The Public GalleryToronto

Toronto City Council · 2019-01-30 · 2019.MM2.10

The filed record

Protecting the City of Toronto against potential impacts of the Government of Ontario’s Bill 66 - by Councillor Mike Layton, seconded by Councillor Ana Bailão

The Public Gallery wrote no story on this item. What follows is the city’s own record of what happened to it, as filed: nothing on this page is summarised or scored by us.

The decision

2019-01-30 · Toronto City Council · adopted

As filed

City Council on January 30 and 31, 2019, adopted the following: 1. City Council express its opposition to Schedule 3 of Bill 66. 2. City Council express its opposition to Schedule 5 of Bill 66. 3. City Council express its opposition to Schedule 9 of Bill 66. 4. City Council express its opposition to Schedule 10 of Bill 66 or any similar successor sections or schedules within Bill 66. 5. City Council request that, following the adoption of Bill 66 by the Province, the City Manager report back to City Council on the impacts of the legislation on the City of Toronto.

Show the rest of As filed, 448 more characters as filed

6. City Council direct the City Clerk to distribute City Council's decision in opposition to Schedules 3, 5, 9 and 10 of Bill 66 to the leaders of all parties represented in the Ontario Legislature, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, the Minister of Labour, the Minister of Education, all Greater Golden Horseshoe municipalities, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario.

The vote

Adopt Item · Carried, 20-2

Against (2)Michael Ford, Stephen Holyday
Absent (4)Denzil Minnan-Wong, Jim Karygiannis, John Tory, Mark Grimes
The whole record, all 26 members

Every name opens that member’s record.

On the agenda

As the city filed it

The Government of Ontario has introduced Bill 66, an Act amending or repealing various other Acts that could have lasting impact on City of Toronto residents, the planning process, the natural environment, food security, workers, and child welfare. Schedule 3 of the Bill could put at risk young children in the care of home child care providers. Through changes to the Child Care and Early Years Act and the Education Act, the legislation would allow an increase in the number of very young children in the care of each home childcare provider, which could compromise the quality of care and increase the risk of accidental injury or death.

Show the rest of As the city filed it, 1,816 more characters as filed

Schedule 5 repeals the Toxics Reduction Act, 2009, and associated regulations that require Ontario companies to publicly report on their use and release of toxic substances and develop feasible reduction plans. Taking away the responsibility to inform the public and reduce harmful chemicals found in our workplaces, consumer products and local communities puts human health and the environment at risk. Schedule 9 amends the Labour Relations Act, 1995, to deem municipalities and certain local boards, school boards, hospitals, colleges, universities and public bodies to be non-construction employers. That would mean that any collective agreement binding the employer and the trade union ceases to apply in so far as it applies to the construction industry. This would mean not only a lowering of quality of jobs in the City, but there could be potential risks to the public if unqualified and untrained workers were to be responsible for projects related to construction and other infrastructure projects in the City. Schedule 10 of the proposed legislation would amend the Planning Act to allow municipalities to pass by-laws without public notice that could override important drinking water, agricultural and environmental protections contained in the Clean Water Act, 2006, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, 2001, the Greenbelt Act, 2005, the Places to Grow Act, 2005, and other provincial legislation. The Greenbelt is an integral component of land use planning that complements the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe to encourage smart regional planning and sustainable communities, reduce urban sprawl, and protect natural and hydrological features and agricultural lands. Furthermore, protections like those included in the Clean Water Act are critical to the health of residents of Toronto.

Staff recommended

Councillor Mike Layton, seconded by Councillor Ana Bailão, recommends that: 1. City Council express its opposition to Schedule 3 of Bill 66. 2. City Council express its opposition to Schedule 5 of Bill 66. 3. City Council express its opposition to Schedule 9 of Bill 66. 4. City Council express its opposition to Schedule 10 of Bill 66 or any similar successor sections or schedules within Bill 66. 5. City Council request that, following the adoption of Bill 66 by the Province, the City Manager report back to City Council on the impacts of the legislation on the City of Toronto.

Show the rest of Staff recommended, 448 more characters as filed

6. City Council direct the City Clerk to distribute City Council's decision in opposition to Schedules 3, 5, 9 and 10 of Bill 66 to the leaders of all parties represented in the Ontario Legislature, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, the Minister of Labour, the Minister of Education, all Greater Golden Horseshoe municipalities, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario.

    On the record

    The item as the City filed it

    More from this meeting

    The whole meeting