sault Ste. Marie PC)

Mrs. Liz Sandals (Guelph L)

Miss Monique Taylor (Hamilton Mountain ND)

Ms. Soo Wong (Scarborough–Agincourt L)

Substitutions / Membres remplaçants

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

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga–Streetsville L)

Mr. Taras Natyshak (Essex ND)

Mr. Lou Rinaldi (Northumberland–Quinte West L)

Mr. Bill Walker (Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound PC)

Also taking part / Autres participants et participantes

Mr. Robert Bonofiglio, Manager, Corrections Reform Policy Branch,
Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)

Ms. Marnie Corbold, Counsel, Legal Services Branch,
Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services

Clerk / Greffier

Mr. Christopher Tyrell

Staff / Personnel

Mr. Liron Taub, legislative counsel