Transparency in Public Matters Act 2006 Receives 1st Reading
The ![[ Transparency in Public Matters Act ]](/images/transparency-sunrise.gif "[ Transparency in Public Matters Act ]")
Transparency in Public Matters Act 2006 (Bill 142) received 1st reading on Tuesday October 3. Described as "An Act to require that meetings of provincial and municipal boards, commissions and other public bodies be open to the public", it was introduced by MPP Kim Craitor as a private member's bill. In its current form it is essentially identical to the first reading of Bill 123 (2004) but expands the scope of bodies subject to the Act. Universities are indeed included as they were in at 1st reading of Bill 123 - before they were removed under pressure from lobbying efforts of the Council of Ontario Universities (COU). The Act will require additional work to meet the recommendations of the Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC) to assure advance notice of meetings are widely published and to prevent last minute changes to agendas without adequately alerting the public. The bill still faces many hurdles to become law.
This version of the Transparency in Public Matters Act is essentially identical to the 1st reading of Bill 123, but expanding the scope of bodies subject to it. For those interested we have an Adobe Acrobat comparison of the two versions which highlights the differences (rough as that process may be).
When commenting in the earlier Bill 123 the IPC commented that it was a good start but the scope of bodies subject to the act needed to be expanded and wording was needed to prohibit last minute changes to agenda items. Craitor's Bill 142 appears to have addressed the matter of scope but, unfortunately, does not address the issue of last minute agenda changes. This will have to be dealt with in committee.
To address this issue the committee need only turn to the Section 4.1 as amended in the 2nd reading of Bill 123. That section states:
Prohibition on new agenda items
4.1 (1) Once a designated public body has given notice to the public of a meeting under section 4, it shall not add a new item to the agenda for that meeting unless the item,
(a) relates to a matter requiring immediate attention, and the body has provided notice to the public of the change to the agenda by posting the amended agenda in a publicly accessible location or publishing the amended agenda on its website or in any other print or electronic medium of mass communication; or
(b) relates to a situation or an impending situation caused by the forces of nature, an accident, an intentional act or otherwise that constitutes a significant danger to life, health, property or the environment.
Two-thirds majority vote required to amend agenda
(2) A two-thirds majority of the members of the body must agree to add a new item to the agenda under clause (1) (a).
Majority vote required to amend agenda
(3) A majority of the members of the body present and entitled to vote shall vote in favour of adding a new item to the agenda under clause (1) (b).
The Act also needs strengthened wording to assure notices of meetings and agendas (and agenda alterations in accordance with the above) are published in all formats to assure as wide a distribution as possible by being prominently posted electronically, on the web, in print media, and physically posted. Organizations should not be allowed to select one mechanism as that may have the effect of restricting public awareness.
There should be language specifying significant fines for organizations and their representatives who violate the Act.
We hope that Craitor and Bill 142 can withstand the pressure from COU and others seeking to water down the bill or seeking exclusions from it (including pressure from those within his own Liberal government lacking a real commitment to transparency).
In addition, Craitor is also facing tight timelines to get the bill moving.
If you are in favour of a revamped and strengthened Transparency in Public Matters Act, please contact Kim Craitor and let him know (contact information below) and also contact your local MPP!
References:
- Transparency in Public Matters Act 2006 (Bill 142)
1st Reading - October 3, 2006 - Tight timeline for Craitor's transparency bill
Niagara Falls review - October 05, 2006 - Comparision of 1st readings of Bill 142 (2006) and Bill 123 (2004)
- I'm Sorry, this Meeting is Closed to the Public: Why We Need Comprehensive Open Meetings Legislation in Canada
IPC analysis of Bill 123, 2004 - Kim Craitor - MPP Niagara Falls - Liberal Party of Ontario
Contact Information
| Tight timeline for Craitor's transparency bill Niagara Falls review - October 05, 2006 by Corey Larocque Local News - Kim Craitor will have to play Beat the Clock if his bid to improve the openness of public bodies is to become law in less than a year. "That's the reality," the Niagara Falls MPP said Wednesday, a day after he introduced a private members bill that would require a long list of agencies to open their meetings to the public. But if the Liberal government swung its support behind Craitor, the bill could quickly work its way through Queen's Park, said Niagara Centre MPP Peter Kormos, a New Democrat who supports Craitor's idea of forcing more public bodies to hold open meetings. Liberal MPP Craitor introduced Bill 142, the Transparency in Public Matters Act, at Queen's Park Tuesday. If passed into law, it would require a list of boards including the Niagara Health System, Niagara Parks Commission, Niagara Falls Hydro and Ontario Lottery and Gaming to allow the public to attend their meetings. Ontarians could appeal to the Information and Privacy Commission if they believe a board improperly held a closed-door meeting. Private members bills are a popular way for opposition politicians and government backbenchers to champion causes that are important to them, but are not high priorities to the government. MPPs can introduce as many private members bills as they want. But each MPP has one chance each session to call a bill to second reading, where its chances for success improve. After second reading, bills are often sent to a committee to be studied, to get public input and to be amended. Craitor used his slot early in the session to bring forward a law to guarantee grandparents access to their grandchildren, even if the parents are divorced. A bill's final stage third reading, involves a debate and then a vote. That leaves a lot of work in a short period of time. When Sarnia-area MPP Caroline Di Cocco introduced an earlier version of the transparency bill in 2004, it took a year-and-a-half to get to second reading. Craitor's transparency bill could move faster if the Liberal cabinet would adopt it as government policy. That happened with another private members bill Craitor had, calling for Highway 405 to be renamed after Maj.-Gen. Sir Isaac Brock. Ontario's Transportation Minister Donna Cansfield adopted it as government policy this year. The naming ceremony will take place next Friday "I'm going to be talking with the premier and a couple of the ministers to see if it's possible to get the government to have its own legislation," Craitor said. McGuinty considers private members bills on a case-by-case basis, a spokeswoman for the premier told The Review. But government House Leader Jim Bradley said cabinet ministers generally don't publicly state their positions on private members bills to avoid the appearance they're trying to influence members. "I really don't indicate support for bills or not ... It's supposed to be a free vote without government interference," said Bradley, the St. Catharines MPP. As Tourism Minister, Bradley oversees the Niagara Parks Commission. Under its legislation, the commission was set up to operate at arm's length from the government. Its board is not required to meet in public. Some agencies affected by bill: - university and college boards of governors - hospital boards - public health boards - professional colleges of health professionals - a commission established under the municipal act - municipal councils - police boards - parks commission established by the provincial government - local health integration network - municipally owned hydro boards - Ontario College of Teachers council - Ontario Lottery and Gaming corporation clarocque@nfreview.com |
| Kim Craitor - Niagara Falls-
Liberal Party of Ontario Member's information from Legislative Assembly of Ontario Website
Member, Standing Committee on Regulations and Private Bills Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services Contact Information
|
