INTENDED
APPOINTMENTS
JIM CAMERON
CONTENTS
Wednesday 4 September 1996
Intended appointments
Mr Jim Cameron
Mr Edward Wetherall
Mrs Shirley Cordiner
Mr Dennis Tompkins
Mr Arthur Stewart
Mr William Buffam
Mr Graham Strachan
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Chair / Président: Mr Floyd Laughren (Nickel Belt ND)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Président: Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie ND)
*Mr RickBartolucci (Sudbury L)
Mr BruceCrozier (Essex South / -Sud L)
*Mr EdDoyle (Wentworth East / -Est PC)
*Mr Douglas B. Ford (Etobicoke-Humber PC)
*Mr GaryFox (Prince Edward-Lennox-South Hastings /
Prince Edward-Lennox-Hastings-Sud PC)
*Mr MichaelGravelle (Port Arthur L)
*Mr BertJohnson (Perth PC)
Mr PeterKormos (Welland-Thorold ND)
*Mr FloydLaughren (Nickel Belt ND)
Mr Gary L. Leadston (Kitchener-Wilmot PC)
*Mr TonyMartin (Sault Ste Marie ND)
*Mr DanNewman (Scarborough Centre / -Centre PC)
Mr Peter L. Preston (Brant-Haldimand PC)
*Mr BobWood (London South / -Sud PC)
*In attendance /présents
Substitutions present /Membres remplaçants présents:
Mr TonySilipo (Dovercourt ND) for Mr Kormos
Mr TedChudleigh (Halton North / -Nord PC) for Mr Leadston
Mr MarcelBeaubien (Lambton PC) for Mr Preston
Clerk / Greffier: Mr Todd Decker
Staff / Personnel: Mr David Pond, research officer, Legislative Research Service
The committee met at 0933 in room 228.
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
The Chair (Mr Floyd Laughren): The committee will come to order. Welcome back, members. This morning and this afternoon we have a pretty full agenda. The first item on the agenda is the report of the subcommittee dated August 21. Is anyone interested in moving its adoption?
Mr Bob Wood (London South): I so move.
The Chair: Mr Wood has moved its adoption. Is there any debate? All in favour? It's carried. Thank you, Bob.
INTENDED APPOINTMENTS
JIM CAMERON
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Jim Cameron, intended appointee as member, motor vehicle dealers compensation fund board of trustees.
The Chair: We move on to the second item, which is the intended appointment of Mr Jim Cameron to the motor vehicle dealers compensation fund board of trustees. If you can handle that title, Mr Cameron, without its going to your head, you'll be a worthwhile appointment. We welcome you to the committee. We have a tradition of allowing the person to say whatever they want to say for a while and then we move to each of the other parties for questions. If you want to make an opening statement, you're more than welcome.
Mr Jim Cameron: Thank you for meeting with me today and giving me an opportunity to discuss this appointment. Just to fill you in a little on my background, I'm 48 years old, a resident of Etobicoke. My wife and I have three children. I'm a chartered accountant and am a partner in the Markham office of KPMG Peat Marwick Thorne. I chair our firm's automobile dealer network and have a practice which deals almost exclusively with owner-managed businesses, and a very large portion of my practice relates to automobile dealers.
I graduated as a chartered accountant in 1971, left public accounting, and was the secretary-treasurer initially and, latterly, the new car sales manager with a large General Motors dealership here in Toronto.
I'm very much involved in the community. I am currently the chairman of the Credit Valley Hospital Foundation in Mississauga. I'm a volunteer account executive for the United Way of York region. Previously, I've had a number of positions with the Humber Valley Hockey Association, including coach, convenor and vice-president of the junior division. I've coached with Islington minor baseball and am the past president of the Mississauga Dixie Kiwanis Club.
I've been asked to address compensation. You're aware that I'm a chartered accountant with a public accounting firm. In this particular instance, I understand that the members of this committee are paid $85 per day, and I think that's appropriate, but it is significantly less than my normal chargeout rate.
Why do I think I should be considered? I am a chartered accountant with a strong background in owner-managed companies. I have experience with automobile dealerships. I'm experienced in arbitrating business separations. I have a conciliatory and flexible attitude. I'm conscientious and fair-minded. I have good written and oral communication skills, good interpersonal skills, and I think I'm objective. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr Cameron. Are there questions from members of the government?
Mr Dan Newman (Scarborough Centre): Good morning, Mr Cameron, and welcome to the committee. In reading through your résumé, given the board your appointment is to, the motor vehicle dealers compensation fund, and given the fact that you say you're fairminded and objective, some people still might say there might be a potential conflict of interest in that you are an audit partner for KPMG, heading up the automobile dealers section. Do you see any potential conflict of interest, where you might have clients of yours in an accounting firm, yet you're dealing with something before the board?
Mr Cameron: I don't think that's likely. To a large extent when you're dealing with these situations, they're dealerships in bankruptcy. If a person has a conflict of interest I think you state it and abstain. There are also automobile dealers in this group, and I know the legislation enables them to absent themselves from anything affecting them. I doubt there would be much in the way of a conflict of interest, but I wouldn't know that unless and until I was there.
Mr Newman: Does KPMG do any work in insolvency?
Mr Cameron: Sure we do.
Mr Newman: So potentially --
Mr Cameron: Probably in these situations, the appointments with respect to insolvency and everything would be made. Based on my review of the legislation, it's pretty straightforward as to whether an individual is entitled to compensation. I shouldn't think it would matter what involvement we may have as a liquidator or a trustee in bankruptcy.
Mr Newman: What would you define as a conflict of interest if something came before you? Say, for example, you're on the board; what would it take for you to say, "No, I'm not going to rule or partake in the decision-making in this case"?
Mr Cameron: If it appeared that you had any bias at all, even if it was in appearance only, you would not be involved, and that's what our rules of professional conduct as a chartered accountant would require.
Mr Newman: So you would be willing to step aside on those decisions that --
Mr Cameron: Absolutely. I think that would be expected.
Mr Newman: So I have your assurance that you would?
Mr Cameron: Absolutely.
0940
Mr Douglas B. Ford (Etobicoke-Humber): Good morning, Mr Cameron. I have three questions lined up if we have enough time. I'll start with the first one. What is the avenue of appeal that may be followed if a consumer feels unsatisfied by a decision of this board?
Mr Cameron: There's a review process or appeal process.
Mr Ford: Please tell the committee about your automotive experience. I see on your résumé that you have previously been employed by Roy Foss Motors as secretary-treasurer and presently are chairman of the national automobile dealer network of KPMG.
Mr Cameron: It was 1975 when I returned to public practice from the automotive business. I dealt, because of my background, with a number of automobile dealerships as clients, and that part of my practice has grown. It's a part of the practice that I'm very interested in. I chair a network within the firm that helps address the issues the dealerships are facing and enables us to expand our business in terms of serving automobile dealerships.
Mr Ford: How many years were you in that --
Mr Cameron: Five years.
Mr Ford: What is the maximum claim amount that can be paid out by the fund?
Mr Cameron: It's $15,000 per claimant.
Mr Ford: It's $15,000? Good.
Mr Cameron: From $10,000.
Mr Marcel Beaubien (Lambton): Thank you, Mr Cameron. Further to Mr Ford's question, do you feel there are adequate funds within the fund to pay the claims submitted to it?
Mr Cameron: I would suggest that the funds seem probably more than adequate. I note there's a surplus of about $6 million cash on hand. In the 10 years the fund's been operating, you've paid out $700,000. It seems to me that there are lots of funds available.
Mr Beaubien: While we're talking about claims being made to the fund, what is the most common type of claim presented to the fund?
Mr Cameron: Never having sat on the fund, I don't know the answer to that. I fully expect it's bankruptcies, where there are customer deposits involved and the people have not received their automobiles.
The Chair: That's a substantial reserve fund. It's not as much as the doctors have in the malpractice fund, but still substantial.
Mr Cameron: As a chartered accountant, it appears to me that it will cover. It won't be necessary to increase the fees.
Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur): Good morning, Mr Cameron. Under Bill 54, the Safety and Consumer Statutes Administration Act, the move is afoot to have the fund and various aspects of the motor vehicle industry be self-regulated in terms of the industry itself having control of this particular program. Can I ask what you think of that? Obviously, there is some level of concern that if it's regulated by those among the industry it might make a difference in terms of consumer trust, I suppose, but also just in terms of whether there might be a change in the priorities.
Mr Cameron: As you may perhaps be aware, chartered accountants are a self-regulated profession. I personally believe that's healthy. In a self-regulated industry or profession, the people involved tend to be very concerned and want to make sure they're dealing with things fairly. It tends to be the leaders who are going to regulate the profession or the industry, and sometimes they really overstep to ensure the fairness. I think the fear everybody has is being regulated by individuals who aren't familiar with the business or the profession. I think self-regulation is excellent and, with the benefit of hindsight, I think one would find that it was probably successful, even in this industry, which I know has been slightly tarnished over the years, I think with some reasonable justification.
Mr Gravelle: I notice in the research material provided to us -- and you mentioned that $700,000-plus has been paid out, and I think the number of cases cited was 308. I don't know whether that's a lot or a little. It doesn't sound like a lot, that from 1986 to now there have been 308 cases. I guess it's that the consumer has to come forward, rather than -- as the system stands, does the consumer have to come forward to make a claim? Is it based more on the industry? In other words, is it consumer-driven or is it the other way in terms of how people can access the fund?
Mr Cameron: I would expect it's probably consumer-driven. If you're dealing with a bankruptcy, in all probability the trustee is aware of the compensation fund. If he's dealing with creditors who are customers, they would probably steer the individuals to the compensation fund. I also think we're probably dealing with a situation in Ontario where there haven't been that many failures of automobile dealerships. The deposit funds are held in trust in any event, so if the dealer has complied with the regulations those funds should not be at risk and it should be possible for the customer to receive the funds anyway. I know the Toronto Automobile Dealers Association has posted a bond that covers its members. My guess is that there's not a lot of abuse in this particular area. There may have been when the legislation was first written, but I think the dealers comply pretty well with the legislation such that there are not problems refunding the deposits.
Mr Gravelle: The question of unregulated car sales in Ontario: I think the figure is somewhere around 200,000. That's a lot.
Mr Cameron: It is a tremendous number.
Mr Gravelle: Do you see the fund being able to get involved in that aspect of the business; in other words, expanding the area they generally deal in? Obviously, it's one that car dealers themselves would be very interested in having changed.
Mr Cameron: Yes, the car dealers are very interested in that. I noted that it was in the list of their three recommendations. Of course what's happening is that those referred to as curbsiders are taking some of the revenues the dealers might otherwise get if they were selling the units. I know the dealers would also like to see GST charged on those curbsider cars, because the individual has an advantage over the dealer in selling that vehicle because he doesn't have to charge GST.
That whole area is probably very, very difficult to control. The people who are doing it are advertising in the papers as though they were the owners of these vehicles but they have purchased them somewhere else, and they're here today, gone tomorrow. That's probably the difficulty. I'm not saying they're all like that, but that tends to be a problem. A consumer who has been taken advantage of or who hasn't been dealt with properly has no recourse and the person from whom he's purchased the vehicle has disappeared.
It's a problem in the industry. Whether this fund is able to deal with it, I don't know. I suppose the premise probably was that the dealers contribute to the fund and there's protection for the consumer in dealing with the dealer, so why would you not deal with the dealer as opposed to a private individual? If indeed it's intended that the industry fund the program, it seems appropriate to me that only the customers of the people funding the program would be protected.
Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt): Thank you, Mr Cameron. Under the areas contemplated for self-regulation are, as I'm sure you're aware, such areas as registration and accreditation of members of the industry, investigation of consumer complaints, suspension or revocation of registrations, and prosecutions. Just to follow up on some of the discussion you were having with Mr Gravelle on this question of self-regulation, would it be your view that all of those are areas that would be appropriate to be under the self-regulating aspect of the industry?
Mr Cameron: I think it probably would. That's the way other self-regulated professions and industries work. There would be a committee, probably not dissimilar from this group, that would make the decisions about disciplining their members and how they should be disciplined. In fact, sometimes those may be the best people to determine how to discipline the dealers who are not complying with the regulations because it gives everybody a bad name. I personally believe you would find such a group very responsible, and it may be difficult to be only partially self-regulated.
Mr Silipo: How would you deal with the concern I have and which I know many others have expressed, which wouldn't be just in this area but generally in terms of the whole question of self-regulation, which is: How can that be done in a such way that we assure the public it is being done as strictly as if it were done either by members of the general public outside of the industry appointed by government, or indeed by government itself?
0950
Mr Cameron: I think you'd have to make it quite clear to the industry that their responsibility is to look after the members of the public, and that in the event they prove they were unable to do that or didn't do it satisfactorily, they would have to answer to a committee or a group. I think you would review their performance, and you've certainly got information from the past that you can compare their performance with. I don't think that's so much a matter of, how do you protect the public, as it is, how you deal with an industry that regulates itself?
Mr Silipo: Mr Cameron, you certainly strike me as somebody who comes to this position with a fair amount of knowledge about some of the areas and work that needs to be done. I say that because I want that to be on the record and, second, because in my short stint on this committee that hasn't always been my experience. I very much appreciate seeing that in your presentation this morning and in your answers to our questions.
There's one other question which is a standard question for us. I guess it's a two-parter. First of all, I'd be interested in hearing how you became interested in this position and, second, I'd be interested in knowing whether you are a member of the Conservative Party or indeed any other political party.
Mr Cameron: I became aware of this position through a friend of mine, a fellow by the name of Brian Caldwell, who's the executive director of the Canadian Association of Japanese Automobile Dealers. He's a person that I work with quite carefully.
To answer the question, am I a member of any political party, the answer's probably yes, but I'm not positive. If the answer is yes, it is the Progressive Conservative Party, but I think all that does is give me an opportunity to vote. Having made contributions in the past, which sometimes our firm members are required to -- and I've made contributions to parties other than the PC Party -- I think there's a strong possibility that I am, but I don't honestly know.
Mr Silipo: Okay. Thank you.
Mr Cameron: Do you?
Mr Silipo: Do I what, sir?
Mr Cameron: Do you know?
Mr Silipo: Do I know if you are?
Mr Cameron: Yes.
Mr Silipo: I don't, no. That's why I asked the question. Sometimes we know, sometimes we don't know. In this case I would also say that as far as I'm concerned it doesn't particularly make a difference, but I think it's important for us to know for the record, because we do review on this committee, as you know, a number of appointments -- not as many as we might like, but it is the one opportunity we have as members, not only of the opposition but indeed of the government, to review people who are recommended for appointments. From my perspective, it's useful to know when people have political affiliations, if they do.
Mr Cameron: Just for any other members who may be interested in that, I see that as being a non-issue. I'm not political.
Mr Silipo: I would agree with you that it should be a non-issue, Mr Cameron. It's sometimes become an issue, and I think it's important that we have that information out very clearly. I believe it's quite appropriate to appoint people to various agencies, boards and commissions who do have political affiliations to any of the three main parties or indeed any other political party. I don't think it's something that should be held against them, but unfortunately in the past it's become an issue -- it's been made an issue by members of the governing party today -- so it's important that we have that information on the record.
As I said, I'm quite impressed with the credentials you bring to this position and I will certainly be more than happy to support your appointment to this board.
Mr Cameron: Thank you very much for your kind comments.
The Chair: Are there any other questions?
Mr Bob Wood: We'll waive the balance of our time.
The Chair: Mr Cameron, thank you very much for your appearance and for your thoughtful responses to the questions.
Mr Cameron: Thank you for your time.
EDWARD WETHERALL
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition and third parties: Edward Wetherall, intended appointee as part-time member, Town of Port Hope Police Services Board.
The Chair: The next intended appointment is for Mr Ed Wetherall to the Town of Port Hope Police Services Board. Mr Wetherall, we welcome you to the committee and offer you the opportunity to say a few opening remarks, if that's your wish. It's not required, but if you wish.
Mr Edward Wetherall: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I was pleased to note that I was a unanimous choice of all the parties to appear before the committee. It makes me feel a little wanted.
The Chair: That's one way of putting it.
Mr Wetherall: Just to give you a very short rundown on my background, I came to Canada in 1950 from Ireland and started to work for IBM, and I spent 11 years with IBM. I moved up the ladder reasonably fast, and eventually took over as plant manager of General Instrument. The company was 25 people at that time, but during my tenure, leadership, grew to 400 people. During this period I felt it was necessary to give something back to my community, so I got into public service work with the Kinsmen Club, for one, and the Rotary Club for another -- not at the same time, but at different times -- and eventually I was approached to run for councillor, so I spent 10 years on the council in Ajax. I was chairman of the finance and legislation committee, and chairman of the police committee for a time, and chairman of the negotiating committee, and chairman of the fire committee.
There's one little anecdote as far as that is concerned that I would like to leave with the committee, because it reflects my belief in public service. As chairman of the fire committee, and also chairman of the finance and legislation, I think the firemen thought they had an easy mark. Sixteen of them arrived at my house one night in a fire truck and said "We need this and we need that, we need a smoke extractor, we need a rescue truck" and so on. So after a little refreshment I said: "Look fellows, you've got wives. Are they involved with you?" They said, "No, they're not involved." So I said: "You've got a good hall. Why don't you get your wives involved and run some euchres and other things and raise some money for the fire department?" So they did.
To complete the story, I hear the sirens going one night and the fire truck comes down the street and into my driveway. They came in and gave me a card and a box of cigars and they said, "To the best damn fire chairman we've ever had." And that was my thanks for anything I'd done in getting these people to do something for themselves.
After I completed my service in Ajax, because I'd played a leading role, I moved to Toronto and I became chairman of the borough of York planning board, three years, and then I was on the Metro planning board.
Subsequently, when I retired from General Instrument, I moved to Port Hope. The only involvement I've had in Port Hope has been with the hospital board, as chairman of the committee which did the planning for the 21st century.
I guess that wraps up a short background of my involvements. It's been work and service for the last 40 years.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr Wetherall. Are there any questions?
Mr Beaubien: Good morning, Mr Wetherall. I'm glad to see that you're apolitical. I was not going to ask you a question as to your political affiliation, because I think, if you're going to sit on the police services board, political colour makes no difference. In your preamble you mentioned that work and service in your community are very important. I agree with you, and I fail to see, if you belong to one party as opposed to another, where that would make a difference, because you are dealing with local issues.
As a former long-standing municipally elected official, I'm sure you gained an awful lot of experience. What do you feel were some of the main criteria you learned when you were an elected official to prepare you to deal with the policing needs of the 1990s?
Mr Wetherall: To go back to your first remark, I don't think any of us here are ashamed of our political affiliation. We all have had some.
I think it's my background in management, in budgeting -- budgeting has been my forte -- my commonsense approach to the subject, and also my research and my knowledge of the subject. I don't think you can do that in the time I've had, the last week, but it can be done over a short period of time, six months to a year into your tenure. I've always been a person who sat back and listened and then became quite active in the process, having finished up as chairman in most of the areas I worked in.
1000
Mr Ford: Good morning, Mr Wetherall. I just read your backgrounder here and it impressed me that you had 300 employees in a 40,000-square-foot plant. You must have been well organized in there.
Mr Wetherall: It was well organized.
Mr Ford: I know the size of a plant with 300 people is a lot of people in that 40,000 square feet.
Mr Wetherall: Yes, well, the type of work that we were doing was in electronics.
Mr Ford: It must have been small.
Mr Wetherall: Yes, it was a small area. Probably a desk like this would hold one to two people.
Mr Ford: Another thing I was impressed by is that you're an ex-Rotarian or you're still a Rotarian.
Mr Wetherall: No, I've retired from the Rotary.
Mr Ford: My basic questions here, I have two of them. What are some of the community concerns in Port Hope with regard to policing issues and police services?
Mr Wetherall: There's one big issue at the present time, and I'm not in total agreement to council's response to it, and that is vandalism. That is our big problem right now. Port Hope doesn't have the problems of the big city, but they have one problem, and that is vandalism. Now, the council has come out with a policy of paying 10% of the damage to someone who will -- "snitch" is not the right word, but will report the person and see that they come to justice, a minimum of $100. I don't believe that is the answer. I believe public policing on a voluntary basis is the answer, that people become aware that this is costing them money and this is their property, and they willingly report back to the police or call the police.
There's one thing that I found when I called about something. I tried to find a number other than 911 and I couldn't find a number. I couldn't find it in the blue pages, and I think it is completely wrong that the 911 number should be used to the extent it is. I think it should be a separate number just to call the police station and say, "There's a problem in this area." I'm sure they must be inundated with calls on 911 when it should be for, I think, an absolute emergency.
Mr Ford: Don't they have a regular number?
Mr Wetherall: There's a regular number, but I couldn't find it published anywhere. I had to call the town hall to get it. I don't know how it is in other municipalities.
Mr Ford: That's a good answer, anyway.
Why is it important to you to make a contribution to your community by serving specifically on a police services board?
Mr Wetherall: It brings it very close to my family. We've always been a law-and-order family. My daughter Gael Miles, who is now a regional councillor in the city of Brampton, took a crime prevention course and worked for the Vanier Institute for a while, and then Brampton advertised for a person to take over the management of crime prevention in the city. Of over 80 applicants, she got the job. She wrote what I think is called the STEP program for seniors, which was recognized across North America. She got the Solicitor General's award. She got the crime prevention award internationally and became a speaker over North America. Gael has often said to me, "Dad, if you ever do anything else in your life, get on the police services board." So when I was asked would I be willing to serve, it brought it right close to my life.
Mr Ford: It seems you've had an extensive background in various companies, organizations and different things of that nature. Those are all my questions, sir.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr Ford. That actually uses up the time for the government side.
Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): Welcome, Mr Wetherall. Any relations in Sudbury, Ontario?
Mr Wetherall: To who?
Mr Bartolucci: In Sudbury, Ontario, do you have any?
Mr Wetherall: There are not too many spelled the way my name's spelled. My name is spelled W-E-T, and they're W-E-A, most of them. But coming from Ireland -- and a lot of Wetheralls were here before.
Mr Bartolucci: I married somebody from Ireland. That's why the name is so familiar.
Mr Bert Johnson (Perth): We'll forgive you.
Mr Bartolucci: Absolutely.
Now that we've finished asking questions about Rotarians and living by the four-way test and 911 numbers and relatives, let's talk about police issues. Who's the minister responsible for the police services board?
Mr Wetherall: It's the Solicitor General.
Mr Bartolucci: That's right, good. What do you think his role is in the operating of a police services board?
Mr Wetherall: I think everything starts at Queen's Park. In all of my municipal life, I realized that we were the child of the province. He has to be the overseer and the person who makes the changes through legislation. Police services boards have no control over legislation; it has to come from the Solicitor General's office.
Mr Bartolucci: All right, then, if that's what the Solicitor General's role is, what do you consider the responsibilities of a police services board member?
Mr Wetherall: The municipality has responsibility for policing the municipality through the administrative unit, which is the police services board. As a member, I am responsible, one of five, for the policing and the law enforcement within the municipality. I think I would take that very seriously.
Mr Bartolucci: What other roles do you see yourself having as a board member?
Mr Wetherall: I certainly wouldn't go in with any agenda. It has to be a learning process for me and, as I say, most of these areas, I have faith, it's surprising how often common sense comes into the situation. I've read some cases in my background papers that surprised me that people would take the approach they did in certain situations.
Mr Bartolucci: As long as that common sense doesn't have a revolution attached to it, I'm sure it could probably work.
Let's talk about that. As a board member, if you have a particular view and that view is shared by your board and the Solicitor General has an opposing view, how do you see there would be a rationalizing of opinions in this instance?
Mr Wetherall: I think it would be very difficult. Usually something of this nature starts with a confrontation, and confrontation is probably a lack of knowledge as to what your position should be in the situation. I think it's laid down in the Police Services Act and I would have to follow those rules. You're bringing up a case which actually happened. I could never have approached it in the way it was approached.
Mr Bartolucci: You know that your police force is in negotiations right now.
Mr Wetherall: Yes. I understand it has been close to completion. I'm not too sure. I think they went to arbitration.
Mr Bartolucci: Yes, conciliation, I think.
Mr Wetherall: I only know what I read in the paper in that regard.
Mr Bartolucci: Did you talk to any of the police force about the negotiations, about their contract, why they refused the contract?
Mr Wetherall: Not at all. The only thing I've talked to the police about, the bicycle patrol and so on, is about certain things I see downtown and so on.
Mr Bartolucci: Did you talk to Rick Austin or John Floyd about the contract, the two councillors who sit on the board?
Mr Wetherall: No, I haven't talked to them.
Mr Bartolucci: Did you talk to them about their opinion with regard to the way the board is made up, or have you talked to any town councillors about the format of the board, the composition?
Mr Wetherall: No.
Mr Bartolucci: Do you agree with the composition of the board, three and two -- three provincial appointees?
Mr Wetherall: I have no problem with it. I think the board is made up properly and five people is quite adequate.
Mr Bartolucci: Do you think the breakdown should be more appointees than those reflective of those elected by the community to serve on the police services board?
Mr Wetherall: I think the balance is proper at the present time. Of course, people say whoever pays the piper calls the tune, but --
Mr Bartolucci: The taxpayers pay the piper.
Mr Wetherall: Yes, the taxpayers pay the piper. I guess it's fairly heavy, on a municipal basis. It's not cheap; policing isn't cheap any more. But I see the makeup as proper. I wouldn't like to see that changed.
Mr Bartolucci: What initiatives are your police force taking presently that would make them unique to other police forces? Any?
Mr Wetherall: I think, number one, the makeup of the support staff: There are handicapped and aboriginal on there. That is going in the right direction. I think the bicycle patrols, the local policing, is another good direction. I would quite frankly like to see more of a police presence in the downtown area, where seniors congregate and so on.
1010
Mr Bartolucci: So you're a strong believer in community-based policing.
Mr Wetherall: I was brought up with it.
Mr Bartolucci: You and I agree on that. There's absolutely no question about that.
Have you talked to any of the police officers with regard to the way they see the process involving a complaint towards a police officer? Have you talked to any of them at all about what their views are?
Mr Wetherall: No, I haven't. The short time I've had has been reading background material and so on. I haven't, really, and I don't even know if it would be right to do so until I take a position on the services board.
Mr Bartolucci: Good luck.
Mr Silipo: Mr Wetherall, a couple of questions with respect to the role of the police services board, just picking up on some of the questions Mr Bartolucci asked. What's your sense of the kind of impact that provincial cuts are having on police services generally, and obviously more particularly in Port Hope? Have you seen any? Do you know what is happening there?
Mr Wetherall: I haven't heard of a problem in Port Hope, but I think, number one, the job of the police services board is policing and law and order within the municipality. Certainly in these days you have to take a close look at the budget and so on. It's amazing sometimes. When you take the positives of a situation as far as even a police force is concerned, and take the negatives, and you inventory those and you work on the negatives, I think you can find ways to improve not only the force but the cost of policing, because if you improve something, the costs usually go down.
But there's one thing I think we have to work on very closely, and that is public policing, because there's no cost to public policing. It's a matter of police, instead of looking for trouble, responding to trouble when it's brought to their notice, and I'm sure there are many instances where they're not available to see it happening. But I think through Neighbourhood Watch and other programs we can work within the budget that we've been given. As I say, I don't think Port Hope has a financial problem anyway, either the police force or the municipality. It's in surprisingly good shape.
Mr Silipo: I hope that continues, for the sake of Port Hope, in terms of that financial stability. But what do you see as being areas that would be appropriate and areas that might not be appropriate in terms of something the Solicitor General seems to be pushing, which is the whole issue of other funding sources for police services, whether it's charging for a variety of services or a variety of fund-raising -- you gave us an interesting anecdote about some fund-raising activities with respect to the fire services. What kinds of areas would you draw the line on in terms of ensuring the public continues to have a police service that clearly it's entitled to have and that is obviously paid for collectively through our taxes, as opposed to other avenues? What kind of areas, given the kind of really interesting experience that you bring to the table?
Mr Wetherall: I couldn't agree with financing police services especially by any other means than the broad board. It's the proper way and it's the cheapest way. Whether it's through provincial taxes or local taxes, municipal taxes, I think it has to be that way. It's a strange thing when you get other people involved and contributions from industry and so on. There may not be any call for special treatment, but all I'm saying is this. I think it should be done in many other areas, as the broad board of taxation across the municipality and across the province for policing, and the municipality, is the proper way to go. I can't see it being done any other way. I think these are ideas that come up in a time of crisis and budgeting and so on, but I wouldn't agree with it.
Mr Silipo: If the budget situation develops to the point where, in your view as a member of the board, provincial cuts begin to threaten the level and quality of policing that would be provided in Port Hope, what would you see your role as a member of the board in dealing with that circumstance?
Mr Wetherall: I think my job as a member of the board is, number one, to provide policing and law-and-order protection within the municipality and come up with the most efficient way to do that as far as policing. I don't think I would fire a policeman, but I'd say if we have one too many, a time of attrition would have to take care of it. But it's a strange thing; people try to do things overnight. I found in my budgeting for the municipality of Ajax that people came to me with things which were literally impossible, and I'd say, "Go back and look at this over five years," and all those things got done. Believe me, they got done, whether it was lighting for the ballpark or fencing or whatever else.
I think it's the same with budgeting for the police force. It can't be achieved overnight, but if you want to talk about more efficiency, it should be done over a period of four to five years. I would look to policing first. Budgeting would come second, but it would be done efficiently.
Mr Silipo: What are your thoughts on the question of accountability over police budgets? I'm sure you know that a number of municipalities make the argument that because the bulk of the funding for police services is raised through property taxes, the budgets of police boards should be subject to the approval of the local municipal council as opposed to the review process that exists now. I ask this particularly given your experience as a former municipal councillor, but I'd be interested in your thoughts on this.
Mr Wetherall: I got into one that went to the Supreme Court; my ruling won in the Supreme Court with the school boards, but I won the war and lost the battle because the province changed the law and gave the school board control over capital expenditures they didn't have at the time. It's something that's rather hard in this instance to comment on because I don't know what the breakdown is between provincial funding and local funding, but it's all coming from the taxpayer, whether it's municipal taxes or provincial taxes. The sword has to be with the province, as I see it, and this is with the knowledge I have the present time.
Mr Silipo: One last question. You said in your opening comments that you're apolitical. Does that mean that you're not a member of any political party?
Mr Wetherall: No, it doesn't. I don't think I'm ashamed of my political affiliation. I'm sure none of you are. Maybe non-partisan would be a better word.
Mr Silipo: Okay, fair enough. Are you member of any political party?
Mr Wetherall: Yes, I am.
Mr Silipo: Which party?
Mr Wetherall: The Conservative Party.
The Chair: Any further questions of Mr Wetherall? If not, thank you, Mr Wetherall, for coming before the committee. We appreciate your presence.
1020
SHIRLEY CORDINER
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Shirley Cordiner, intended appointee as board member, Region of Niagara Police Services Board.
The Chair: The next intended appointment is Shirley Cordiner for the Region of Niagara Police Services Board. Ms Cordiner, we welcome you to the committee and offer you the opportunity to make any opening remarks you might want to make.
Mrs Shirley Cordiner: Thank you very much. I thought I would give you some background this morning about myself.
I was born and raised in St Catharines and moved to Ridgeway 14 years ago with my husband and our three sons. As our boys were growing up I became involved in volunteering in the schools they attended and in the scouting and soccer programs in the town of Fort Erie. I found I enjoyed working with other people to help coordinate and promote good programming in these organizations to increase enjoyment for the youth involved.
As we all know, once people realize you are a person who gets the job done you are asked to join many volunteer committees.
In the fall of 1992, when the community policing initiative was starting in Ridgeway-Crystal Beach, I was asked to sit on this committee. The committee comprises citizens from the Ridgeway-Crystal Beach area and officers from the Niagara Regional Police Services. We are a problem-solving committee and also a committee that organizes and promotes crime prevention programs as they are needed.
Our community policing program has thrived over the past few years. We have a liaison officer designated for our high school and our elementary schools. His presence no longer is viewed by the community as, there must be a problem in the school or why would he be there? They now understand it is a part of community policing.
In being involved with so many aspects of the community, I find it very satisfying to be able to sit down with police officers and work out solutions to some of our problems in Ridgeway-Crystal Beach.
In my position as chairman of the committee, I was asked by Chief Waddell to sit on his citizens' advisory committee. This group consists of all the community policing chairmen in the Niagara region.
In the fall 1994 I was elected as a trustee to the Niagara South Board of Education. Again with my work in the community, I feel I'm a strong representative from Fort Erie on this school board. I'm in contact with the parents as I sit on two parent councils and feel I can ably express their concerns about education on this board.
As a trustee I sit on elementary negotiations and the promotional committee for vice-principals. My experience over the past two years enhances my qualifications to sit on the police services board.
In closing I would like you to know I'm a very high- energy person who enjoys working with other people to succeed in attaining positive results.
Mr Ed Doyle (Wentworth East): Thank you for appearing today. How are things in Niagara this morning?
Mrs Cordiner: I came to Toronto last night, so I don't know. The traffic is not like here.
Mr Doyle: It took me two hours to get in from half the distance, so I can understand. I think you made the right move. I wish I had come in last night.
There's lot of community experience on both your résumé that we see here and in what you've told us this morning. You particularly mentioned community policing. That seems to fit quite well with this potential appointment.
Could you tell us what the challenges are for the police force in your community and if there are any specific regional concerns regarding this?
Mrs Cordiner: For our local community of Ridgeway-Crystal Beach break-and-enter is a major problem, and as fall approaches and our American residents leave the area it increases. I know that a special patrol is being put on this fall to try and deal with the situation and get a handle on it as fall progresses.
As far as regional concerns, I think for all of us in the peninsula the coming of the casino to Niagara Falls is a concern, and I'm sure for the town of Fort Erie the increase and influx of tourists and people attending the casino coming across the Peace Bridge. I have to think that Fort Erie will be dealing with maybe a few different problems than we have had previously.
Mr Doyle: If you are appointed as a board member, I wonder if some of the projects and initiates that you have in mind could be explained. Do you have a few?
Mrs Cordiner: The main project in the initiatives and the police services board for Niagara Peninsula would be the increase of community policing in our communities. I know, coming up this fall, Fort Erie has now been broken into five different areas, Ridgeway-Crystal Beach being one area for community policing, and four other areas. Designated officers will be working in those areas so that citizens will get to know them.
I think it is very important. I've seen community policing in Ridgeway-Crystal Beach have a very positive effect on our youth, and for myself on the police services board, that is an important concern that I certainly will support.
Mr Doyle: As somebody who's been involved in the way you have, you see expansion as a good idea in that regard?
Mrs Cordiner: Yes.
Mr Ford: Good morning, Mrs Cordiner. I see you have three sons. I have three sons of my own, so I know why you're involved in the Scouting movement and the soccer situation and the athletics and on the police services board, which all sort of tie in one way or the other.
I have a couple of basic questions that I'd like you to ask you. Your résumé shows that you are the chair of the Ridgeway-Crystal Beach community policing committee. You are also involved in Chief Waddell's committee for the selection of superintendents. How do you come to be involved in your community policing?
Mrs Cordiner: I became involved in community policing when they were looking for members from the community who can relate well with the citizens of the committee and who are known in the community. Maybe with my involvement in the schools where our youth are, my background in all areas in volunteer work, my relationship with the community is known. I am known in the community, so I can carry any problems they would like known to the police that they may not approach the police with themselves. They are very hesitant. We would work on areas in Ridgeway-Crystal Beach.
In Ridgeway we have one high school. We know that this week, with high schools now going back, our lunch hours in our business area are inundated by high school students. In working with Niagara Regional Police Services we will have one of our police officers likely walking the beat through that time period, from 12 to 1, just to reinforce that he or she is out there.
To sit on the promotion of superintendents, Chief Waddell was the first citizen to ever do this in the history of Niagara Regional Police. I believe he felt that my input would be important as a citizen. His objectives for Niagara Regional Police are to include citizens wherever possible. In sitting as a trustee on the Niagara south board on a promotional committee I found my background only helped. I think in sitting on that promotional committee I was able to give some insight into what the citizens are looking for in our executive officers.
Mr Ford: How many police do you have down there in that area, on that police board?
Mrs Cordiner: In Niagara Regional Police I think we have around 700, 800 police, but with civilians I would think maybe over 1,000 employees.
Mr Ford: That's fine. Thank you.
Mr Bartolucci: Again welcome. Good luck in your role. You're obviously a community person who wants the best for the community. No doubt your appointment will be upheld today in this committee.
Let me ask you a couple of question with regard to policing in general. The Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services, what effect does that has on policing itself?
Mrs Cordiner: My only knowledge of OCCPS is that in the cuts of the funding with Niagara Regional Police the association felt there was a reduction in numbers of our police officers because of this. I believe their appeal, and with Niagara region, was to OCCPS to come down to investigate. Really that is the my only knowledge of OCCPS.
Mr Bartolucci: Are you familiar with the special investigations unit component?
1030
Mrs Cordiner: Not really, no. I've heard the name.
Mr Bartolucci: They are a special investigations unit obviously, by its name. Do you think that a police officer should head up that committee?
Mrs Cordiner: A special investigations? For the management of that? Yes, I believe so.
Mr Bartolucci: The Solicitor General disagrees with you. If it was a recommendation from your board that you see nothing wrong -- and nor do I -- with a police officer or a former police officer heading up SIU, how would you try to convince the Solicitor General that it's a good idea to have a police officer policing a special investigations unit?
Mrs Cordiner: I think to manage that type of unit you would have to have knowledge of the laws of the police service and knowledge of whatever is being investigated, the procedures to follow. I don't really believe a citizen would have the knowledge to do that.
Mr Bartolucci: It's under review right now. There have been temporary placements and I think they're struggling with it. There was a very good system in place before, but for some reason there are some changes. We don't know why either.
Let's go back to community-based policing, because that is a very, very important initiative.
Mrs Cordiner: Yes, it is.
Mr Bartolucci: How do you see that expanding in the schools? You have a police officer presently going into the schools, you said.
Mrs Cordiner: Yes.
Mr Bartolucci: How do you expand community-based policing from that police officer coming into the schools and being in communities, but expanding the program?
Mrs Cordiner: I'll speak from personal experience, which is best for myself. We have been very fortunate in Ridgeway-Crystal Beach that our community policing officers use a lot of their off-duty time. In Ridgeway-Crystal Beach we have youth programs now going on in our schools two nights of the week to help get them off the streets. I know being a trustee, my principals in my schools, if there is a problem that they think is developing, have no hesitation to call our community officer in to sit down and discuss it and try to check it before it goes further.
Because of the time limits of our community policing officers, who of course are also on there for calls for service, I would like to see the increase of time spent in our schools. I truly believe that's where we have to start, with our youth being able to talk to our police officers.
I would like to see our officers spend the time to drop into the schools and let our youth get to know them a little bit. Also, I know for our officer in the high school, he is able to explain some law enforcement, and any youth who look as if they would like to go into law and security, he has the background to let them know. Our police in our schools are very important and not just to be called in when there is a problem.
Mr Bartolucci: We might want to wait until the two gentlemen are finished. They spoke all the way through your answer. It was an excellent answer and they could have learned something from it. However, we'll go on now because I think we have their attention. Hopefully, we'll keep it. They have a short attention span, the government side of the House.
However, as you see policing unfold in your own area and in the province, what problems do you see looming on the horizon, not for any particular reason, but for a variety of reasons?
Mrs Cordiner: It's come up previously. I think the budget is a major problem for all of our police forces. We are going to have to look at if there's any overlapping of services. I think that would have to be one of our main concerns.
Mr Bartolucci: Are you fearful that maybe because of budget constraints, because there aren't the dollars there once were, very vital police services may have to be altered?
Mrs Cordiner: I don't know if I have enough background to answer that question.
Mr Bartolucci: Just a personal opinion.
Mrs Cordiner: I would hope not. I would think, being part of the police services board, you certainly would investigate all avenues.
Mr Bartolucci: Just in conclusion, I'm a former principal and a teacher on leave. The way you speak about your involvement with principals, superintendents, teachers, I think will hold you in an excellent position to be a very positive contributor to the police services board. I wish you well. I'll certainly be supporting it, because I believe you have to have that interaction.
The Solicitor General, again, doesn't agree with us, because he doesn't want you, as a board member, to become involved with the police officers directly. How are you going to get around that? If you want to meet with a couple of police officers because you have something you think they have concerns about, how are you going to get around the stipulation that a board member shouldn't meet with police officers directly?
Mrs Cordiner: In applying for this position, I had to really think through my priorities. If it came to a conflict, I would have to resign from our community policing committee. Resigning from a committee does not mean that you still cannot be involved. I have a bit of a problem with it. I think what is needed is they need to be listening to the citizens. That's where a lot of our answers are, if people will listen.
Mr Bartolucci: Well, you sure are going to be a good member of a police services board. There's no question. Always remember the importance of listening to what the people say, and working through the deputy or the chief. That way you can talk to anybody, as long as you inform the deputy or the chief that you want to meet with these guys. That's the loophole the Solicitor General provides in legislation. So good luck.
Mr Silipo: I'll just start from that last point, Mrs Cordiner, and say that I hope you'll continue, if you are appointed to the police services board, as I expect you will be, with that same type of involvement that you seem to demonstrate with respect to your work so far, both in terms of police matters and on the school board, around talking and continuing to be involved with the people who actually deliver the services, in this case our police officers. I think it's essential, and I think the Solicitor General is wrong in the approach he's taking.
I want to talk a little bit more broadly with you around something that's been touched on, which is the budget. As I'm sure you know, this year the police services board in the Niagara region has had to reduce its budget by almost $2 million, I gather, as a result of cuts from the province to the regional municipality. Can you tell us what kind of effect that's had on police services in the region and how the region is coping with that?
Mrs Cordiner: From my involvement, from the little bit I am involved, I truly cannot say that the cuts have affected Niagara Regional Police Services. I would have to say, though, they are looking at other alternatives because of the cuts. It has come up about the use of volunteers, which I know opens a whole new avenue, the use of volunteers for the taking of verbal reports and giving out information. If that can be done and can be looked at, I'm certainly sure it would release police officers to be out on the street, where they are.
1040
I know in reading the newspaper that they are also now looking at charging a fee for alarms that are going off. Right now, I think an officer may lose half an hour in responding to a security alarm.
So I can't personally see where the cuts have affected the police in my area of the Niagara region at this point.
Mr Silipo: I'm actually a little surprised by that answer, given a couple of things. Our understanding is that Police Chief Grant Waddell has indicated very recently that police services would likely overspend their 1996 budget because of the need for overtime costs caused largely by the number of homicide investigations this year and the crackdown on motorcycle gang activity.
Earlier in the year, before the cuts fully took effect, there were concerns expressed from the Niagara Regional Police Association which were relayed to the Solicitor General by none other than the local MPP, Tom Froese, the MPP for St Catharines-Brock, in a letter which indicated:
"As a result of the reduction in the transfer of funds by the province to the Niagara regional government, the region has asked the Niagara Regional Police department to cut $2 million from their 1996 budget.
"The Common Sense Revolution states the following, `Funding for law enforcement and justice will be guaranteed...any savings we find in our justice system through greater efficiencies will be reinvested to ensure public safety in our streets and in our homes.'"
You don't think that the government and the Solicitor General are indeed breaching a basic commitment they made to the people of the province that they would not cut police services budgets and generally budgets for law enforcement and justice? You don't see any effect that's having?
Mrs Cordiner: Not for me personally in the area of Ridgeway-Crystal Beach. Very truthfully, no, I don't. I'm not saying that there aren't changes in the rest of the peninsula, but my concerns up until this point are for my own community. For the cuts that were made, no, I don't see any changes.
Mr Silipo: If you become a member of this board, you presumably will have to look after the interests not just of your own local community but indeed of the whole region. I have to assume, on the basis of what information we have here, that in fact the budget that's being provided now isn't adequate in the view at least of the police chief, who is after all the chief staff person responsible for those services. You've put a lot into continuing to talk and listen to the people who deliver those services. If that's what the police chief is telling you, that it's having an effect, that he can't run the services with the funding he's receiving, what's your response as a prospective member of the police services board?
Mrs Cordiner: I think until I sit on the board -- citizens will complain when maybe a dog's barking and an officer doesn't respond immediately because of calls for service being prioritized. If that's a complaint from a citizen, then I think we have to look at the structure of how policing is serviced in the Niagara Peninsula. Sitting on the police services board, I'm sure I would have much more background to understand the cuts in funding, where they really are, but other than that, I don't think I can respond to that.
Mr Silipo: Finally, are you a member, Mrs Cordiner, of any political party?
Mrs Cordiner: No.
The Chair: If there are no other questions, thank you, Mrs Cordiner, for coming before the committee.
The next intended appointment is Dennis Tompkins. Mr Tompkins is not here yet. We don't know whether it's because he's late or he'll be coming, but Mr Stewart is here. So should we go ahead with Mr Stewart's interview? He's the next one on the list. Okay? Let's do that.
He's not here either.
Mr Bob Wood: On a point of order, Mr Chair: Why don't we deal with concurrences while we're awaiting the arrival of the next intended appointee? I don't think the next intended appointee is due till 11.
The Chair: That's true.
Mr Bob Wood: If it's in order, I'd be prepared to do so.
The Chair: It seems everybody's agreed to that.
Mr Bob Wood: Perhaps I can move concurrence in the intended appointment of Mr Cameron.
The Chair: We've heard Mr Wood's motion. Any comments on it? None? Are you ready for the question? All those in favour of concurrence for Mr Cameron? It's agreed unanimously.
Mr Bob Wood: I move concurrence in the intended appointment of Mr Wetherall.
The Chair: We've heard the motion. Any comments on Mr Wetherall's appointment? If not, all those in favour? It's unanimous.
Mr Bob Wood: I move concurrence in the intended appointment of Mrs Cordiner.
The Chair: Any comments on Mrs Cordiner's appointment?
Mr Silipo: I just would say she strikes me as somebody who is on the one hand fairly knowledgeable of the community and some of the issues. I was a bit troubled by some of her positions with respect to the impact the budget cuts are having. I'm not going to oppose this appointment, but I would have trouble in expressing my support, so I would just abstain.
The Chair: Abstain?
Mr Silipo: Yes. It's not possible?
The Chair: Not if you're in the room.
Any further comments on Mrs Cordiner's appointment? No other comments? Are you ready for the question? All those in favour of Mrs Cordiner's appointment? All those opposed? It's carried. Thank you for that.
Why don't we take a break for five or 10 minutes. Let's try to be back here at 11. That way we can get right on with it. Thank you. We're adjourned till 11 o'clock.
The committee recessed from 1048 to 1102.
DENNIS TOMPKINS
Review of intended appointment, selected by third party: Dennis Tompkins, intended appointee as member, Town of Deseronto Police Services Board.
The Chair: The standing committee will come to order. Welcome, Mr Tompkins. Please be seated. The normal procedure is to give you the opportunity to make any opening remarks you might have and then proceed to questioning by the three parties of the Legislature. Welcome to the committee. Did you wish to make any opening remarks?
Mr Dennis Tompkins: I thought long and hard about putting in an application for this position because of my previous involvement in municipal politics, and I wondered if I really needed to rest as opposed to -- but I'll maybe just give you a little background on myself. I've served on town council since 1979, two terms on council and then the next three as mayor of our community, till the last election. Then I was removed; let's put it politely.
The Chair: It happens to the best of us.
Mr Tompkins: Yes, it does. It's one of those jobs that, if you do a good job, you eventually work yourself out of. Previous to that and during my stint on council, I've chaired every committee of council, including what used to be the old police committee or police commission at that point. I happened to be mayor when the Police Services Act was first initiated about five years ago, four and a half years ago. At that time, because I was mayor, it was council's wish that the head of council should represent council on the police services board. So I am somewhat familiar with the act; not any new legislation that's come in the last two years or so.
I'm self-employed. I've been employed since 1977. I'm in manufacturing. I'm heavily involved in recreation, in minor hockey, minor ball, things like that, within the community. Since most of my personal investments are tied up in the community and with what's happening with policing -- maintain your own force, go OPP and other things -- actually, as a businessperson, it has a direct effect on me and my family. So I'm hoping that my past experience can contribute something to this committee. That's about everything.
Mr Ford: Welcome, Mr Tompkins. I've got a couple of questions here. These are standard questions. I've read your background; it's quite impressive. Are you familiar with the principal responsibilities of the Town of Deseronto Police Services Board? Being the ex-mayor, I think you should be.
Mr Tompkins: I hope I am. In what respect?
Mr Ford: Just the general functioning of the police services board, the responsibilities.
Mr Tompkins: The police services board, maybe to oversimplify it, is to set the policies and initiate them through the chief of police, not directing the chief of police, but to develop the policies for the good of the town to provide proper law enforcement education, training for police personnel, a fair board to deal with complaints of the public concerning policing, and to give direction to the community in general as to which direction policing is going in.
Mr Ford: Good quality liaison, in other words.
Mr Tompkins: Yes.
Mr Ford: I've got one more. As a former mayor of Deseronto, what experiences will you bring to this board that will benefit your community?
Mr Tompkins: Probably from a budgetary standpoint and just from a time period of experience with what's happening now to policing in general in small communities, to hopefully put that experience to work when the time comes to decide what we're going to do with our police department from a cost-effectiveness standpoint and also any government dictates on how to handle it. Unfortunately, what happens sometimes is you get good people but maybe very new people who have to make decisions based on just information they have at the time without any previous history. Hopefully I have a feeling of the pulse of the community, what the community wants, what the business community wants and hopefully what's best for our community.
Mr Ford: You should have a little experience in that, running your own business there, being part of the community. Like you said, you have your investment in that community, so you have a big concern for that community.
Mr Tompkins: Yes, I do.
Mr Ted Chudleigh (Halton North): Mr Tompkins, welcome to the committee. It's certainly impressive, your résumé. You've been involved not only continuously in various areas, but through a wide cross-section, being involved not only in the municipal government, but also with your church, with food banks, sports and minor sports, and the public utilities commission.
You would probably have a wide experience of people whom you know throughout the community and the surrounding districts. Do you see this as an attribute to bring to the police services board?
Mr Tompkins: Definitely. Being in a small community, you know everybody in the community. And we have a good working relationship with the OPP detachment in Napanee plus the special officers, the OPP, the reserve detachment with the Tyendinaga territory right beside us. We've had an ongoing relationship with the band council and the reserve police themselves. It's worked well over the years, and that's always something in a small community. Where policing is a concern, sometimes you don't have the money to have the numbers you would like to have, so I think it needs a good interaction of personalities between band council and, say, the band reserve who are probably our closest neighbours. I'm sure you're all aware of dealing with native territories. They're very self-sufficient in the sense that their council dictates basically everything. That's one of the problems our community is having now, so it was one of the decisions that made up my mind, that I thought maybe I had something to offer.
Mr Chudleigh: I'm very pleased that you've put your name forward.
Mr Bartolucci: Deseronto is a small place and you've already said that everyone knows everyone else. What's the feeling with regard to policing in your town right now?
Mr Tompkins: In regard to keeping our own force or going OPP?
Mr Bartolucci: Right.
Mr Tompkins: I really think it was almost split down the centre. People like the visibility of having their own people. They like the reputation of the OPP but a lot of people looked at it as reactive policing because they were going to be dispatched out of Napanee, but they could be anywhere maybe in a 30-mile radius. So the concern of that group of people was that with reactive policing it may be prioritized policing, where if they have six calls and two cars on duty, obviously they're going to go to the most important ones first.
There's a feeling in the community that the visibility of our own officers is important, it's a deterrent to crime itself, just the fact that they are on the street or in their car. That's one side of the coin. I like to think you can look at both sides. The other side is the funding that the OPP have versus the town of Deseronto. Your officers have the most up-to-date courses, the most up-to-date equipment and probably -- I don't like to use the word "better" officers, because I don't necessarily believe that, but because of their training and the OPP force behind them, they are in a position where they're always on top of what's going on. Sometimes that's the negative side to having your own force in a small community. If you wanted me to be specific one side or the other, I could, but I like to look at it from both sides.
1110
Mr Bartolucci: I really appreciate that, and you've given us a fair overview of what the community feels. As an intended appointee, how do you feel, personally?
Mr Tompkins: I am really torn. I guess my feeling is, if I had the choice -- I'm touching off-subject here. If per capita policing were in place in the province of Ontario, I would say we would maintain our own force and we would educate and update to provincial standards. With the fact that approximately 33% of our town budget goes into a five-man police department, that part is discouraging. But, again, you have to weigh those costs as to break-and-enters and the visibility of the police against other things, but I like the idea of the OPP in terms of what they have to offer. The only thing I don't like about it is that even if they have a community office set up in our community, I doubt very much if there'd be an officer in there an hour a day. It would be, again, more of a reactive thing. So I think the answer is somewhere in between.
We did an OPP costing study back about eight years ago, seven years ago, and one of the things that we were looking at as a result of that was a possibility of maybe keeping our chief -- who's maybe eight years, 10 years from retirement -- he could be on our payroll, be a liaison person in the community so they have somebody on there, sort of like a Buford Pusser of Deseronto, if you've seen the old movie, where the OPP would provide the reactive type of policing.
There are some balances that may be able to be done, but until you're in a position where you can offer comments that have any authority or power, I don't know. That's sort of my feeling on it, anyway.
Mr Bartolucci: Obviously, now Deseronto has what is classically defined as a community-based police force. Are you fearful that you would lose that?
Mr Tompkins: Only if we weren't replacing it with something as good as or better, that was going to be more cost-efficient to the taxpayer. If you knew our community, with the industries that have shut down in the area in the past while, our tax level is significantly higher than, say, Napanee, Picton, other similar-size communities in the area. Basically, especially townships that aren't paying for policing now, if you took the approximately $400,000 off our $1.2 million budget in the town -- that's approximate figures -- we would be reasonably well-off as a community. But so many other things have to go and, unfortunately, when you have those types of costs and the taxpayers have to bear them in the community, obviously other services have to slip in terms of roads, recreation, arenas.
We're a community around 1,800 or 1,900 but we're probably functioning with a dollar figure of maybe a community of 1,000 people. So it's a constant case of juggling the books. But I think one thing the police services board has to be in our community is receptive to input from council, which isn't always the case. I'm not saying council should dictate what they're doing, because they'd like to; there's no question. But I think they really have to be receptive of how it's going to affect the home owner.
How I like to do things: In our community a couple of years ago, to talk in terms that the average person, home owner, understands, an $11,000 increase in taxes represents a 1% increase on your tax bill. Then if you go to the people and say, "We're increasing our budget by $55,000 this year," they'll say, "That's a 5% increase to us." So I like things to work out that way, so that everybody can understand what you're doing instead of throwing mill rates at people. I don't pretend to understand them at times.
Mr Bartolucci: Very, very true. We had an intended appointee before from Deseronto. Do you know Mr Kemp? You're familiar with Mr Kemp?
Mr Tompkins: Yes, I do. I grew up with him.
Mr Bartolucci: What was the reaction of the community at the withdrawal of his name?
Mr Tompkins: Shock and anger, I guess.
Mr Bartolucci: Could you outline why?
Mr Tompkins: I think you'd have to know Ray. He owns Kemps Furniture in Deseronto. They're probably one of the more religious families in the community. When that happened, I know his mother was in tears and his wife was in tears over the accusations that were made. I don't pretend to know all of them, but always you get one side of the story and maybe not the other. But I think generally the community, even people whom I wouldn't call friends of Ray's, were quite upset with the way it was handled, yes.
Mr Bartolucci: Did he withdraw his name?
Mr Tompkins: I don't know. I really didn't want to get into that because even when you're talking to him, you're in a point of taking sides at that point, of agreeing with him or not agreeing with him, and I didn't want to do that.
Mr Bartolucci: That brings us up to date on Mr Kemp. Maybe we can go on. Your police services budget was up 4% last year. Were you in favour of that increase?
Mr Tompkins: Not really. I'm sure a lot of you are aware of infrastructure funding that was done during the last government which was put through. Deseronto did well in that. As I saw it, there was room to maximize the funding, the $1.2 million that was going to be made available to Deseronto in other areas and take money from other areas. My feeling is, whenever you have a tax increase, it never comes off. Even if there's an increase to the actual police budget, there has to be a decrease someplace else to balance that. As I said earlier, our tax rate for our community and what it has to offer is high.
So my feeling is, had we used the infrastructure money properly and maximized it and just taken it away from maybe some other services for a year or two, we could have absorbed those costs with no increase because, as you know, 4% there plus the county levy increase and the board of education increase, which was significant, all of a sudden you're looking at a 10% increase. So take 10% over about seven or eight years, that's a 100% increase on the actual tax bill.
Mr Bartolucci: I read from your impressive résumé that you helped Father Germaine set up a food bank. Has there been extensive use of that food bank?
Mr Tompkins: Very much so. It's decreased somewhat now. We had -- how do I say this politely? -- a landlord in town that housed a lot of needy people. The fire marshal's office and Ontario Hydro saw fit, due to inadequacies in the three buildings, to shut them down, which resulted in about 48 or 50 apartments, which the people sort of ended up migrating to Napanee, Picton, Belleville and area. We've noticed a decrease since that has happened, but unfortunately we've also noticed a decrease in our number of students in our school, which means our grants are down. So there's a ripple effect.
Mr Bartolucci: Do you think there's any correlation, Mr Tompkins, with the funding levels provided by the province, food bank usage, increase in police services? Do you see there's a correlation? Do you see a pattern developing in your particular community only? I don't ask you to speak for the province.
Mr Tompkins: I think communities have to be careful, that sometimes being of good heart and wanting to help, if you overdo it to the extent that you're maximizing it more than other communities, you'll end up drawing in a lot of their people who need help. If your community's under financial pressure to begin with, it's going to put more strain on the town.
The way we had it set up, we have a resource centre which was set up a number of years also in the community for seniors, for other people, for needy people, for people who have questions maybe for you people here, if they don't know where to turn. The food bank was put under the auspices of the resource centre, so it's basically a volunteer group. They worked in conjunction with community and social services, had a representative down and they tried to make everything fair so nobody was taking advantage of it. If they were on social services, they had to be recommended or a letter from them to the resource centre. So it was all kept very secretive and private so nobody's feelings were hurt or offended that way.
So that way, it's worked out well, because it hasn't just been a group. If we really believe in something, sometimes we tend to go a little overboard. So it's sort of an impartial group that has the good of the community in mind that's running it.
Mr Silipo: Mr Tompkins, you're still a member of the Progressive Conservative Party?
Mr Tompkins: I haven't been for a number of years. As I'm sure you know, I ran for them during the David Peterson sweep of 1987, I think it was. I took Jim Taylor's place. I won the nomination that year. But to tell you the truth, it's not a matter of wanting to or not wanting to. We've been so busy with our business, and my kids are 13 or 14, 15, so we're trying to do as much as we can with them, my wife and I, now, while they want us to be around, as opposed to in a few years. So if you're asking if I've been active, no, I haven't. I probably would have been if it wasn't for my kids --
Mr Silipo: It's not because there's been a philosophical parting of the ways?
Mr Tompkins: No, no, nothing like that, just personal life and business.
Mr Silipo: I understand that. When you were the mayor of Deseronto, were you a member of the police services board, as the municipal --
Mr Tompkins: Since before I was mayor, I've been on every police committee since 1978-79, when I was on council, and I was the chairman before that, the last policing committee chairman. So council, just because of my experience and budgeting experience, at that time they asked me to sit on it. So yes, I was.
1120
Mr Silipo: Do you see any difference in the way in which you're going to fulfil your role if you're appointed as one of the provincial appointees, as opposed to when you were sitting there as a member of council?
Mr Tompkins: In the sense that I don't have to wear two hats, I guess. But I have a short memory so I make a poor liar, so I always attempted to see things in black and white as much as possible and not so much as try to do things for favours down the road. If something is right, it's right; if it's wrong, it's wrong. That's how I presented it to council and we had some rather heated arguments, and just the same the opposite way. Sometimes I didn't agree with the police services board and when I went back to council and brought their wishes, I defended them adamantly and was out-voted. But my feeling has always been, once an issue is over and there's a vote taken on it, the issue is over. Then you get on with the next one; you don't hold grudges or seek revenge or this sort of thing.
Mr Silipo: The question that you were discussing earlier with Mr Bartolucci around the future of the police services in Deseronto, the question of maintaining a distinct police services unit as opposed to purchasing services through the OPP, is that something, previously, whether it was when you were a member of the police services board or any other time in your public life, that you've taken a clear position one way or the other on?
Mr Tompkins: Back in -- I can't remember the year; I guess it would be the late 1980s -- we had a previous OPP costing done, police costing done. At that time, our council -- we had a seven-man council, counting myself -- was split three for, three against and I was the deciding vote. At that time, I voted to retain our own police force. Mainly it was for the reasons I gave earlier. I just didn't feel at that time it was in the best interests of Deseronto.
The reason I was so clear on that, before the town of Napanee had disbanded their force, we had conversations with them of setting up sort of a mini-regional force to eliminate the administration costs and the duplication of services, plus to give enough men so that they could schedule. Napanee had nine officers and we had four at the time, and 13 would have allowed holidays off, stat holidays and that sort of thing. So I was still in that mode at the time, so I was still a believer in our own force.
Mr Silipo: This model or concept that you mentioned earlier, about another possibility other than the two choices, that is, a third possibility of having perhaps a smaller local unit with then some services being provided by the OPP -- the more reactive services, to use your words -- is that something you would be eager to pursue as a member of the board, something that might in fact provide the right balance between a lower cost to the ratepayers and maintaining good service that you seem to be saying you now are getting from having your own police force?
Mr Tompkins: I think so. My feeling is, I guess, the only things that come to mind are the three options: the one that you just talked about, going OPP completely, or maintaining our own force. There's probably other options in there that we can do. I think what I'd like to do, if I were on the committee, is to sit down and itemize the pros and cons of those options and maybe somebody else on the committee would have some other options too. I think in the long run, what's important is cost and service. Obviously, normally more service means more costs, so it's a matter of juggling that, but I really feel that the gut feeling of the town is that they would like to have an individual that they could say, "He's our officer." My recommendation at the time was to maintain the chief because before he was chief, he was probably one of the best constables we had. He seemed to have good discretionary powers in that respect.
Mr Silipo: As has been mentioned, the police services budget is up this year from last year about 4%. Could you just tell us, from whatever information you have, how that was possible? I'm assuming that there were some cuts from the Solicitor General to the municipality, or perhaps not. Perhaps this is one of the few that escaped those cuts.
Mr Tompkins: Off the top of my head, the only thing that comes to mind is the new 50-millimetre guns as opposed to the old .38s that they had, things that we looked at years ago but we were trying to cost them in over a number of years as opposed to other things, plus I'm not sure if there were any insurance implications and overtime implications because the one lady constable that we had had a motorcycle accident and lost her leg. So she was still on the payroll. The town of Deseronto did not have a long-term disability program or even a sick time. We absorbed it. For whatever reason, that was a policy of the town, that they would absorb it out of their own payroll. So I would assume that some of it would be overtime, people making up her shifts, because as far as I know to date, she's officially still a member of the force.
Mr Silipo: You mentioned that the money spent on police services is about 30%, I think, of the overall local council expenditures.
Mr Tompkins: Approximately, yes.
Mr Silipo: Where do you stand on the issue of control over police budgets? Should they be simply under the control of the local municipality or should we maintain the present system?
Mr Tompkins: I guess I've seen both sides of it and it all comes down to the individuals you're dealing with on the municipality. I've had fellow councillors and that who have been very negative in terms of police budgets. It wouldn't matter what the justification is; there's no increase. "We want a decrease. Get rid of one of our officers, we don't need him." Unfortunately, it's a personal thing that comes into it as much as anything else. On the other side, I've also seen a very strong chair on the police services board who was very -- not dictatorial but liked to have his own way in terms of things. I think there needs to be a system of control.
During this incident, the chair of the services board -- not this chair, the previous one -- had his back up, and maybe rightly so. He believed in what he was doing and the members of council, the four out of the seven councillors, believed they were right in what they were doing. There didn't seem to be the conciliatory department or area at that time that would step in and say, without costing the town maybe $7,000 for consultant's fees to look into the problem. Nobody seemed to want to make the decision, and at that time the services board felt, "We have the right, it was mandated to us, this is a budget and this is what we're going to do."
I think there needs to be a system of checks and balances on there, a justification. I don't necessarily believe that maybe a bureaucrat outside the community or something is the person to bring in and look at the sides, because as you know, some people are better speakers than others and they present their case better. I don't know what the answer is to that, but maybe it's a committee of the public whose taxes are going to be directly affected in it and they're going to have to weigh the services versus the dollar increase. I don't know if I've answered your question. I didn't mean to --
Mr Silipo: I don't know that there's any right answer at this stage either. I just was interested in your views. Thank you.
Mr Ford: I'd just like to relate to Mr Tompkins that I can understand where you're coming from with a police department, local police vs the OPP, because Colborne, as you recall, had an incident that you might relate to. This is where the druggist took the law into his own hands and was charged. He had also been broken into three or four times, I believe. They had a situation there that you're relating to when you say you'd like to have a few local police there, because the OPP took a half-hour, sometimes more than an hour, to respond to the calls. I just thought I'd bring that to the committee's attention.
The Chair: Anything else? If not, thank you very much, Mr Tompkins, for your very open and frank expressions to the committee.
1130
ARTHUR STEWART
Review of intended appointment, selected by third party: Arthur Stewart, intended appointee as member, Town of Penetanguishene Police Services Board.
The Chair: We have, for the morning, one final intended appointment. That's Mr Arthur Stewart as an intended appointee to the Penetanguishene Police Services Board. We welcome you to the committee and ask if you have any opening remarks you'd like to make.
Mr Arthur Stewart: Actually, Mr Chairman, I don't have any opening -- I understand that all of you have my résumé. The only thing I could add to that probably is that in my 17 years on council, the last five I was chairman of the police committee. That's when we had a committee instead of an appointed board at the time. I might add that in 1983 I was warden of Simcoe county.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr Stewart. Any questions?
Mr Newman: Welcome, Mr Stewart. Why have you decided to volunteer to sit on the Town of Penetanguishene Police Services Board and what is it that would interest you to sit on the board?
Mr Stewart: As you can see from my résumé I've been in public service, servicing my own community for several years. I got out of it for a rest for a while, and this is one of the places where I think I can use my past experience. You know that the OPP has taken over Penetang this spring, so really it's a whole new ball game for me, I guess, other than just experience in a committee I sat on before. But really I just got out of politics for a rest and sort of get my feet wet again.
Mr Newman: Thank you.
Mr Ford: Mr Stewart, thank you for coming today. I have a standard question here that you'll give us an answer on, I hope. As a town councillor I'm sure there are difficult decisions that had to be made from time to time. How will you handle any tough decisions that may come up if you were to sit on the police services board?
Mr Stewart: Probably the same way as I did for the 17 years in council. You have to approach all angles on a situation and certainly work with the committee that you're on, as I've worked with council in the past.
Mr Ford: I have to say one thing. I'm impressed with your community service here in the pipes and drums, because I have a lot of friends who are involved in the same type of Scottish country dancing type of thing. I know it's quite a lively activity and it's very community-minded, so I understand that.
Mr Bartolucci: Again, welcome. You said you were the chair of the police committee before they became the police services board. Did you contract out to the OPP at that time as well?
Mr Stewart: No, no. That's when we had our own police force. In fact, we had our own police force till this spring and then the OPP took over this spring.
Mr Bartolucci: Right. How much is the contract for with the OPP?
Mr Stewart: Really I don't have that information.
Mr Bartolucci: You sat on council for a long time, so you know your community well. There's no question about that. Could you explain to me why your town decided to go with a police services board of five when really the stipulation of three would suffice?
Mr Stewart: That I can't answer. I wasn't on council at the time. I don't really know their reasoning for going to that size of committee. I understand there's -- what is it -- three or five?
Mr Bartolucci: Yes. Depending on the police force size.
Mr Stewart: That was after my time in council.
Mr Bartolucci: If you had the opportunity to bring that up at a police services board meeting, would you recommend that they return to three as opposed to five or go to three as opposed to five? If so, why? If not, why not?
Mr Stewart: The thing is, this police services board is a new situation with me. I'd have to look into that situation to see what the pros and cons are to make a decision on that.
Mr Bartolucci: When you sat on town council, how many members made up town council?
Mr Stewart: Nine members, counting the mayor, yes.
Mr Bartolucci: The warden was a part of the bigger region?
Mr Stewart: I was deputy reeve and reeve of the town, so I represented Penetang at county council.
Mr Bartolucci: We had a gentleman just before you, and you were listening in on the interview, who was divided as to whether he wanted to remain with a local police force or contract out to the OPP because of a variety of reasons. You've lived both experiences. What is your reaction to the police force you have now in comparison to the force you had when you served earlier as a council member?
Mr Stewart: Just in my past experience, you can't tell whether there's really that much difference, since we've only taken on the OPP this spring. It's really hard to tell at this point whether they're going to be better than what we had.
Mr Bartolucci: Have you not noticed or have you not heard from the community at all? Has the transition been so smooth that no one's noticed either a difference, an improvement, or no interaction at all with regard to it?
Mr Stewart: I'm on the main street, I live on the main street, I have my business on the main street of Penetang, and certainly the speeders are cleaned out of town. They've been really nabbing them probably more than the Penetang police were. This is one thing that I've noticed, but it's pretty hard to tell, when they've only been in for a short time.
Mind you, I can remember as a kid, going back, that the OPP was in Penetang before and council decided to go to their own force again.
Mr Bartolucci: Just asking for a personal opinion again, do you like the OPP presence better than the town force presence? Which one would you prefer?
Mr Stewart: Really it's hard to tell. Mind you, out of the OPP probably half the police force from the previous police is working for the OPP in town. So as I say, it's too soon to really make a judgement on whether council has done the right thing or not.
Mr Bartolucci: Any initiatives that you'd like to start in your town with regard to policing?
Mr Stewart: The one thing I wouldn't like to see dropped is the participation that the police had in the schools in Penetang. We're not poor in schools. We have 11 schools in the town. That's one of the things. I'd probably like to see them get out in the community and do a little legwork and get to know people, but this is something that is going to hinge on whether the funding is there and the manpower.
Mr Bartolucci: There was that presence before when you had your town force.
Mr Stewart: Yes, there was a certain amount. They didn't ride around in the cruisers all the time. They were up and down the main street meeting people and so on. But I feel if the police are exposed to the public, it leaves a pretty good taste in the public's mouth when they see police going up and down the street other than with a car.
Mr Bartolucci: Yes, that's right. It's a lot better to be proactive as a police force rather than reactive by writing out tickets.
Mr Stewart: Yes.
Mr Bartolucci: I'm sure the increase in issuances of tickets can't be sitting well with the community.
Mr Stewart: That again is a little hard to tell. Probably with the OPP in there they are pretty stringent, where the town police were probably a little lax because they lived in the town and they knew everybody in the town.
Mr Bartolucci: These police officers who are assigned to the town right now, the eight constables, do they live in the town?
Mr Stewart: I believe they do, yes. Mind you, some of them are working out of the town as well, you know, over in Port McNicoll and in different locations from time to time.
Mr Bartolucci: Tell me a little bit about the community and the incidence of crimes over the course of the last year. Have you noticed or have you heard from police officers that the incidence of break-and-enters is up, as it is across most of the province?
1140
Mr Stewart: They're certainly up, but whether they're up since March is something I don't know. But during the past couple of years, the increase of break-and-enters around Penetang and area has certainly increased. There's people pretty hungry out there. They're even raiding freezers.
Mr Bartolucci: That's a sad commentary.
Mr Stewart: Yes, it is.
Mr Bartolucci: What concerns do you have with regard to policing in your own community because of decreased dollars being allocated to police services?
Mr Stewart: Again I don't know whether I can answer that right now, because I'm not involved with the police other than just as a taxpayer.
Mr Bartolucci: You've served your community for a long time. You're coming back -- I'm assuming you will get this appointment -- at a particularly difficult time for a police services board member. You'll have to use all the people skills you have used so effectively in the past today and in the future. If you had one piece of advice to give the government members on the other side, with regard to policing only, what piece of advice would you give them?
Mr Stewart: Probably to loosen up a little more money for policing.
Mr Silipo: Mr Stewart, are you a member of any political party?
Mr Stewart: Yes.
Mr Silipo: Which party?
Mr Stewart: The PCs.
Mr Silipo: I was struck by the comment you made just now in answer to a question from Mr Bartolucci. You said that people are pretty hungry; "They're even raiding freezers." Is that an indication of a greater level of need or poverty that, as you see it, is resulting in more crime out there?
Mr Stewart: I don't know whether you've heard that that area is -- when you've got Mitsubishi that closed down at the end of August, and TRW is gone with 1,000 employees out of work, and several other factories, it's a pretty desolate area. Of course the province is cutting all over, welfare and unemployment, so it's a problem that's probably -- the province will have to deal with it in the next few years, I would think.
Mr Silipo: When we have a situation in which there is a greater need, for a variety of reasons, including fewer jobs, less money coming from government for a number of services, do you have any indication that one of the things that will result from that is that we will see people resorting to crime as a way to survive?
Mr Stewart: I think this is a problem all over. I don't think it's just in Penetang. I think you've got that problem all over.
Mr Silipo: I agree. I certainly would not want to indicate that it's a problem just in Penetang.
Mr Stewart: I think we've outpriced ourselves in wages. That's the problem.
Mr Silipo: Okay. You made a comment just earlier with respect to the advice you would give the government members, which is to free up a little bit more money for policing. One of the things we saw from the Tory side when they were running in the election would seem to us to be a fairly clear promise or indication that they would maintain funding for law enforcement. As a member of the Tory party, was that your impression as well?
Mr Stewart: I don't know the real works of funding a police force, but if you'll notice on my résumé, I'm sitting on the airport commission, and we really got hit there pretty good. In another three years, we won't have any funding at all from the province, which is kind of heavy, so we're going to have to go to the communities that own the airport to get funding. But as far as the police are concerned, I don't know. There has been some suggestion of the individual police boards finding funding elsewhere than the province and the municipalities.
Mr Silipo: What do you think of that?
Mr Stewart: Actually, I don't know where you'd go, unless you went to the bingos.
Mr Silipo: It's a concern we share. One of the questions that's being looked at, I understand, as part of the review which includes this question of potential other funding for police services is the issue of whether in a jurisdiction like yours, where police services are being provided through the OPP -- there's a question being asked about whether there is a need for a police services board. What are your views on that?
Mr Stewart: This is something I'm new at, the police services board. Even when I was on council, it was a committee of council. The police services board, I don't know. When the OPP came in, the responsibilities of hiring and firing are gone. There'd probably be a certain budget you'd be formulating, but the thing is, you've got a fixed figure on a contract with the OPP and it's with the council in Penetang. Not sitting on that board, I really can't give you a clear answer on what you're asking.
Mr Silipo: I guess you're saying that at the very least, there's a reduced role for the board to play, given some of the personnel issues.
Mr Stewart: Definitely, compared to the way it was.
Mr Silipo: In the question you were discussing earlier about the pros and cons of local police department versus the use of the OPP, I appreciate the fact that you're not of one view or the other in terms of which is better, as you said earlier, given that the OPP experience is still fairly recent. But if you as a member of the police services board had to assess that, say, after a couple of years of experience, what are the kinds of things you would look for, the kinds of criteria you would use in determining whether to continue that relationship with the OPP or whether to revert back to a distinct force for the town?
Mr Stewart: One thing is the financial element, of course. That's probably the biggest. Of course the next issue would be, are we getting the services we would if we were a separate police force? That's all I can say.
Mr Silipo: One person who was here earlier, in talking about this distinction, categorized the OPP presence as being more of a reactive force; that is, they're there to deal with incidents that come up as opposed to a local force perhaps being more proactive, being more visible, not just in terms of dealing directly with crimes but in the whole area of prevention, in being in schools etc. How important are those kinds of issues to you in determining whether a police force is working well for the community?
Mr Stewart: I would hope, as I said before, that the OPP continue the programs in the schools. I can't see any reason they shouldn't. This is educating your young people to be brought up with the proper information; you know, rather than saying, "There's a cop," instead they're calling them policemen.
Mr Silipo: One final question. Where do you stand on the question of who should have control over police budgets? Again, in this case it's perhaps a bit of a different issue, given the relationship and the purchase of services with the OPP, but I think it still applies in terms of, should the local council be the body that has final say over the police budget or should we maintain the present system which allows for a dispute resolution mechanism when there's a disagreement between the police services board and the local council?
1150
Mr Stewart: That's a question I could answer both ways. If we were in the situation with our own police force, the police services board would be handling it, and I think that's the place for it. But when you've got OPP, OPP has a contract with the town and council does financial dealing with the contract.
Mr Silipo: Is that contract directly with council as opposed to with the police services board?
Mr Bartolucci: I believe it's with the town.
Mr Stewart: Yes, as far as I know, it's with the town.
Mr Silipo: So in this case you're saying the issue doesn't really arise because the police services board isn't involved. But if you were revert back to a local police force -- and there's no right or wrong answer to this. I'm just curious about where people stand on that issue of control of police services budgets. Should that control be there in the present situation, or should that be with --
Mr Stewart: It should really be with the police services board, but then you've got two councillors sitting there who are representing council.
Mr Beaubien: Good morning, Mr Stewart. Most of the presenters this morning alluded to funding, and certainly the members across. You seem to be very concerned about funding of policing services in the province, whether there should be more money or less money allocated to that service. I would strongly suggest to you that for the past 10 years the per capita household grants in the province of Ontario have been frozen at $50.
Both of you gentlemen have had an opportunity to deal with this particular issue. However, you did not have the political intestinal fortitude to do it. This government presently is looking at funding issues with regard to policing matters in the province. I would strongly suggest that yes, maybe we do need more money for providing policing services, but it's not necessarily a lack of funding; we need a more equitable funding system in the province of Ontario. I think the present Solicitor General wants to deal with this issue.
Mr Bartolucci: Mr Chair, on a point of order --
Mr Beaubien: Mr Stewart, my question is to you --
The Chair: He's getting to the question now. Go ahead, Mr Beaubien.
Mr Beaubien: Do you feel we do have a problem with the equity in funding in policing? For instance, your municipality defrays costs for providing OPP policing, yet you have to defray costs for providing municipal policing, while other municipalities in the province do not have the cost of providing their own policing, costs of the municipal government. Do you see inequity in that system? Do you think that should be redressed or addressed?
Mr Stewart: Are you referring to the township?
Mr Beaubien: I'm sure you have surrounding municipalities, local municipalities in your township or in your county, that do not have local municipal policing costs associated with their municipal budgets. Do you think that is a fair and equitable system?
Mr Stewart: Certainly not. I think everybody should be paying. This is one of the things. The OPP have been out in the townships, and probably the townships have been getting away with murder when it comes to funding police forces. I think the province is looking at that situation right now, isn't it?
Mr Beaubien: Do you think the $50-per-household grant that has been allocated to municipalities with their own police force is adequate funding?
Mr Stewart: I don't know whether it would be adequate. The only people who would know that is the Ontario government.
Mr Beaubien: Thank you.
Mr Bartolucci: On a point of order, Mr Chair: I come to committee to hear the views of intended appointees. I go to church on Sunday to listen to the sermon. The sermon I heard on Sunday was based on fact and reality, well documented in preparation, not the way Mr Beaubien presented his sermon, which was out of order, which was incorrect, which was misleading and which is actually --
Mr Doyle: What about your sermons? You've been giving them all morning.
Mr Chudleigh: Mr Chairman, you're out of order allowing a point of order in committee.
Mr Bartolucci: As they continue to interrupt, I continue to say that he makes no sense at all. I suggest that the witness answered the question well, considering that it was a question that deserved only one answer.
The Chair: I think it's safe to say that both sides of the table have succeeded in teasing the bears. If that's the end of the questioning, Mr Stewart, I thank you for coming before the committee and provoking as much interest as you did among the members.
Mr Stewart: Thank you very much.
Mr Bob Wood: On a point of order, Mr Chair: Would there be any interest in doing the concurrences now?
The Chair: I was just going to ask that. I think there's an agreement that we deal with the two concurrences remaining from this morning's appointees.
Mr Bob Wood: I will therefore move concurrence in the intended appointment of Mr Tompkins.
The Chair: Any comments on concurrence for Mr Tompkins? If not, all those in favour? Opposed? It's agreed.
Mr Bob Wood: I move concurrence in the intended appointment of Mr Stewart.
The Chair: Any comments?
Mr Silipo: I certainly will be supporting this appointment. I just want to note that I was struck by Mr Stewart's courage in a quiet but clear way expressing his concern about the impact of a variety of cuts and what they're doing to, among other things, the level of crime in the province.
Mr Beaubien differs on this issue, perhaps, but he might very well re-read that section of the Common Sense Revolution that said that funding for law enforcement and justice would be guaranteed. I don't think I'd have any disagreement with him about the need to provide greater equity in this area and indeed other areas, but the basic reality is that a promise was made by his government, his party, that is being breached. I think we heard from Mr Stewart some of the impacts of that. For that and many other reasons, I certainly would support Mr Stewart's appointment.
The Chair: Are you ready for the question? All those in favour? Opposed? It's carried.
Thank you, gentlemen, for that. We will reconvene at 1:30 for the two remaining intended appointees. We know that cabinet is meeting today and there could very well be some certificates coming from that, at which point the subcommittee might want to meet at the end of the regular committee meeting. Would that be appropriate for members?
Mr Bob Wood: We're going to attempt to get the material from the cabinet. We can't guarantee that we'll have it, but I'd like to suggest we have the meeting anyway, in case the members might wish to do it simply by fax or mail.
The Chair: Let's do that, then.
Mr Bert Johnson: On a point of order, Mr Chair: On the first three votes for concurrence, we were directed by the Chair that it was a unanimous vote. In the last two we weren't, although they appeared to be. Is that inconsistent? Is it a matter of concern?
The Chair: We can make that note, if you like.
Mr Silipo: Actually, the first three weren't; the first two were. I voted against it.
The Chair: The first two were, yes.
Mr Bert Johnson: And the last two. I'm sorry; you're absolutely right.
The Chair: Thank you for that. We are adjourned until 1:30.
The committee recessed from 1159 to 1334.
WILLIAM BUFFAM
Review of intended appointment, selected by the third party: William J. Buffam, intended appointee as member, the Town of Smiths Falls Police Services Board.
The Chair: The standing committee will come to order. We have a couple of intended appointments to deal with this afternoon and then concurrences. The first one is Mr Buffam.
Welcome to the committee. Have a seat at the table there. Make yourself comfortable. It's the custom that if you wish to, you may make a few opening remarks to the committee. That's not necessary, but you're free to do so.
Mr William Buffam: It's difficult to encapsulate 32 years of municipal business into a short period of time. However, I'm quite proud of my accomplishments over the years. I initially entered municipal politics in 1956 as a councillor in the township of Montague, which is on the eastern outskirts of Smiths Falls and follows the Rideau Canal to Merrickville. I held this position for roughly 10 years and approached that as a learning period to expand my knowledge in the municipal field.
In 1966 I entered into the reeveship and for the next 22 years dealt with local municipal problems. I served as warden of Lanark county council and as chairman of the Leeds-Grenville-Lanark district health unit. I was involved in the development of the first social services department in the county of Lanark, also the development of a personnel department. When I went to the county we had between 300 and 400 employees, and there was not adequate coverage in the personnel problems.
I was also involved in one of the early amalgamations of the two public hospitals in Smiths Falls, which was a rather sensitive issue based on the fact that one was a Protestant hospital and the other a Catholic hospital which had long roots in the community. Fortunately we were able to resolve the concerns and the hospitals were designated critical and chronic care facilities.
I served on Lanark Homes, helped with the extension of the homes for senior citizens, served personnel and served on most of the committees, and one of the highlights which I'm rather proud of is that I helped to bring Montague from the 19th century into the 20th century. It was a rather primitive rural community when I became involved, with no permanent staffing and very limited facilities. By the time I left we had established office facilities, permanent office staff, permanent road staff, developed a road program, municipal buildings, and one highlight that I'm very proud of is that we were one of the earliest municipalities to develop a book on the township's history, dating from 1792 to 1982. I'm very proud of that achievement.
Mr Beaubien: For the record, what is the proper spelling of your name? I have three documents in front of me and they are all spelled differently.
Mr Buffam: I apologize, sir. Our name has been distorted many times. It's Buffam. It was originally a French name that was anglicized.
Mr Beaubien: I can sympathize with you on that.
As a former councillor, former reeve and former warden your municipal experience is certainly extensive. What is your vision of policing needs and how the cost should be borne in the 1990s or going into the next century?
Mr Buffam: Cost in the 1990s is a very sensitive issue, seeing that we're faced with downsizing or reduction of funding. I must admit that I have attempted to familiarize myself with the philosophy of the police services board. As I used to tell my employees, it's not a matter of working harder; it's a matter of working smarter. I think we have to look at economies, be creative and search for methods of still maintaining confidence in the police to do their business and yet manage their financial resources.
Mr Beaubien: I certainly cannot disagree with you when you say that we have to work smarter and be more creative. However, do you feel that with regard to funding municipal police departments in Ontario, we have to bring more equity into the system?
1340
Mr Buffam: Equity? In what respect?
Mr Beaubien: For instance, many municipalities in Ontario do not have any policing costs associated with their municipal budget.
Mr Buffam: These are ones that are serviced by the Ontario --
Mr Beaubien: The OPP, yes.
Mr Buffam: It's a difficult question. If I might be so bold as to state, you could always look that the OPP took total coverage of the entire policing and that the municipalities then funded their operation, but it would be a removal of local responsibility that we're all so very concerned about. It's a problem that I don't think is readily or easily addressed.
Mr Beaubien: What would be your personal preference? To maintain a balance between OPP policing and municipal policing in Ontario as opposed to having just one providing the service for everybody?
Mr Buffam: Policing becomes extremely difficult. In our municipality the local police force works in cooperation with the OPP. If they are unable to attend to a situation outside the municipality or boundary, the Smiths Falls police will cooperate. I admit I'd have to delve into it more to give you a more accurate answer.
Mr Ford: Before I ask you my question I'd like to make a comment about Smiths Falls. I used to go up there quite a bit because I had an assignment with Hershey chocolate, and I see you were involved with them for about 34 years. Is that right?
Mr Buffam: From 1962, sir.
Mr Ford: Also, I used to talk about Smiths Falls quite a bit because I went through there. Many industries would leave their doors unlocked at noonhour and the place would be empty. You could walk almost right through the plant and walk out and never see anybody there at noonhour, and I thought this must be a very honest community.
Mr Buffam: It is basically honest, but times have changed somewhat across the province. We have at Hershey a complex monitoring system now that allows us to control all aspects of the plant. In the early years we were able to park our loaded trailers outside for pickup without any concern for vandalism. As time progressed, that became an impossibility. Consequently some of the plant is now surrounded by a security fence and the whole area is now monitored by cameras.
Mr Ford: Things have changed.
Mr Buffam: Changed in conjunction with what's happened across the province, I suspect.
Mr Ford: The question I have is, what role does the police services board play in your community? Why is the board important?
Mr Buffam: The board, as I can see it, is a management board. It interprets legislation and works in conjunction with the existing police force to ensure that adequate policing and crime prevention are pursued. If I might prevail upon one thing, I think it's most important that police services boards and the police establish a rapport with the general public. If police are perceived as being a law unto themselves, we don't get what I believe is public cooperation. I believe it's most important to have a community policing function where our young people are taught to respect police and the law. This in itself may reduce some of the problems that exist today.
Mr Ford: Thank you very much for answering that question. I just want to make another comment. I have to commend the people of Smiths Falls, because they were extremely friendly and I found them to be extraordinarily honest.
Mr Buffam: Thank you very much, sir. I'll convey that to the people of Smiths Falls.
Mr Gravelle: Mr Buffam, how are you?
Mr Buffam: Fine, thank you.
Mr Gravelle: There is a ministry discussion paper, a review of police services in Ontario, which the minister put out in June, and there was some discussion with a variety of police chiefs. Are you familiar with that paper? Have you had a chance to read it?
Mr Buffam: No, I have not.
Mr Gravelle: There are some options being discussed. One can argue that there's a need for greater protection, more police services, and many members of the public would argue for that, yet there's no question that there's going to be less of a financial commitment from the government, despite the promises they made in the last election. There's obviously going to be a reduction in support. As a result of this, some of the options they're discussing are alternative sources of revenue for the police. Have you had an opportunity to discuss with anybody --
Mr Buffam: No, I'm afraid I've come on with little to no background in this field. It's absolutely new to me. Anything I might express would be a personal opinion that I've formulated from seeing what's transpired and from reading the local newspapers and that.
Mr Gravelle: I think your personal opinion would be very important; it couldn't be more significant, in fact, assuming you are appointed to the board. And you certainly seem like a gentleman who would be qualified in terms of your background and experience in every way, and your commitment to your community. I'd be curious about how you feel about the potential for alternative sources of funding, having the police basically get into --
Mr Buffam: I have some concern about, I guess you might say, commercializing a police force. I think we have to explore avenues that leave the police apart from public criticism of being too commercialized. We have to look at avenues that provide a stature to the police force.
I might explain that three of my relatives are police officers, one an RCMP, two municipal, and one of my relatives is a provincial court judge, so I've had occasion to see some -- but I think we have to sustain a stature. I have a great deal of sympathy for the police force in the fact that we ask them to protect us, in some cases put their lives on the line, yet on given occasions the public is prepared to attack them. Right or wrong, it's the public perception, and I think it's most important that the police force maintain that independent stand that they're governed by the law and by public funding.
Mr Gravelle: I think a lot of people would share your concern. I'm certainly pleased to hear that you would be very careful about letting the police departments do that, because obviously they have a very real role to play. When you're selling police services, for example -- that's an option -- and doing advertising, there are some elements there that can only, it seems to me, take away from what their main thrust is.
What about literally privatizing some of the functions; for example, having some of the functions that one normally associates with policing in terms of the court system and transporting prisoners etc taken away as a responsibility of the police and having civilians or businesses do that? How do you feel about that?
Mr Buffam: The only thing I see from a financial standpoint is that it's still a cost incurred by people, and again we're allowing what I consider to be people who are not trained in the policing profession to deal with some of these issues. I can see the utilization of volunteers or auxiliaries to take over some of the functions of the police force and allow the police department to pursue the more critical issues of law enforcement.
Mr Gravelle: I appreciate your thoughts on that. I'm glad you've got some concerns. I wish you all the best.
Mr Buffam: Thank you.
1350
Mr Silipo: Mr Buffam, one of the issues that's being looked at in this review is the whole question of accountability of police budgets. I'd be interested in your thoughts, particularly given your experience as a former municipal councillor, about that issue. Do you believe the budgets of police services boards ought to be, at the end of the day, under the approval and control of the local council, or are you more satisfied with the present system, which gives some level of independence to the police services board and allows for a mechanism to resolve disputes between the two?
Mr Buffam: I think we have to allow two responsibilities to exist. The municipality is responsible to the taxpayers for the gathering and dispensation of tax funds. At the same time, the police services board, or the management board, is responsible for the guiding of services in the police field. What we have to do is bring together this function so that both parties can work effectively and in the best interests of the people, and at the same time be well concerned about the expenditure of tax dollars.
Mr Silipo: When we look at the police services in Smith Falls, we're told there's a force with a budget of $1.7 million, 19 uniformed officers, six full-time civilian employees, four part-time etc. Is your sense that we have a service in Smith Falls that's good for the community, that's worth maintaining essentially as it is, or do you anticipate major changes in the next couple of years with respect to how those services are delivered?
Mr Buffam: Again I must state that my knowledge is rather limited to the fact of being a resident of Smith Falls and what has been published in the paper. I think there's room to resolve the problems. My approach in any matter is cooperation rather than confrontation, because confrontation merely diminishes the relationship between the two bodies and sometimes causes problems not to be resolved in the best interests of either party.
Mr Silipo: Whether it's from your perspective in public life or from your perspective as a citizen of the community, what are your thoughts on what we are seeing happening in a number of other places? I don't know what the situation is in Smith Falls. I can only assume it's similar to other communities in terms of the police services board having to deal with reduced budgets as a result of municipalities being cut back by the province, with them in turn cutting back on the budgets of police services. I'd be very much interested in your thoughts on that. Do you have concerns about that? Is it something that you think can be managed? Where do you stand on that?
Mr Buffam: There's a lot of words transpired, sir, and I'm just trying to filter them through to give you an accurate answer.
We've reverted to a situation where resources are becoming scarce -- I have to relate back to my early years when times were extremely difficult -- and people are able to develop. In these situations, it's difficult, but not impossible, to resolve these problems. We're going through a difficult transition in the province now because of the reduction in funds. It's not only the police services board but many other bodies that are suffering the same circumstances. I think we're just going to have to look at it and do the best we can under the circumstances. Given critical times, I think people rise to the occasion and we'll resolve the problem in everybody's interests.
Mr Silipo: I hope you're right, for the benefit of the people of Smiths Falls and throughout the province. My concern is that in this area of service we have on the one hand the reality you described at the beginning in your exchange with Mr Ford, that is, that the town of Smiths Falls, just like the rest of the province, isn't what it was in terms of degree of safety and openness that one experienced in years past. There is, whether we like it or not, a greater need for security police services, however best those can be defined and provided.
At the same time, part of the reason I, as an individual member of this Legislature, continue to pinpoint this issue is that we have a government that was elected, among other things, on a promise that they would not make any cuts to the whole area of policing and law and order, that yes, there would be savings found, better ways found to do things, but that money would be maintained within the system.
That isn't what we are seeing. We are seeing direct cuts to municipalities which are of course translating into cuts to police services boards, among others. A number of people are continuing to point out to us that that is indeed diminishing the ability that, in this case, police officers have to protect us.
Mr Buffam: One approach I take is that we can't always rely on the province to fund all our operations. Since the police force in Smiths Falls is a municipal police force funded by the local municipality, I would look at the approach of monitoring the public's perception of what's being done. If we need security, I would approach the people with the fact that contributions would have to come up to maintain that level of funding. Funding is either direct or indirect, and it all comes from a tax base. Regardless of whether it comes from the local tax base or the province, it's still a requirement.
Mr Silipo: I couldn't agree with you more. The problem I'm having is that when Mr Harris went out and made that promise, he didn't tell people that the other side of the coin was that people might have to pay more through their property taxes to maintain the same level of service. I'm interested in the fact that you don't seem to be too worried about that.
Mr Buffam: I've had a personal experience; I've had a break-and-enter. I have considerable property which has suffered vandalism. I'm a rather large taxpayer in the town of Smiths Falls and I wouldn't hesitate at all to see my taxes go up to fund the difference between what the province might have reduced and what is required to operate efficiently.
Mr Silipo: I expect you'll have to do just that.
Let me ask you one other question that I've been asking and ask all intended appointees who appear before us: Are you a member of any political party?
Mr Buffam: No.
Mr Silipo: Have you ever been one?
Mr Buffam: Yes. Some years ago I was, until the former Prime Minister became Prime Minister. I make no bones about it: I was sorely distressed with the way he handled the federal government, and at that point I disassociated myself from that particular party.
Mr Silipo: You're talking about the Progressive Conservative Party?
Mr Buffam: Right.
The Chair: We have used up the full time. Thank you very much, Mr Buffam, for appearing before the committee and for answering the questions put to you.
Mr Buffam: Thank you very much, gentlemen. I hope I haven't gone outside my bounds in any respect.
The Chair: Not at all.
Mr Buffam: I appreciate your time. Thank you.
1400
GRAHAM STRACHAN
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition: Graham Strachan, intended appointee as member, Ontario Mental Health Foundation.
The Chair: Let us move to the final intended appointment for the day, Mr Graham Strachan. We welcome you to the committee. It's customary to give you the opportunity, if you wish, to make a few opening comments, but it's not required, before we get into the questions.
Mr Graham Strachan: I am Graham Strachan. I am the president and CEO of a small Canadian biopharmaceutical company applying molecular biology and genetic engineering technology to discover and develop therapeutic products to treat various illnesses. We're located in Mississauga. I participate in several industry associations relating to biotechnology in Canada and am chairman of the National Biotechnology Advisory Committee.
Mr Ford: Good afternoon, Mr Strachan, and thank you for coming today. I've got a number of questions to ask you. I'll just take them one at a time.
The foundation supports research, professional training and education. Which of these areas do you feel needs most attention?
Mr Strachan: I would say all three areas need attention because they all build on one another. But the area I'm most deeply interested in and am concerned with is the research end of the spectrum, because that is the lifeblood of future economic commercial developments in this province and in the country. It's the area I know best. I am involved in training through the recruitment and hiring, of course, of trained scientists and technicians.
Mr Ford: I see your extensive background there. In 1988, you secured financing for Allelix Biopharmaceuticals. Do you feel that you may have fund-raising abilities that can contribute to the board? Are you the fund-raiser?
Mr Strachan: Well, I participate --
Mr Ford: You're part of it, participation.
Mr Strachan: Sure. I have a lot of experience in raising money, investment capital, to commercialize early-stage scientific discoveries, to take them from our universities, medical schools, and build them through the chain into products. I've raised money to do that. I think one of the challenges for the foundation over the next few years is how to make do with less money and build on partnerships with other groups that have money.
Mr Ford: How has the company grown with that financing?
Mr Strachan: We started in 1988 with 40 employees, half PhDs. Today we're about 180. In the last year we've added 25 staff.
Mr Ford: So it's the same company still. It hasn't been merged with another company?
Mr Strachan: No, we're a Canadian company.
Mr Ford: That's very good. You mention in your résumé that you've completed several major strategic alliances and joint ventures. What alliances do you feel will be important to build for the Ontario Mental Health Foundation?
Mr Strachan: I think alliances with various research groups, various patient groups, for example, the schizophrenia society, Alzheimer's Canada, other groups like that. Then at the other end of the spectrum, of course, there is considerable capital available for supporting medical research through new vehicles like the Canadian Medical Discovery Fund, Working Ventures, other initiatives, which I think in an innovative way can be tapped into as a source of funding.
Mr Ford: Are you still a publicly held company?
Mr Strachan: Yes.
Mr Ford: Do you feel there is any conflict of interest that exists by sitting on this board and working for a pharmaceutical company?
Mr Strachan: I would say there's potential for conflict of interest. I have served on various bodies of this type and nature. Whenever an apparent conflict seems likely, I've declared it and not participated in the discussion. I would say the incidents in which that occurs have been rare, and I believe they can be handled, provided one recognizes the situation.
Mr Ford: Thank you very much, sir. Good answer.
Mr Bob Wood: We'll reserve the balance of our time.
Mr Gravelle: Good afternoon, Mr Strachan. Did you apply for the position on this committee? I'm just curious as to how it came about.
Mr Strachan: Someone wrote me a letter about a year ago mentioning to me that someone had suggested I had certain skills and capabilities that might help the board and the foundation, and would I be interested in participating.
Mr Gravelle: Whose office did that come from?
Mr Strachan: The director, Dr Cappell.
Mr Gravelle: There is an interesting connection in terms of your business career, and the question about the potential conflict is a fair one, but I think you recognize that possibility exists.
Have you had an opportunity to do any research in how the foundation has worked in terms of some of the funding it has done for research? Have you had much of a chance to do that yet?
Mr Strachan: Yes, I've reviewed the material, I've reviewed the projects that are being supported; I'm familiar with some of them. I've got reasonable understanding of the state of the art and scientific developments in this area in the province.
Mr Gravelle: One of the concerns about the grant process has been that in some areas there are limitations in the amounts that can go towards some of the grants. I think Mr Fish, the chair, was here in February and mentioned how they were making attempts to combine money so they can have larger amounts. Do you see that as being a barrier, in terms of having limitations in the funds?
Mr Strachan: I think it's always a challenge. There is never enough money for research of this nature. You've got to set priorities. You've got to recognize what are the excellent areas so you build critical mass and support these areas. It really is a question of setting priorities. I think there are some opportunities for leveraging various funds, for bringing different groups together in partnerships to build and accelerate the scientific progress.
Mr Gravelle: One of the realities of a foundation like the Ontario Mental Health Foundation and the nature of what they do, which is giving research grants -- and this probably goes to other research areas as well -- is that the public probably doesn't have as easy an opportunity to understand the benefits. You're not going to have a press release at the end that says, "We've done this, this and that." Do you feel there's a need for more public awareness of what the foundation does, in essence a need to maintain support for the foundation? I'm leading to something here.
Mr Strachan: Fine. I would say yes, clearly, and that's true in many other areas of this type of activity. But I think there has been progress made. In this city the work on, for example, understanding Alzheimer's disease and the causes of Alzheimer's disease has got fairly wide publicity in the last two or three months.
Mr Gravelle: With the direction the government is moving in -- looking for more support from the corporate sector, looking for more support from the volunteer sector -- do you think there's a chance that the funding levels could be reduced? How would you respond if the funding from the government was reduced? Do you see it as a challenge that you could face?
Mr Strachan: I think if you look back over the last five years, there have been reductions across the board in expenditures on scientific activities, programs and work. I suspect that the belt is going to continue to be tightened. By the same token, there are different avenues being opened up. I mentioned earlier Working Ventures, the Canadian Medical Discovery Fund. They're sitting on enormous pools of capital in part because the stage was set, the environment was set, to encourage these pools to be formed. I don't have specific points to cite there, but these could be new mechanisms, new vehicles, to supplement government funding.
Mr Gravelle: Some would argue and have argued that there is a need to spend more money on research. In finding the solution, if not the cure, to some of the problems we have in terms of mental health and others as well, because it's a long-term goal, it's a little more difficult to justify at times. I think it's fair to say -- we probably wouldn't get much argument from anybody in this room -- that there's a tendency right now to be looking for short-term cost savings. I'm certainly familiar with those who would argue that research is one where you need to have long-term goals in mind and recognize that; in other words, have some patience, some understanding. Would you argue for an increase in terms of the support for the foundation itself, or at least some kind of confirmation of support?
1410
Mr Strachan: Yes. I've taken the position both federally and provincially that there needs to be, there should be greater support at the basic level, because that is the foundation from which economic growth, commercial discoveries will come in five, 10, 15, 20 years. We're seeing today in this province the fruits of some of the expenditures that were made 20 years ago in Mount Sinai and Sick Kids and elsewhere. I think there is a continuing need and I would argue for it and I think the record shows that there's been a reasonable return and an increasing return on prior investments in this area.
Mr Gravelle: The argument will probably continue forever in the sense that there is still a tendency to look for the answer in the short term. There are those who feel it's not worth waiting for, and I think there is a need for great patience and you get great returns for that.
Mr Strachan: Absolutely.
Mr Silipo: Could you talk a little more about where you see this relationship between government and the industry meeting in terms of responsibilities for research, particularly the funding of research?
Mr Strachan: It's the job of government to really make sure that investment in the basic sciences, the pre-competitive area, is captured in this province and the country and translated into, first, jobs and, second, products and processes of economic return. I would argue that it is not industry's role to really play a key part in the pre-competitive phase of research. That isn't their job, because the return isn't going to come for 15 to 25 years and it's going to be a return across the broad basis of society, not to one particular niche.
In the science I'm involved with, of molecular biology, DNA, understanding the cause of genetic diseases -- the genetic basis for cystic fibrosis, for example, other things -- the science underlying these advances goes back 25, 30 years. It's taken that length of time to translate them into products and processes. That is the job, in my view, of government, to make sure that the pre-competitive or the basic sciences are well supported, that we're able to recruit and bring in the very best scientists. We can't do this across the board; we just don't have the resources to compete, for example, with the United States across the board. On the human genome project, for example, the United States is spending $250 million, $300 million. We are spending $2.5 million, $5 million, something in that range. So we've got to select our niches, and I think over the years we've been quite successful in doing that.
Mr Silipo: The pools of funds that you mentioned earlier, were those pools within the industry, or are those government pools of funds that you think should be better utilized?
Mr Strachan: They have pools of money from individuals, from private people, very much catalyzed by government policies and programs, largely tax incentives. Probably at RRSP time you see them.
Mr Silipo: I very much appreciate the distinction you're drawing and I'm generally comfortable with what you're saying in terms of where you see government playing a role in terms of funding or having primary responsibility as opposed to industry. Where do you see the role of government, through grants or tax incentives or however it would be done, acting as a catalyst to draw a variety of industry, but I'm asking specifically in terms of this particular area, pharmaceutical companies and others, into the Ontario jurisdiction? That's what we're primarily concerned with here. Is that, in your view, an appropriate role for government to be playing, saying to companies, "If you're prepared to come to Ontario to establish here, we will provide some incentives" -- that could be in the form of some tax reductions initially or upfront grants -- "if part of that involves not only the jobs in the company that will be established, the investment that comes with that, but also some commitment to research"? That goes a little bit beyond, perhaps, the immediate --
Mr Strachan: The reality is that in fact the various jurisdictions in this country are offering very significant advantages for companies to move there. If you look at the sector I'm particularly involved with, the biopharmaceutical-biotechnology, the areas of the country in which biotechnology is growing and is becoming a very important factor in the economy are Quebec, Saskatchewan -- particularly in agricultural biotechnology, around the University of Saskatchewan, the Prairie Research Institute -- and British Columbia. These are the three what I call pulls.
I spent some time in committee under the previous government looking into biotechnology and the structure of biotechnology in the province. Unfortunately, we weren't competitive in the incentives we were able to offer companies. There are many advantages to locating in Ontario: The scientific base here within half a mile of this building on University Avenue is a tremendous resource; the trained workforce, graduates coming out of the universities; and a stable political climate. There are many advantages, but the reality of life is that some of these other jurisdictions are offering very considerable incentives.
Mr Silipo: Is it your sense that that's something we should be prepared to do as a jurisdiction?
Mr Strachan: I think you've got to look at it very carefully. I think there are some other advantages in Ontario.
Mr Silipo: Part of the reason I raised it was because I was particularly struck to read the other day that one of the things the Premier is going to be doing on his trip to Europe is trying to encourage some pharmaceutical companies, I believe, to come and open up shop here in Ontario. I think it's good that he's doing that. I just found it a little odd against an action this government took only a few months ago. There was a company looking to settle here in Ontario which had been granted a relatively small amount of money -- I forget the exact amount, but it wasn't a lot -- by the previous government. That was withdrawn by this government, with the result that that company has now opened up in Quebec, with an overall investment of millions of dollars and about 100 jobs that would have been created, a fair amount of research commitment. I just found that slightly contradictory, and that's one of the reasons I flagged that question.
I don't have anything but support for your appointment to this board. I think you bring an interesting wealth of experience. I just have one last question that I ask all applicants, and that is whether you are a member of any political party.
Mr Strachan: No.
Mr Silipo: Have you ever been a member of any party?
Mr Strachan: No.
The Chair: If there are no further questions, Mr Strachan, thank you very much for coming before the committee. I think you can see that the members of the committee have appreciated your presence here and your answers. Thank you.
Mr Strachan: Thank you very much for your time.
The Chair: We have now to deal with the concurrences of this afternoon's intended appointments.
Mr Bob Wood: I move concurrence in the intended appointment of Mr Buffam.
The Chair: You heard the motion. Is there any comment on the motion? If not, ready for the question? All those in favour? It is unanimous agreement. Thank you for that.
Mr Bob Wood: I'd like next to move concurrence in the intended appointment of Mr Strachan.
The Chair: You've heard the motion. Any comment or debate? Ready for the question? All in favour? Another unanimous agreement. What a committee.
Mr Bob Wood: It shows the quality of the appointments, Mr Chairman.
The Chair: Don't tease the bears.
Mr Bob Wood: I was doing my best to prolong the meeting.
The Chair: That completes our business on intended appointments. I'd ask the clerk whether we've had any indication about certificates from today's cabinet meeting.
Mr Bob Wood: It would appear they'll be about 35 minutes from now.
The Chair: I'd ask the people on the subcommittee whether they'd be prepared -- are they going to be here? We could sit down somewhere around 3.
Mr Bob Wood: I'm wondering what prospect there might be to meet now, with a view to maybe having the names submitted over the next six days. Could we take a crack at a meeting now? If it doesn't get anywhere, I'm certainly prepared to come back at 3 if need be. If you folks can deal with these immediately, that's fine, but I would have thought you might need some time to study these before names could be chosen.
The Chair: We don't have them, right?
Mr Bob Wood: No, but even if we did have them, would the members be --
Interjection.
Mr Silipo: Mr Chair, what I think Mr Wood is suggesting is what we did for today's meeting, which is that each of the caucuses were asked to submit names of people they wanted to review by a certain time to the clerk, and we then proceed on that basis. I'd be happy with that.
Mr Gravelle: I would support that as well.
Mr Bob Wood: Maybe we can have a brief meeting of the subcommittee right after this meeting which will deal with it. We can set a time, and that will be it.
The Chair: Is that agreed? All right, let's do that, then. We'll adjourn this committee, having completed our work for the day. Thank you very much.
The committee adjourned at 1421.