Item - 2024.MM18.16

Speaker Nunziata advised Council that the provisions of Chapter 27, Council Procedures, require that Motion MM18.16 be referred to the Executive Committee. A two-thirds vote of the Council Members present is required to waive referral.

That City Council delete recommendation 1 and replace with:

1. City Council request the City Manager, in consultation with the City Solicitor, to develop an action plan to recognize that Torontonians are able to practice their faith and access their place of worship free of intimidation and harassment; and are able to freely exercise their protected Charter rights to freedom of assembly, religion and expression and convey the action plan directly to relevant participating bodies including Municipal Licensing and Standards and the Toronto Police Service Board.

That:

1. City Council amend the recommendation by:

a. adding the words "which could include amending provisions of the City of Toronto Act giving Toronto the authority" after "introduce legislation"; and

b. deleting the words "faith-based schools, daycares, community centres and museums; and other institutions of a religious or cultural nature" and replacing with the words "and faith-based community facilities, including schools and daycares, ensuring that nothing in the legislation prevents peaceful protests or demonstrations outside of the “bubble zone” including those that occur as part of a labour union strike and direct the City Manager to develop an implementation and education action plan based on regulations accompanying the legislation and convey the action plan directly to relevant participating bodies including Municipal Licensing and Standards and the Toronto Police Services Board and report back to City Council once the requested legislation receives Royal Assent"

so that it reads as follows:

1. City Council request the Attorney-General of Ontario to introduce legislation, which could include amending provisions of the City of Toronto Act giving Toronto the authority to permit peaceful protests or demonstrations while creating safety "bubble"  zones (modelled on Ontario’s “bubble zone” law that protects women’s access to reproductive health), for places of worship; faith-based schools, daycares, community centres and museums; and other institutions of a religious or cultural nature and faith-based community facilities, including schools and daycares, ensuring that nothing in the legislation prevents peaceful protests or demonstrations outside of the “bubble zone”, including those that occur as part of a labour union strike and direct the City Manager to develop an implementation and education action plan based on regulations accompanying the legislation and convey the action plan directly to relevant participating bodies including Municipal Licensing and Standards and the Toronto Police Services Board and report back to City Council once the requested legislation receives Royal Assent. 

Councillor Bradford, rising on a Point of Order, stated that he called for a hold on the Item and that, as it is his Member Motion, he would like to hold it; that’s tradition.

Councillor Bradford, rising on a Point of Order, stated that if the Speaker were to play the tape back she would hear that he actually called out “hold” first.

Councillor Bradford, rising on a Point of Order, stated that he called it first and that he wished to know if he had to stand up.

Councillor Bradford, rising on a Point of Order, stated that it was his Member Motion.

During Councillor Matlow’s speaking time, Councillor Perks, rising on a Point of Order, stated that he wished to request a 5-minute recess.

Councillor Perks, rising on a Point of Order, stated that it is often the practice when Members need to confer with the Clerk about something, that Council takes a brief recess, and that's within the rules. Councillor Perks further stated that he was asking the Speaker to call a recess to allow to confer with the Clerk.

Mayor Chow, rising on a Point of Order, stated that she wished to confirm what Council was considering. Mayor Chow stated that Council is debating Item MM18.16 and that she sees two motions in the system.

Councillor Bradford, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that what just happened was obstruction, a disregard for the rules of procedure, and it was embarrassing. Councillor Bradford further stated that it was not right, and he stated he wished to call out that there have been a number of procedural errors and gamesmanship that are completely unacceptable and undemocratic.

Councillor Fletcher, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated she doesn’t think it’s a fair comment to state that what happened under the Speaker’s leadership and the Clerk’s leadership is gamesmanship, and that she would ask the Speaker to have Councillor Bradford withdraw the comment. Councillor Fletcher further stated that it’s a very serious allegation.

Councillor Perks, rising on a Point of Order, stated that he wanted to make sure he understands the effects of the different motions and stated that if Councillor Matlow’s motion passes, it deletes the recommendation, but Councillor Pasternak’s motion amends it. Councillor Perks further stated that he wished to know if he was correct in his understanding that, if Councillor Matlow’s motion passes, there is nothing left to amend.