Monday
December 13, 1999

Lundi
13 décembre 1999

Prayers

1:30 P.M.

Prières

13 H 30

Motions

Motions

On motion by Mr. Klees,

Sur la motion de M. Klees,

Ordered, That, pursuant to Standing Order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on December 13, 14 and 15, 1999 for the purpose of considering government business.

On motion by Mr. Klees,

Sur la motion de M. Klees,

Ordered, That, pursuant to Standing Order 9(c)(ii), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. on December 16, 1999, for the purpose of considering government business.

Deferred Votes

Votes différés

The deferred vote on the motion for Third Reading of Bill 23, An Act to amend certain statutes administered by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care in relation to supporting and managing the health care system, was carried on the following division:-

La motion portant troisième lecture du projet de loi 23, Loi modifiant certaines lois dont l'application relève du ministère de la Santé et des Soins de longue durée en ce qui concerne le soutien et la gestion du système de soins de santé, mise aux voix sur le vote différé, est adoptée par le vote suivant:-

AYES / POUR - 49

Arnott

Hodgson

Skarica

Baird

Jackson

Snobelen

Barrett

Johns

Spina

Chudleigh

Johnson

Sterling

Clark

Kells

Stewart

Clement

Klees

Stockwell

Coburn

Marland

Tascona

Cunningham

Martiniuk

Tilson

DeFaria

Maves

Tsubouchi

Dunlop

Mazzilli

Turnbull

Ecker

Munro

Wettlaufer

Elliott

Mushinski

Wilson

Eves

Newman

Witmer

Galt

O'Toole

Wood

Gilchrist

Ouellette

Young

Gill

Palladini

Hastings

Runciman

NAYS / CONTRE - 29

Agostino

Cleary

Kwinter

Bartolucci

Colle

Marchese

Bisson

Conway

Martel

Bountrogianni

Curling

McGuinty

Boyer

Di Cocco

McLeod

Brown

Dombrowsky

Parsons

Bryant

Duncan

Phillips

Caplan

Hampton

Sergio

Christopherson

Hoy

Smitherman

Churley

Kormos

And the Bill was accordingly read the third time and was passed.

En conséquence, ce projet de loi est lu une troisième fois et adopté.

Petitions

Pétitions

Petition relating to the Northern Health Travel Grant program (Sessional Paper No. P-1) Mrs. McLeod.

Petition relating to Upgrading Highway 401 and investing federal gasoline tax revenue in Ontario road improvements (Sessional Paper No. P-9) Mr. Hoy.

Petition relating to the Link between cancer and occupation (Sessional Paper No. P-32) Mr. Christopherson.

Petition relating to the Government of Ontario ensuring that Karla Homolka serves her full sentence in prison (Sessional Paper No. P-38) Mrs. Molinari.

Petition relating to Retroactive cap on revenue earned by medical laboratories and the protection of property rights (Sessional Paper No. P-41) Mr. Curling.

Petition relating to Wasting of public funds to produce Ontario Millennium Memento souvenir (Sessional Paper No. P-43) Mr. Bartolucci.

Petition relating to Saving the Oak Ridges Moraine (Sessional Paper No. P-44) Mr. Colle.

Petition relating to Closing down the hazardous waste dump near Sarnia and tightening environmental regulations regarding toxic waste in that area (Sessional Paper No. P-45) Ms. Di Cocco.

On a point of order raised by the member for Windsor-St. Clair (Mr. Duncan), the Speaker recessed the House for 15 minutes.

On his return, the Speaker delivered the following ruling:-

I thank the Chief Government Whip, the House Leader for the Official Opposition and the Member for Hamilton West for their submissions on Bill 25, An Act to provide for the restructuring of four regional municipalities and to amend the Municipal Act and various other Acts in connection with municipal restructuring and with municipal electricity services.

Like you, I have carefully reviewed the Bill and our precedents and practices as they relate to omnibus legislation. Omnibus bills have been the subject of procedural scrutiny in this country for almost three decades. In that time, members and Speakers alike have expressed grave concern over the use of this kind of legislation, and I am as mindful as any that there may come a time when we go too far. However, while members may have expressed what are undoubtedly legitimate grievances with respect to Bill 25, they do not make the bill procedurally unacceptable. As Speaker Lamoureux said in the House of Commons of Canada in 1971, the issue for the Speaker is whether there has been advanced a "legitimate procedural argument".

Therein lies my responsibility: I must ensure that the content of an omnibus bill has a theme of relevancy subject to the umbrella which is raised by the long title of a bill. We in this House have had experience with a number of omnibus bills, many of which have caused a great deal of controversy. Several of those bills I would say had a lesser thread of relevancy than the one we have before us today.

How does one determine relevancy? According to Beauchesne, relevancy is defined as follows:

"...there should be a theme of relevancy among the contents of a bill. They must be relevant to and subject to the umbrella which is raised by the terminology of the long title of the bill."

On June 10, 1997 Speaker Stockwell noted that a bill cannot be saved by its title and that "a theme of relevancy is achieved when all the parts of the bill are linked in a tangible way".

I concur with Speaker Stockwell's more restrictive definition of relevancy and it is that which I applied in my consideration of Bill 25. This Bill creates five new statutes and amends several others. It is long and I agree with some members that there are aspects of it that may be cause for serious concern. However, while it covers several different geographical areas of the province, it maintains throughout it the consistent theme of municipal restructuring. My reading of the bill found no unrelated subjects.

I do not find that the parts of this bill are so different as to have no connection with each other and therefore cannot find the bill to be out of order.

I want to address the comments made by the House Leader for the Official Opposition relating to his request for direction from the Speaker that the House Leaders meet to deal with this issue. I must say it requires no direction from the Speaker for the House Leaders to come together and to make arrangements among them on how the business of the House is to be conducted. This has happened numerous times in the past, and either as a result of unanimous consent of the House or the stated agreement of the House Leaders, Speakers have allowed matters to be conducted in accordance with those agreements.

On the issue specifically of omnibus legislation, Speaker Sauvé perhaps put it best when in 1982 she stated that "It may be that the House should accept rules or guidelines as to the form and content of omnibus bills, but in that case the House, and not the Speaker, must make those rules."

As I say, that option always lies open to the House Leaders. I would be more than happy to offer the facilities and resources of my office for any meetings that you may initiate in this regard.

Orders of the Day

Ordre du Jour

A debate arose on the motion for Second Reading of Bill 25, An Act to provide for the restructuring of four regional municipalities and to amend the Municipal Act and various other Acts in connection with municipal restructuring and with municipal electricity services.

Il s'élève un débat sur la motion portant deuxième lecture du projet de loi 25, Loi prévoyant la restructuration de quatre municipalités régionales et modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités et diverses autres lois en ce qui a trait aux restructurations municipales et aux services municipaux d'électricité.

After some time, pursuant to Standing Order 9(a), the motion for adjournment of the debate was deemed to have been made and carried.

Après quelque temps, conformément à l'article 9(a) du Règlement, la motion d'ajournement du débat est réputée avoir été proposée et adoptée.

The House then adjourned at 6:00 p.m.

À 18 h, la chambre a ensuite ajourné ses travaux.

6:45 P.M.

18 H 45

Orders of the Day

Ordre du Jour

Debate was resumed on the motion for Second Reading of Bill 27, An Act to amend the Pension Benefits Act and the MPPs Pension Act, 1996.

Le débat reprend sur la motion portant deuxième lecture du projet de loi 27, Loi modifiant la Loi sur les régimes de retraite et la Loi de 1996 sur le régime de retraite des députés.

After some time, pursuant to Standing Order 9(a), the motion for the adjournment of the debate was deemed to have been made and carried.

Après quelque temps, conformément à l'article 9(a) du Règlement, la motion d'ajournement du débat est réputée avoir été proposée et adoptée.

The House then adjourned at 9:30 p.m.

À 21 h 30, la chambre a ensuite ajourné ses travaux.

le président

GARY CARR

Speaker

Sessional Papers Presented Pursuant To Standing Order 39(A):-

Documents Parlementaires Déposés Conformément À L'article 39(A) Du Règlement

Ontario Heritage Foundation / Fondation du Patrimoine Ontarien, Annual Report 1997/98 (No. 43).

Part-time appointments re intended Order-in-Council dated December 8, 1999 (No. 44).

Responses To Petitions

Réponses Aux Pétitions

Petitions relating to the Northern Health Travel Grant program (Sessional Paper No. P-1):

(Tabled October 25, 28; November 2, 3, 15, 16, 1999) Mrs. McLeod.

(Tabled October 25, 26, 27; November 3, 1999) Mr. Gravelle.

Petitions relating to Preventing exposure of minors to pornography in retail establishments (Sessional Paper No. P-19):

(Tabled November 15, 1999) Mr. Newman.

(Tabled November 16, 24, 1999) Mr. Cleary.

(Tabled November 23, 24, 1999) Mr. Lalonde.

Petition relating to Strict laws against animal cruelty (Sessional Paper No. P-21):

(Tabled November 16, 1999) Mr. O'Toole.