Bill 117

[mat2312]

I just sent a letter to dickson also. Tried to explain to him that this is dealt with in the HTA already, and that I work in the hospital in his riding and have never seen an under 15 motorcycle passenger injury.

I'm still waiting for my letter from Mr. Dickson which his secretary promised me. If I don't hear from her in the next day or so I'm going to be following up. I want a meeting with him and have him explain to me face to face why he supports this legislation.

When the CSC blatantly says there's no concern, does Ms. Jaczek's opinion trump that?

[Bantario]

This MPP with her BILL was on the Oakley show yesterday, she is truely clueless! And as the President of the Canadian Motorcycling Association said "This is a solution looking for a problem"

She got shot down yesterday

[Kawi-G]

This is what I just e-mailed Ms. Jaczec. I know a prev. post had a letter also...i figured If we can fill her e-mail, she may just get the idea.
btw she's an "mpp" not "mp"




Ms. Jaczec:
The reason I’m writing you is in regards to the proposed Bill 117 that you intend put forward. As a third generation motorcycle rider, I think this is a misguided bill. Restricting passengers under the age of 14 years is the wrong approach to motorcycle safety, and would be difficult to enforce. I’m sure you have seen a teenage son or daughter that is taller than at least one of their parents. How will a police officer be able to determine age when the rider in question is wearing a heavy jacket, helmet, and going in the opposite direction as the officer, it’s next to impossible to recognize a friend on the road, let alone a complete stranger.fficeffice" />>>
> >
If you are truly concerned about motorcycle safety, maybe a look at some of the very cheap and very ineffective helmets that are available and LEGAL should be the victims of your panic over motorcycle safety. >>
> >
I look forward to taking my son on my motorcycle next year when I will judge for myself if he is strong enough and sensible enough to be a passenger. And trust me he’s not going with me until he knows what to do. Then, with the proper safety gear, (full face helmet, gloves, good footwear, etc.) he will go for a small civilized ride with Dad. Then possibly progress from that point. Putting an age restriction on maturity, knowledge, and common sense is impossible. >>
> >
If you want to read a very good article, Mark Richardson, editor of the Toronto Star Wheels section, has written an article that appeared on Sat. Nov. 8^th. Page 1, and continued on page 12.>>
> >
I look forward to hearing from you.
Respectfully;

[KawiZuki]

This is what I just e-mailed Ms. Jaczec. I know a prev. post had a letter also...i figured If we can fill her e-mail, she may just get the idea.
btw she's an "mpp" not "mp"




Ms. Jaczec:
The reason I’m writing you is in regards to the proposed Bill 117 that you intend put forward. As a third generation motorcycle rider, I think this is a misguided bill. Restricting passengers under the age of 14 years is the wrong approach to motorcycle safety, and would be difficult to enforce. I’m sure you have seen a teenage son or daughter that is taller than at least one of their parents. How will a police officer be able to determine age when the rider in question is wearing a heavy jacket, helmet, and going in the opposite direction as the officer, it’s next to impossible to recognize a friend on the road, let alone a complete stranger.fficeffice" />>>
> >
If you are truly concerned about motorcycle safety, maybe a look at some of the very cheap and very ineffective helmets that are available and LEGAL should be the victims of your panic over motorcycle safety. >>
> >
I look forward to taking my son on my motorcycle next year when I will judge for myself if he is strong enough and sensible enough to be a passenger. And trust me he’s not going with me until he knows what to do. Then, with the proper safety gear, (full face helmet, gloves, good footwear, etc.) he will go for a small civilized ride with Dad. Then possibly progress from that point. Putting an age restriction on maturity, knowledge, and common sense is impossible. >>
> >
If you want to read a very good article, Mark Richardson, editor of the Toronto Star Wheels section, has written an article that appeared on Sat. Nov. 8^th. Page 1, and continued on page 12.>>
> >
I look forward to hearing from you.
Respectfully;

I don't think they will take you seriously with all those smiley faces

Also, you should add the link for them to the Star article. I doubt they will search for information that disagrees with their bill

[Kawi-G]

The " ", ">" and other crap, happened when I cut and pasted, don't ask me why, I don't know computers that well...

As for the link, Ms. Jaczec can do a bit of reasearch for a change...

[gAbRoO]

This reply i got from my local MPP

From: Delaney_Bob-MPP

Subject: RE: my objection to Bill 117

Dear Gabroo:

Private Members' Bills of all types come before the Legislature. As the name suggests, these are initiatives of the individual Member, not of any Party in the Legislature. Few of them ever become law, even those that are passed at Second Reading. This bill, proposed at first reading, would, if successful, undergo the following procedures:

1. Second Reading Debate in the Legislature;
2. Assignment to a Standing Committee;
3. Consideration before a Standing Committee of the Legislature, in which individuals and groups may make deputations and presentations to the Committee;
4. Recommendation by the Standing Committee that the Bill be referred back to the Legislature for Third Reading;
5. Third Reading debate in the Legislature;
6. Passage in the Legislature;
7. Proclamation by the Lieutenant Governon in Council (i.e. becomes law).

It would be unfair to presume the will of the House in Second Reading Debate. It is also realistic to assume that you and others with concerns about the bill should not be worried that Second Reading Debate of the Bill, whether it passes or not, is equivalent to adopting and implementing it. It is certainly not.
If the Bill passes (and that is a b-i-g "if"), its hurdles are still formidable, as shown above. By the time the Bill is through Committee, if it is ever even called, it will likely look quite different than it does now. In the event that it passes, and is not assigned committee time, which is a very precious resource, it will "die on the order paper" if the Legislative Session is "prorogued" (in other words, if the government 'clears the decks' at some point in its mandate).
Even bills that are wildly popular, and have considerable merit, or are easy to implement, have trouble surmounting these challenges. I hope you do not lose sleep over the matter. Many thanks for your kind thoughts. The Legislature and the Legislative process have a way of sorting out what is necessary, what is workable, and what is not. All the very best.
Bob

[djltoronto]

This reply i got from my local MPP

Even bills that are wildly popular, and have considerable merit, or are easy to implement, have trouble surmounting these challenges. I hope you do not lose sleep over the matter. Many thanks for your kind thoughts. The Legislature and the Legislative process have a way of sorting out what is necessary, what is workable, and what is not. All the very best.
Bob

FAIL - did this tactic work for Bill 203?

[82Seca750]

FAIL - did this tactic work for Bill 203?

Consideration before a Standing Committee of the Legislature, in which individuals and groups may make deputations and presentations to the Committee;

the above process was completely side-stepped by the standing committee for Bill 203

the SVOA (Specialty Vehicle Association of Ontario) had spent weeks preparing a stout document that debated every clause in Bill 203....as has been done endlessly on many forums....the SVOA essentially represented the entire enthusiasts' crowd

the SVOA were told by then MOT Donna Cansfield (Liberal MPP) that the Standing Committee would hear their stance.....only for the SVOA to show up on the day and time scheduled, and be told that the decisions on the direction of Bill 203 had already been decided

plain and simple.....the system is a complete wank.....if they want something to go through, they don't care what those opposed think

[kellen]

I got a reply from my MPP

Dear Kellen,

Thank you for writing to me with your concerns on Bill 117, Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Child Passengers on Motorcycles). I know that you, and many others, are concerned about this bill. Safety is an important issue, especially when it comes to children, but I don’t think that an arbitrary ban is the answer.

There has not been any research or analysis demonstrating that restricting children under the age 14 from being passengers on motorcycles will improve safety.

Ensuring the safety of our children is important to all of us, but it is our responsibility to ensure that the steps we take to protect them are the right ones. Therefore, when the bill goes to second reading debate on December 4th I intend to vote against it.

Thank you again for writing and sharing your views on this bill.

Sincerely,

Ernie Hardeman
MPP for Oxford

[adri]

I got a reply from my MPP

Good on you & Ernie.

[eastcoast_gsx]

Its on now.

http://events.startcast.com/events6/...0_Vid_File.asx

[adri]

However this goes, I'm emailing Peter Kormos a big THANK YOU for his efforts.

[eastcoast_gsx]

All we hear is "We need to protect the children".... over and over and over again.

Sad.

[AFJ]

The vote as to whether to send it on to committee will be at about 4:15 pm.

The statistics given by Jaczek and Klees in the debate are either incorrect (either by design or incompetence - who can tell?) or inappropriate (refer to motorcycle accidents in non-mandatory helmet US states).

If the cry is to save children, then the bottom line statistics (which nobody quoted in the debate) shown below ( taken from the 2005 Ontario government Road Safety Annual Report) are:

Total number of 15 year old and younger children killed in road accidents of all types in 2005 - 43. Number of motorcycle passengers 15 years old or younger killed in 2005 - 0.

Total number of 15 year old or younger children injured in road accidents of all types in 2005 - 5,155. Number of motorcycle passengers 15 years old or younger injured in 2005 - 21.

AFJ

[eastcoast_gsx]

It is carried.

Need people with louder voices it seems.

[skip]

yeah its carried and now with committee

[Suzuki_girl]

Subject: Results of today's debate on private members bill
117

Today, Private membersBill 117, An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act to prohibit riding a motorcycle with a child passenger under 14 years of age was debated. There was a voice vote and it was determined that the “Yes” voice vote had it so the bill has passed and will move on to Justice committee.

I was also told that the Ontario legislature will prorogue next Thursday and there is a sense that Bill 117 won’t be include in the carry over motion and could die on the order paper at that time. We will continue to monitor Bill 117 and I will talk with others to determine next steps. Continued pressure on local MPPs over the next week could also help if we want this bill to silently go away and not be added to the list of Bills that will be kept alive for the next session.

Please call if you have questions or suggestions.

Thanks
Jo-Anne

Jo-Anne Farquhar

Director of Communications & Public Affairs

MMIC/COHV

Office - 416-491-4449 ext 105

Toll-Free - 1-877-470-6642

Cell - 416-996-9207

jfarquhar@mmic.ca

jfarquhar@cohv.ca

[kellen]

Great, so now there is nothing on paper saying who voted what?

[geoff-9]

i emailed every MPP a while ago and all i got was people saying they wont vote for it,


this is the most recent one to reply, i like how he points out that hes sick of the ban everyting attitude.


I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for forwarding your thoughts and concerns with regard to Bill 117 – Child Passengers on Motorcycles.

Although I have not had an opportunity to speak to this bill in the Ontario Legislature, your emails and calls have certainly allowed me to forward valuable information to my colleagues.

Lately, there is a ban this and ban that attitude sweeping through the Ontario Legislature, and this so-called policy is being made on the fly and is not based on sound scientific research or evidence. For that reason I voted ‘Nay’ against Bill 117 yesterday afternoon.

I have included Hansard transcript from Peter Shurman, a PC colleague, who captures my feelings on this bill nicely.
Thank you again for helping my colleagues and I represent your views to the best of our abilities.



Mr. Peter Shurman: First of all, my colleague for Oak Ridges-Markham is proposing a solution to a problem that just doesn't exist. It's not my quote; that's coming from the Canada Safety Council in a letter. The CSC does not see any cause for the restrictions that she proposes for motorcycle passengers and has found no statistical evidence that would merit these restrictions.
What is the motivation of the proposal, then? If you ask me, the member for Oak Ridges-Markham has overdosed on the Liberal nanny-statist Kool-Aid and is suffering from the father-knows-best hangover that ails her party and stems right down from Premier Dalton McGuinty, a.k.a. Big Daddy. Another ban-kill me now.
If the member had bothered to research the opinions of stakeholders in the area of motorcycling safety she would have found that she does not know best. Furthermore, bills like the one that we're debating today convince me that we are dealing with more than an addiction to bans. I think a better term for these ban-happy Liberals is legislative hypochondriacs: Not only is their solution to every problem a ban, but they're now introducing bans to resolve problems that aren't there. You want to regulate motorized two-wheel vehicles? Then what you do is you go after what's going on off-road, not what's going on on the road.
The Motorcycle and Moped Industry Council does not support Bill 117 because "it is not based on sound research or on scientific data. Statistics do not indicate the need for such a measure."
I look back in my own family history to my brother, the owner of two Harleys. He has been a motorcyclist for the past 40 years of his life, has three kids, and he's 55 years old. Both of those motorcycles are treated as well as his kids in the sense that they look like they came out of the showroom yesterday. That's what motorcyclists are about, including some of our people in the gallery from my constituency of Thornhill who have beseeched me to speak against this-and they didn't have to beseech very hard, because that's what I believe.
In my brother's family there was a rite of passage that involved becoming not old enough, but large enough to sit astride one of these metal beasts and join their dad, my brother, on one of his many cross-country trips: from here to Vancouver, from here down to Mexico in one case, back and forth across the United States, through the mountains, through the valleys, seeing-can you imagine seeing the countryside that way with your dad? And, no, there has never been an accident. His oldest son, now 30-plus, has a Harley-Davidson of his own. These are responsible bikers.
The Canada Safety Council says that children in Ontario are four times as likely to have been injured as passengers on bicycles than on motorcycles and 262 times as likely to suffer injuries as a passenger in a passenger vehicle than on a motorcycle. So I am assuming that the members opposite who support this are not going to start banning passengers in cars, are they?
The province already has legislation that outlines safety precautions. The Highway Traffic Act requires that motorcycle passengers be able to sit astride and rest their feet on the footrests, as mentioned by my friend the member from Welland. You have to be able to fit the bike. It's not about age, it's about size. It says you have to reach the pegs and it says you have to be 16. So why are we wasting time on this?
From the statistical information that's available to us from the opinions of stakeholders such as the Canada Safety Council, the Motorcycle and Moped Industry Council and the Motorcycle Safety Foundation, it appears that the current legislative requirements are working to ensure the safety of young motorcycle passengers. So introducing a ban on children under 14 riding as passengers on motorcycles accomplishes nothing other than cutting yet another family activity from the lives of Ontarians.
1420
There are a couple of other points that need some underscoring.
It puts a portion of our tourism industry at risk. It attracts people to this lovely province, so are we talking about deterring visitors from other provinces and the United States, people who are doing what I've described my brother having done with his family, doing it safely and avoiding accidents and teaching their children well what it means to sit astride one of these amazing machines that can cause damage but that when used properly are no less safe than anything else-and if they were, why wouldn't we be banning motorcycles? Let me not put that idea in anyone's mind.
The people in the gallery today also happen to be people who take their children on rides on motorcycles. They want to be able to continue to do so.
Let me conclude by saying that being trigger-happy is not the way to go. "Ban first, ask later" attempts to regulate every aspect of the lives of Ontario families, whether necessary or not, are not something that I like to see. I’ve e spoken out against them before, and that's why I won't be supporting this bill today.

[Randy]

Eventhough the Bill may die on the paper with the Justice Policy Committee taking a break over the holidays, we should not stop letting them know how we feel about this bill, just in case.

Send a letter to any of the following members, as they are sitting on that committee. Or, send one to the clerk of the committee (at bottom) to have it entered into the committee proceedings.

Committee Members:

Chair:
Lorenzo Berardinetti
LIB / Scarborough Southwest

Vice-Chair:
Jeff Leal
LIB / Peterborough

Members:
Christine Elliott
PC / Whitby--Oshawa

Peter Kormos
NDP / Welland

Reza Moridi
LIB / Richmond Hill

Yasir Naqvi
LIB / Ottawa Centre

Lou Rinaldi
LIB / Northumberland--Quinte West

John Yakabuski
PC / Renfrew--Nipissing--Pembroke

David Zimmer
LIB / Willowdale

Clerk:
Susan Sourial
Tel. 416-325-7352
susan_sourial@ontla.ola.org