Pickering College Charter Acts Repealed

Summary#

• This is a private bill for Pickering College, a private school in Ontario.

• It repeals two old laws from 1917 and 1960–61 that created and governed the school under special rules.

• The bill does not set new rules for the school. It simply removes those old special laws.

• It takes effect when it receives Royal Assent (final approval).

• Key points:

  • Repeals the 1917 Act that incorporated the school and the 1960–61 Act that amended it.
  • After repeal, those special laws will no longer apply to Pickering College.
  • The bill itself does not change school programs, fees, or staffing.
  • Effective on the day it becomes law.

What it means for you#

• Students and families
  • No direct changes to classes, tuition, programs, or daily school life are stated in this bill.
• School staff
  • No employment rules or benefits are changed by this bill.
• Alumni and donors
  • The school is removing its outdated, special founding laws. The bill does not say what legal framework replaces them, but it does not change donations or scholarships on its face.
• Local community
  • No new powers, duties, or services for cities or the province.
• School governance
  • The change is about the school’s legal setup. Any detailed governance rules would come from general Ontario law and the school’s own bylaws, not from this bill.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Proponents' View#

• Cleans up the law by removing century-old, special-purpose statutes that are no longer needed.
• Simplifies the school’s legal framework so it can rely on modern, general laws instead of a one-off charter.
• Does not create any new programs or government duties.
• May reduce confusion and paperwork by keeping governance rules in bylaws rather than in outdated statutes.

Opponents' View#

• Repealing the old Acts could remove historical rules; people may want clear information about what replaces them.
• Some may worry about transparency if governance details are no longer spelled out in a public statute.
• Stakeholders may seek assurances that existing contracts, scholarships, and property commitments continue without change.
• Critics might ask why repeal is needed now and whether any practical problems are being solved.