No. 27 No 27
|
Votes and Proceedings |
Procès-verbaux |
|
Legislative Assembly of Ontario |
Assemblée législative de l'Ontario |
|
1st Session, 36th Parliament |
1re session, 36e législature |
|
Tuesday, November 21, 1995 |
Mardi 21 novembre 1995 |
|
PRAYERS 1:30 P.M. |
PRIÈRES 13 H 30 |
The Speaker delivered the following ruling:-
Yesterday, the member for Windsor-Riverside (Mr Cooke) rose on a point of order about our practice respecting the referral of supplementary questions. The point of order arose out of some confusion that occurred during Question Period. In the first instance, the member for Riverdale (Ms Churley) asked a question of the Premier, who gave an answer. When the supplementary was asked, the Premier chose to redirect it to the Minister of Community and Social Services. Members will recall that I allowed the referral at the time and subsequently agreed to check our practice.
In doing so, I noted that on February 9, 1987 Speaker Edighoffer delivered a clear ruling on this very matter. Speaker Edighoffer indicated at that time that he had examined the past practices of this House and went on to say;
"Having done so, it appears to me very clear that redirecting a supplementary question is an accepted practice in this Chamber and it seems to me to be well within the bounds of logic which guides our Question Period. The right to redirect belongs to the minister and not to the questioner. This has been borne out in reviewing Speaker Turner's rulings from 1981 to 1984"
I want to emphasize this last point because I believe it may be the source of yesterday's confusion. Our practice and indeed, as Speaker Edighoffer noted, "the logic which guides our Question Period", support the principle that the minister has the right to redirect a supplementary question, however, our practice is equally clear that the member asking the question does not have the same prerogative.
|
PETITIONS |
PÉTITIONS |
Petition relating to Bill 7, Labour Relations and Employment Statute Law Amendment Act, 1995
(Sessional Paper No. P-9) (Tabled November 21, 1995) Mr B. Crozier.
Petition relating to North York Branson Hospital (Sessional Paper No. P-15) (Tabled November 21, 1995) Mr M. Kwinter.
Petition relating to Winter Road Maintenance for the Northern Region (Sessional Paper No. P-18) (Tabled November 21, 1995) Mr M. Gravelle, Mr F. Miclash and Mr D. Ramsay.
Petition relating to Community based Justice Programs (Sessional Paper No. P-19) (Tabled November 21, 1995) Mr J.-M. Lalonde.
Petition relating to Northwestern General Hospital (Sessional Paper No. P-21) (Tabled November 21, 1995) Mr M. Colle.
Petition relating to the Establishment of a Committee to review remarks made by the Minister Responsible for Women's Issues (Sessional Paper No. P-29) (Tabled November 21, 1995) Ms M. Churley.
Petition relating to Constable Perry Dunlop (Sessional Paper No. P-30) (Tabled November 21, 1995) Mr J. Cleary.
Petition relating to Seaway Valley Farmers Energy Cooperative (Sessional Paper No. P-31) (Tabled November 21, 1995) Mr J. Cleary.
Petition relating to Replacing Child Care Subsidies with a Voucher System (Sessional Paper No. P-32) (Tabled November 21, 1995) Mr M. Gravelle.
Petition relating to Postponing Tax Cuts (Sessional Paper No. P-33) (Tabled November 21, 1995) Mr E. Doyle.
|
ORDERS OF THE DAY |
ORDRE DU JOUR |
|
Opposition Day |
Jour de l'opposition |
|
Mr Rae moved, |
M. Rae propose, |
Whereas the Common Sense Revolution commits the Mike Harris government to creating 725,000 new jobs; and
Whereas the Common Sense Revolution states that "Ontario needs jobs today, and jobs tomorrow"; and
Whereas the Mike Harris government has cut public investments and programs eliminating tens of thousands of jobs in Ontario; and
Whereas unemployment currently stands at 8.5% in Ontario and the current instability in employment in Ontario is of concern to all members of this House; and
Whereas the Mike Harris government has condemned children and their parents relying on social assistance to a less than survival existence; and
Whereas the Mike Harris government has told families who rely on welfare "to work and to get jobs to supplement their income"; and
Whereas the Mike Harris government has done nothing to promote job creation in Ontario; and
Whereas the Mike Harris government has ended an era where partnerships between business, labour and government promoted economic development; and
Whereas the Mike Harris government is following a fiscal plan aimed at further cuts, increasing economic drag and a tax hand-out to the wealthy; and
Whereas the Mike Harris government's fiscal plan will do nothing to create jobs today or tomorrow;
Therefore, this House calls on the Mike Harris government to take the unemployment situation in this province seriously by restoring job creation programs and job support programs and to follow a balanced and responsible approach to economic development and deficit reduction, rather than pursue a policy of irresponsible cuts to program funding and economic investment in order to pay for tax breaks for the rich.
|
A debate arising, after some time, the motion was lost on the following division:- |
Un débat s'ensuit et après quelque temps, la motion est rejetée par le vote suivant:- |
AYES / POUR - 28
Bartolucci Gravelle Phillips
Bisson Hampton Pouliot
Boyd Kwinter Rae
Bradley Lalonde Ruprecht
Churley Marchese Sergio
Cooke Martel Silipo
Curling Martin Wildman
Duncan Miclash Wood
Gerretsen Morin (Cochrane North)
Grandmaître Patten
NAYS / CONTRE - 52
Baird Hodgson Rollins
Bassett Hudak Runciman
Beaubien Johnson Sampson
Boushy (Don Mills) Saunderson
Brown Johnson Shea
(Scarborough West) (Perth) Sheehan
Carroll Kells Smith
Chudleigh Klees Snobelen
Clement Leach Spina
Eves Leadston Sterling
Flaherty Marland Stewart
Ford Maves Tascona
Galt Munro Tsubouchi
Gilchrist Mushinski Turnbull
Grimmett Newman Vankoughnet
Guzzo O'Toole Wood
Hardeman Palladini (London South)
Harnick Parker Young
Hastings Preston
|
At 6:00 p.m., the question "That this House do now adjourn" was deemed to have been proposed pursuant to Standing Order 34(b). |
À 18 heures, la motion portant «Que la présente Assemblée ajourne les débats maintenant» est réputée avoir été proposée conformément à l'article 34(b) du Règlement. |
|
After one matter was considered, the question was deemed to have been adopted. |
Après l'étude d'une question, la motion d'ajournement du débat est réputée avoir été adoptée. |
|
The House then adjourned at 6:10 p.m. |
À 18 h 10, la chambre a ensuite ajourné ses travaux. |
le président
Allan K. McLean
Speaker
Questions Answered (see Sessional Paper No. 5):-
Final Answers to Question Numbers: 6 and 13.
Interim Answers to Question Numbers: 52 - 79.