Report continued from volume A.

1643

Safer Roads and Communities Act, 2024 / Loi de 2024 pour prévoir des routes et des collectivités plus sûres

Continuation of debate on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 197, An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act / Projet de loi 197, Loi modifiant le Code de la route.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Further debate?

Ms. Aislinn Clancy: I do thank the government; I am supportive of this bill. We do need to draw attention to harm that is caused by drunk driving.

I’m going to focus on prevention. I’m a big believer in Vision Zero. As a member of city council in the past—and I want to thank the city council. The city of Kitchener has paid a lot of attention and dedicated a lot into having protected use for vulnerable road users.

What Vision Zero is: The traditional approach is what we’re talking about today—that traffic deaths are inevitable; imperfect human behaviour; prevent collisions; individual responsibility; saving lives is expensive.

The Vision Zero model says that traffic deaths are preventable; integrate human failing into the approach and predict that; prevent fatal and severe crashes; look at the whole system; and that saving lives is not expensive.

What I’ve learned over the years is that by designing the roads appropriately with vulnerable users in mind, we can prevent serious injury and death.

My daughter bikes to school. She is a vulnerable user. Sometimes, because she’s a teenager and she has opinions about her hairdo, I see her leave without a helmet, and I chase after her, but she’s gone. So this is very personal to me, that when we’re talking about harm on our streets, we’re thinking of everybody and we are thinking about prevention.

My worry about this legislation is that it talks in a reactive way—“after the first,” “after the second,” “after the third”—whereas I do believe that protected bike lanes, protected sidewalks and street design, looking at a Vision Zero approach, will prevent the loss of life, that this is possible and that we don’t have to worry about our loved ones going out walking, biking and scooting and worry that they won’t come home.

I do drive an e-bike, so I do urge all of you that when you’re talking about e-bikes, when you’re talking about scooters, and when you’re talking about cyclists and our kids, you talk to folks who are in it. I live this every day. I take my bike to work in my riding all over, because I do have an urban riding, and I’m grateful for those separated lanes. If you’ve ever had to get spat out into a major road—one time I was going across the Wellington bridge and this gentleman pulled over and he said, “You’re going to kill—you shouldn’t be here. You should get off the road.” Sometimes our rhetoric impacts us directly. I was impacted that way; scared out of my wits, worried that he was going to kill me because he believed I was wasn’t meant to be there.

We know that vulnerable users were fatally involved in 37% of accidents in Ontario in 2020. We know the cancer society also wants us to get out of our cars if we can. Raise your hand if you were a parent and you had to drop your kid off at school. If you were a city councillor, how many of you had your inbox full of parents who were complaining about the area around schools? I know we’re talking about drunk driving today, but we really need to talk and look at traffic from a holistic point of view. The cancer society is spending so much money trying to get kids to walk to school and bike to school. Why? It’s affordable. It prevents cancer. It’s a health care investment. We need to spend more money on looking at how can lead healthier lives, and that’s what the cancer society recommends.

As a school social worker, I was the person, after cannabis was legal, providing those education sessions to grade 8 students. We need to do more of this. This access to alcohol, which is a carcinogen—a class 4 carcinogen as identified by the United Nations—we haven’t met the increased access with the commensurate increase in education. Yes, there’s a bit in the curriculum, but it doesn’t go far enough, and we haven’t done enough to talk to all generations about alcohol use.

As a social worker, I’m really worried about the increased use of alcohol. Just the other day I was at a gas station, and guess what was beside me while I was pumping gas? Somebody had left their beer right beside the pump. I can’t make this stuff up. Yes, I know when people are addicted—when you think of your phones that you’re all looking at right now, they’re addictive. They’re pinging at you. There are more visual reminders all the time. If you have an addiction, spend tonight trying not to look at your cell phone and imagine what it’s like to try and pump your car with gas as an alcoholic not trying to buy that can of beer that might be sitting beside you at the pumps.

I urge you to please talk to the people who use our streets and please think of investing in prevention.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Questions?

MPP Jamie West: Thank you to the member for Kitchener Centre. One of the things that confused me in this bill, and you talked a little bit about this in your debate, where you covered a lot of topics, is that when I was growing up, there were no bike lanes at all. Part of my path to school was on a four-lane road, and we rode our bikes along the four-lane road, along with transports and fire trucks and dump trucks. Now we have an infrastructure where they’re bringing in more and more bike lanes where you’re separated from those, where it’s safer for you, especially for young children.

I don’t understand—do you believe the Conservative government believes that if you remove bike lanes, bikes will no longer be on the roads? If they’re concerned about safety on the road, I feel like the safer way of having our children, especially—I know adults ride their bikes; I have a bike as well. I feel like more people would be safe if there was a designated path for them to be on the road and to not pretend that if you remove the bike lane, bicycles would not be on that road in the first place. What are your thoughts?

Ms. Aislinn Clancy: I think if you talk to any caregiver right now, they are stressed out. I think the American Surgeon General just said we have an epidemic of mentally unhealthy parents. We have an epidemic of poor mental health among caregivers. Why? They have to drive their kids everywhere. They spend all their day, night and day, taking them to school, picking them up, dropping them off at baseball and hockey and this and that. They’re taxi driver number one. It’s not good for the planet, it’s not good for the pocketbooks and it’s not good for parent mental health. What would help caregivers send their kids off into the world on a bike, on a sidewalk, on a scooter—that’s how my kids get to school—is having some safety in mind. I think a lot of caregivers don’t feel safe sending their kids to school walking and biking. I know as a parent I feel much better knowing that my child can take a protected bike lane to school.

1650

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Next question?

Mr. Ric Bresee: I appreciate the presentation today. There’s been a lot of conversation about the idea of prevention. I bring to this House’s attention the piece in this legislation about zero tolerance: that, post-conviction, the requirement would be that there would be zero alcohol, zero drug involvement in those drivers. When we’ve already got someone who has demonstrated that they’ve made a bad decision, don’t you think that imposing zero tolerance on that individual is a method of preventing future failure?

Ms. Aislinn Clancy: I think you named it: You’ve already done the crime, so it’s not prevention, right? We want to prevent people from getting harmed in the first place. If you kill someone drunk-driving, that’s done. That harm has happened to that individual, right?

So we should be looking at the data on how to reduce alcohol dependence. We should be looking at harm reduction and education in our school system. And we should be looking at how to design our streets to prevent that from happening in the first place.

When I ride around in our trail system, for example, when I have to cross a major road, some of those roads have flashing lights. They have a pad that goes up. There are different indicators for a driver that say, “We have a vulnerable user crossing the road.” That means that they stop and they see what’s happening. So we need to look at design and we need to look at mental health and addictions in a way that prevents that from a young age. We’re not there.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Next quick question.

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: I’m shocked, but not surprised, when you tell a story of someone leaving their can of beer right on the gas pump. I’m wondering if you can tell me what in this legislation or what evidence you have seen, with the government expanding alcohol into stores—and I want to be clear: There are variety stores where you can literally drink alcohol in the store before getting back in your vehicle.

What evidence is there that their expansion of alcohol sales to corner stores is actually going to prevent people from driving intoxicated? What measures do you think the government actually could have taken to address the issue? I also want to point out that people who have an addiction to alcohol will drive without a licence even if you suspend them, because they have an addiction. So what measures do you see in this bill that would stop that from happening?

Ms. Aislinn Clancy: That’s missing, and I think that’s our protest against the increase in access to alcohol. Alcohol is a drug, just like opioids are a drug, fentanyl is a drug and marijuana—cannabis—is a drug. Last time access was expanded in the province, emergency visits attributable to alcohol grew more than 24,000 in two years.

So we know that alcohol is a drug. It’s a problem to quit. If anyone has had an addiction, they should know that. So it was not a good health care choice or road safety choice to expand its access, and it’s not good for intimate partner violence.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Further debate?

Mr. Matthew Rae: Don’t worry; I’ll be a little quieter this afternoon, not like I was in question period this morning.

It’s wonderful to rise this afternoon after a very productive break across the summer. I know we call it a break; I don’t know about my colleagues on the opposition side, but I was working day and night for my good constituents in Perth–Wellington. I had many meetings and many community events to attend to across Perth–Wellington, and I look forward to being back at Queen’s Park to continue to advocate on their behalf.

I’m very honoured to speak this afternoon on this important piece of legislation improving safety in our communities, in downtown Toronto, but also especially to rural Ontario, which I have the pleasure of representing.

As has been said in many instances this afternoon and throughout this debate, Ontario has some of the safest roads in North America. In fact, for decades, our province has ranked among the top jurisdictions with the lowest fertility rates—not “fertility”; fatality rates on the roads. First day back at school, everyone.

We certainly are proud of that track record, but it’s not to say that our work is done. There is always more that we can do, and that’s exactly why our government has tabled this legislation that would introduce the toughest penalties in Canada for impaired driving, and we are not going to stop there.

We’ve all seen the epidemic that is the car thieves and auto theft in Ontario and its impact on our communities, and it needs to end. I want to be clear: It needs to end. The Safer Roads and Communities Act would crack down on these criminals. It includes measures, if passed, that would strengthen commercial vehicle safety and enforcement, would provide e-bike safety and, most importantly, show that our government is taking decisive action to make Ontario roads safer. We’re taking that action that the previous governments have failed to do, that the federal government has failed to do as well, and that our opposition has been silent on for too long.

On average, one in three roadway fatalities involves impaired driving by alcohol or drugs. In 2022, more than 20,000 Ontarians had their licences suspended for impaired driving. This year, 10,000 impaired driving charges have been laid by the OPP. Currently, compared to 2022—and the year is not over as well—this is an increase of 16%. That’s one driver every 26 minutes. It’s completely unacceptable.

In 2022, the Ministry of Transportation conducted a roadside survey of Ontario drivers. That survey found that one in five drivers tested positive for drugs, alcohol or both. The same survey found that, since 2014, the number of drivers who are testing positive for drugs has increased by 55%. If that isn’t enough to see the immediate need for change, the Office of the Chief Coroner determined the percentage of drivers who were killed and tested positive for cannabis more than doubled between 2012 and 2020. That’s why we are saying enough is enough as a government. Our government is determined to get tough on impaired drivers and to get them off the roads, and we will if the Safer Roads and Communities Act is passed.

This act would introduce a lifetime suspension for drivers for anyone convicted of impaired driving causing death under the Criminal Code. If you are convicted of killing someone while impaired behind the wheel, you will forfeit your privilege to drive for life. We are ready to do everything we can to make sure those dangerous drivers cannot get back on our roadways. There’s absolutely no excuse for alcohol- or drug-impaired driving under any circumstance. Our message to Ontarians is simple: Our government will not tolerate putting other people’s lives at risk, and a lifetime suspension for impaired driving causing death makes that clear.

These measures would make anyone in this province think twice before driving while they are impaired, and that’s not the only measure in this bill aimed at cracking down on impaired driving. Our government plans to introduce supporting legislation that would require anyone convicted of impaired driving to install an ignition interlock drive device when a licence comes back.

Currently, those convicted of impaired driving can voluntarily install an ignition interlock device to reduce their licence suspension. Alternatively, they can sit out the ignition interlock requirement by refraining from driving for their full licence suspension and ignition interlock term. Combined with the measures in this bill, our government plans to introduce further regulations that would eliminate the sit-out period, requiring anyone convicted of impaired driving to install an ignition interlock for a prescribed period of time.

If you get behind the wheel impaired and put someone else’s life at risk, you should have no choice but to install an ignition interlock. It’s a vital tool to make sure impaired drivers are closely monitored and rehabilitated before being permitted the privilege to drive on their own.

We know that making the interlock devices mandatory doesn’t go far enough, so we’re taking further steps to send a clear message. The Safer Roads and Communities Act would introduce a time-limited, zero-tolerance condition for alcohol and drugs for anyone convicted of impaired driving. If this bill passes, the zero-tolerance period would begin after a driver satisfies the ignition interlock and the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health’s Back on Track requirements, which is a very extensive program that they administer.

Impaired driving is never okay. Even if our opposition chooses to stay silent, we’re going to make sure that people who choose to drive impaired and put other individuals’ lives at risk are held accountable. Our government will never take any chances when it comes to ensuring our roads are safe, and that’s why these drivers will have to work hard to get their licences back.

1700

To drive that point home, the Safer Roads and Communities Act would introduce longer roadside licence suspensions for first-time and second-time drug- and alcohol-related offences. These suspensions would apply to young and novice drivers who violate the zero-tolerance condition, as well as drivers who perform poorly on a field sobriety test or have a blood alcohol concentration of 0.05 or higher.

Currently, drivers receive a three-day roadside suspension for their first occurrence and a seven-day suspension for their second occurrence, and this just isn’t long enough. We need to teach people who drive under the influence that their recklessness is endangering Ontario lives, which will not be tolerated. If the Safer Roads and Communities Act is passed, drivers would receive a seven-day roadside licence suspension for their first drug- and alcohol-related occurrence, and if they were found to be under the influence a second time, that would result in a 14-day suspension.

In addition to these measures, the Safer Roads and Communities Act would align the look-back periods for all drug- and alcohol-related offences or occurrences. A look-back period determines the escalation of sanctions for repeat offenders. Currently, administrative monetary penalties and licence suspensions have a five-year look-back period. Ignition interlock and remedial education requirements have a 10-year look-back period. If this act passes, all look-back periods would be harmonized to the 10-year window.

Our government has a long memory when it comes to drivers who put others at risk. We want to align all look-back periods to 10 years to take a stand against impaired driving and those who choose to do it repeatedly.

Policing is an essential component to keeping our roads safe. Safe roads are not possible without making sure that police have every possible tool they need to combat impaired driving, so that is exactly what we are doing. The Safer Roads and Communities Act includes several measures that will support our front-line police officers.

The Safer Roads and Communities Act, if passed, would amend the Highway Traffic Act to clarify that police can stop drivers for sobriety tests whenever they are driving, whether that’s on or off a highway. If you’re driving impaired, pulling off the highway to evade the police isn’t going to work. Our government is making it crystal clear: If you get behind the wheel impaired, there will be nowhere for you to hide.

In recent years, we’ve also seen auto theft become a growing problem across the province. Actually, calling auto theft a problem doesn’t seem to convey the gravity of the situation—it’s an epidemic. In Ontario, a vehicle is stolen every 14 minutes. From 2021 to 2024, auto theft increased by 72% across the province. In Toronto, auto theft increased by 81% over that same period, and violent carjacking rose by 78% from 2021 to 2022.

Brazen thieves are using weapons to carjack hard-working Ontarians, compromising the safety of our communities and roads. Nobody should have to give over their car with someone putting a gun to their head—a chilling reality that could happen to anyone in any community across Ontario.

This government is standing up and saying, “We have had enough.” If the Safer Roads and Communities Act passes, anyone convicted of auto theft would face a driver suspension for 10 years, a 15-year suspension for their second offence and a lifetime suspension for their third.

The fact of the matter is that motor vehicle theft has become a plague in this province, and our government is looking to step in in every possible way so that this does not become the standard for Ontario’s bright future. The Solicitor General has done a great job. Our new Associate Minister of Auto Theft and Bail Reform is doing a great job. And I know the Minister of Transportation as well is working with both those ministries to ensure we are combatting this problem

Of course, car thieves aren’t the only cowardly criminals putting innocent Ontarians in danger on our roadways. Stunt drivers are constantly putting innocent lives at risk with their blatant disregard for the safety of others on the road. Those who threaten safety have no place on our roads, and we want to make sure that they face the consequences for their reckless actions.

In 2021, we passed the MOMS Act—I didn’t pass it; our government passed it—and we increased the licence suspension and vehicle impoundment periods for anyone engaging in stunt driving, street racing or aggressive driving. The Safer Roads and Communities Act is taking this one step further. If the Safer Roads and Communities Act passes, it would amend the Highway Traffic Act to ensure that anyone convicted of stunt driving faces a mandatory minimum life suspension. Currently, the courts have the discretion to suspend a driver’s licence following a stunt driving conviction, which means minimum suspension lengths aren’t applied in all cases. We want to change that and apply a minimum licence suspension.

By willingly engaging in these dangerous driving practices, these drivers must have a minimum suspension, full stop. The proposed legislation would ensure that anyone convicted of stunt driving receives a mandatory minimum licence suspension. That means one year for a first conviction, three years for a second, and a lifetime suspension, reducible to 10 years under certain circumstances, for a third. Any subsequent convictions would be met with a lifetime suspension that cannot be reduced.

Stunt driving is not a harmless act; it can lead to dangerous and even fatal consequences. Anyone who disregards the safety of others should face a stiff penalty, and if you’re convicted of stunt driving, you don’t get the privilege of getting behind the wheel again with a light slap on the wrist. If the Safer Roads and Communities Act passes, stunt drivers will learn that lesson the hard way, and the legislation shows that we are taking concrete action to protect families and people on our roads. If you put others at risk, you will pay the price.

We have also urged the federal government to toughen their penalties against auto thieves for far too long, as the province has done. We have used every tool at our disposal to ensure that car thieves are held accountable, whether it be taking away their licence or improving and increasing funding to our law enforcement officers across this province. It’s time for the federal government to take these criminals, keep them in jail and not let them out to terrorize our streets. It’s about time they step up and put these criminals behind bars.

The Safer Roads and Communities Act also includes measures to improve e-bike safety. If passed, this bill would create regulation-making authority under the Highway Traffic Act that would allow e-bikes to be categorized into distinct classes. Each class would have its own prescribed vehicle safety requirements, such as speed and weight limits, as well as operator requirements such as the minimum age for drivers and passengers. This proposal is a key step toward addressing safety concerns raised by stakeholders and community members, and the risks associated with heavier throttle-assisted e-bikes.

Today, these e-bikes often exceed the permitted weight or power-assisted speeds. I know many of us see that in downtown Toronto and many of our larger urban centres as well with the growing popularity of these bikes, which are important for mobility—as one of my colleagues mentioned earlier, he uses an e-bike—and ensuring that we have some parameters around those now 21st-century modes of transportation.

Our government has been at the forefront of e-bike safety, continuing to embrace innovation to improve outcomes for road users. The Cargo E-Bikes Pilot Program, for example, allows municipalities to choose where and how cargo e-bikes can be used. If the Safer Roads and Communities Act passes, we’ll take another step toward improving e-bike safety.

It doesn’t end there: We’re also taking bold action to strengthen MTO transportation enforcement officers’ ability to carry out the ministry’s commercial vehicle program. We need all hands on deck to keep our roads safe. If the Safer Roads and Communities Act passes, enforcement officers would be permitted to exceed posted speed limits for enforcement purposes. Traffic would be required to move over for MTO enforcement vehicles when their lights and signals are flashing, and MTO transport enforcement officers would have the authority to seize fraudulent or suspended driver’s licences.

These legislative measures would build upon our tremendous success at improving commercial vehicle enforcement. Last year, the Ministry of Transportation increased enforcement activities in our northern Ontario highway corridors, and, additionally, we’ve mandated the use of electronic logging devices for all commercial vehicles.

The results speak for themselves: MTO officers have laid more 3,600 charges and took more than 1,200 unsafe vehicles off the road. The government opened a new vehicle inspection station near Thunder Bay recently; this is a $30-million, state-of-the-art investment and ensures commercial vehicles are in good working order and takes those that aren’t off the road, helping make Ontario northern highways that much safer.

1710

We’re also making upgrades and building new rest areas across our highway network so drivers can take a break when they need to. At the end of the day, everybody deserves to get home safely, and our government is doing everything in our power to make sure that is a reality. By enhancing MTO’s transportation enforcement officers’ ability to carry out commercial vehicle enforcement, our roads will be that much safer.

Despite Ontario’s track record of 20-plus years as one of the safest jurisdictions in North America, we will never sideline our efforts to make our roads even safer. That is the least we can do, and we owe it to the hard-working people who call this province home. Even if the previous government sat idly by when change was waiting to happen, we’ll pick up the pieces one by one because that is what Ontarians deserve.

Our province proudly welcomes hundreds of thousands of newcomers each year, and they come here for a better life, to contribute to our growing economy and to raise families. By 2031, the greater Golden Horseshoe will have a population of almost 15 million people just living within that area. As our roadways become busier and busier with the growth, we need to make sure that everyone on Ontario’s roadways are protected.

By introducing the Safer Roads and Communities Act, our government is drawing a line in the sand when it comes to drivers who put others’ lives at risk by getting behind the wheel impaired. We’re getting tough on violent criminals terrorizing our roadways to steal cars for profit, we’re cracking down on stunt drivers who threaten the safety of our roadways and we’re taking bold strides to improve e-bike safety and commercial vehicle enforcement across the province.

Our government is not one to back down from a challenge, and we’re not one to stop working towards even more goals to ensure more safety across Ontario roads. When the government tabled the Moving Ontarians More Safely Act in 2021, the government ushered in a new era of road safety that improved the lives of families across the province, but our work is far from over and the Safer Roads and Communities Act shows that we are constantly looking for new ways to protect people, families and communities. The passage of this bill would help have a positive impact on this province that would reverberate for generations to come. Road safety is not a political issue, as our government has made it clear, and we’ll work with all members of this House to ensure that our communities remain safe.

Our government is proud to have tabled this legislation. It builds upon many of our initiatives over the past few years, especially when it comes to our investments in our front-line police offices that go above and beyond every single day for our communities. I think of the over $160 million in combatting auto theft alone, $134 million to buy helicopters to help our biggest urban centres combat auto theft in the most recent provincial budget, ensuring we are there for our police officers to ensure that those criminals are doing the time. I’m a big believer that if you do the crime, you should do the time. I know I look forward to all members of this House supporting this important piece of legislation.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Questions? The member from Niagara Falls.

Mr. Wayne Gates: I appreciate that. I thought I was second.

I listened to my colleague really carefully. You said that the government is going to have the toughest fines ever, but it says here, “Many impaired drivers can avoid criminal conviction thanks to a Ford government policy that allows drivers to plead guilty to a lesser non-criminal charge. While this policy was in place during the pandemic in an effort to move the backlog around, today more serious criminal cases are being tossed out due to this unconstitutional delay, including sexual assault.” Are you in favour of—even though you’re impaired, you’re caught—pleading down for a lesser sentence? Because that’s not what you said in your speech.

Mr. Matthew Rae: Thank you for the question. I know our government stands with the people of Ontario to ensuring we have safe communities and safe roadways. That’s why we’re bringing in, as I mentioned, the most penalties in North America, if passed, for impaired driving, especially if impaired driving leads to death—a lifetime suspension for that. As I mentioned, if you’re doing the crime, it is a crime, you should do the time. I know our government will be using every tool we have available provincially to do that. We don’t amend the Criminal Code; that is a federal jurisdiction. But we will suspend drivers’ licences for those who are convicted of impaired driving that results in death, and I hope the members opposite will support that.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Next question?

Hon. Trevor Jones: Good afternoon, everybody. Thank you to the member for Perth–Wellington for articulating something that reassures me that driving in Ontario is a privilege and not a right.

I live in a jurisdiction, and the member from Essex lives in a jurisdiction, where we have lots of traffic that crosses the border every day into Michigan, into New York state; the member for Niagara Falls will know this is the case as well. So if someone is convicted, found guilty, punished and sentenced and they receive a lifetime driving ban, what’s to prevent that convicted person from going to New York state or Michigan and just apply for and get a driver’s licence in that jurisdiction?

Mr. Matthew Rae: Thank you to the great member from Chatham-Kent–Leamington for that question—a very important question. I know I have the Stratford Festival in my riding. I have the distinct honour of representing that important cultural institution and tourism institution. Many Michigan plates and New York plates and Pennsylvania plates were in Stratford, which was great to see this summer. I do know that a driver with a suspended licence in Ontario is generally prohibited from obtaining a licence in another Canadian province and in some US states. I know, with Michigan and New York, Ontario has a reciprocal agreement that if you share a conviction or a suspension in those jurisdictions, you would not be able to then cross the border either way to get a licence.

I know we’ll continue to work with our great colleagues in the US to ensure that we’re keeping all of our roadways safe in North America.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Next question?

Mr. Joel Harden: I’m just wondering if the member can help me understand something. I think he knows that on this side of the House we would support measures to take further action against impaired driving. I think he knows that on this side of the House we care about road safety all over Ontario, not just downtown but way up north, as my friend from Mushkegowuk–James Bay was saying with respect to the dangers on their highways.

Can the member enlighten us: How is it that one can have an indefinite suspension for killing somebody while driving under the influence, but you can still drive the week after if you kill someone and you’re distracted? Why do we have that double standard?

Mr. Matthew Rae: Thank you to the member for the question. I agree that we’re all passionate about road safety across Ontario. I don’t represent a Toronto riding or a GTA riding; I represent a rural riding. Obviously, it’s very important we have road safety in those areas of the world, especially this time of the year, with harvest going on and lots of farm equipment on the highways, ensuring that—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): I apologize for interrupting the member.

Pursuant to standing order 50(c), I am now required to interrupt the proceedings and announce that there have been six and a half hours of debate on the motion for second reading of this bill. This bill will therefore be deemed adjourned unless the government House leader directs the debate to continue.

Government House leader?

Mr. Steve Clark: Speaker, please adjourn the debate.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Orders of the day?

Mr. Steve Clark: No further business, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): With no further business, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow morning at 9 a.m.

The House adjourned at 1718.