Empowering Ontario legislators.

• Author: Hillier, Randy

Members of Provincial Parliament are elected to represent their constituents, fight on their behalf in the Legislature and in Government and to legislate on issues of local importance. Despite their job description, Members are not always able to represent their constituents as well as they might. The practises and Standing Orders of the House make representing local constituents difficult. Changes could be made to the Standing Orders to enable local representatives to put their constituents first.

**********

The first area we should look at relates to Private members' Bills. A number of surveys have shown that people have little faith in Government's ability to fix problems; it's not hard to see why. In a previous era, Private Member's Bills throughout the Commonwealth were used to cause sea changes in the law.

Slavery would not have been abolished in the British Empire were it not for the countless Private Member's Bills William Wilburforce introduced on the issue. Abortion and homosexuality were decriminalized in the United Kingdom by Private Member's Bills. Smoking is restricted in Federally regulated workplaces and environs in Canada because of a Private Member's Bill in 1988. And that's not even mentioning the many local issues that they've solved throughout the Commonwealth.

Whether or not you agree with these pieces of legislation, it's clear that there was once a time where Private Member's Bills mattered and could do something of substance. That's a far cry from today's Ontario. Private Member's Bills are effectively dead on arrival.

Take for example the case of Kim Craitor's (Niagara Falls) Children's Law Reform Amendment Act, which has been introduced in six consecutive Sessions. Despite the fact that it passed second reading five of those times, it has never been studied by Committee, yet alone receive third reading.

Ernie Hardeman's (Oxford) Carbon Monoxide Detector Bill, which is by no means controversial or divisive, has been introduced to the House four times. It has not yet actually been called for third reading. Only once did it actually go to Committee, despite receiving and passing second reading three times.

Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina) has introduced very similar Bills to amend the Condominium Act four times. They have each received second reading and been referred to Committee each and every time. Despite that, they have never been heard at Committee or gone on for third reading.

Statistics back up the assertion that Private Member's Bills are not the instrument of reform that they could be. From the first session of the Harris Government in 1995 to the 1st Session of the current Parliament, a total of 1424 Private Member's Bills were introduced. Only 4% of them received third reading. Of those 58 Bills, 23 were Bills proclaiming special days, weeks or months; while well-intentioned, they are a far cry from the repeal of slavery.

Scheduling is One reason why many Bills fall through the cracks. There is simply not enough time accorded to Private Member's Bills for them all to be heard at second reading. Another reason is that Standing Committees sometimes do not review all of the Bills referred to them. But the largest reason why so few of them ever make it into law is the Government's monopoly on the calling of Bills for third reading. Only 8.7% of non-proclamatory Bills that received second reading actually went on and received third reading in that time period. And the trend has been down over the past twenty years. Under the McGuinty Government, only 6% of non-proclamatory Bills that received second reading received third reading as well.

Removing the Government's monopoly on the calling of Bills for third reading would give representatives an increased ability to represent their constituents, their constituents' concerns and to do their jobs as legislators. This could be done by giving scheduling authority to a committee and/or by compelling the Government to call Bills for third reading at the end of a session. In the United Kingdom's House of Commons, the Backbench Business Committee is responsible for House scheduling one day a week.

Restoring Motions to Relevance

Motions show public discontent with an existing policy or that an absence of policy fails to address a public concern. Motions are meant to demonstrate to Government the need for change or action. But let's be honest, Private Member's Motions are irrelevant in Ontario's Legislature and have been for some time.

Part of the problem is the disconnect in stature between motions and legislation. The pair are...