Committee Transcript 2003-Jan-15 | Legislative Assembly of Ontario

The Chair (Mr James J. Bradley): I'm told I have to use the gavel here to get the meeting underway. We are now on Hansard. Welcome to members of the committee. This is our first meeting of the new year. I extend to all members of the committee a happy new year in everything. We have quite a lengthy agenda today.

SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS

The Chair: We will begin with some reports that we have. This is a report of the subcommittee on committee business dated Thursday, December 12, 2002. Would someone like to move that?

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): I'm sorry, what was the date again?

The Chair: This is December 12, 2002. Mr Spina has moved it.

Mr Johnson: That's great.

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): I would like to move an amendment that the report of the subcommittee dated Thursday, December 12, 2002, be amended by withdrawing the selection of the official opposition party for the review of Douglas Fred McConnell, nominated as a member of the Stone Mills Police Services Board.

The Chair: There is an amendment. First of all, we'll vote on the amendment. All in favour of the amendment? The amendment is carried. All in favour of the motion, as amended? Carried.

The second one is the report of the subcommittee on committee business dated Thursday, December 19, 2002.

Mr Joseph Spina (Brampton Centre): So moved.

The Chair: Mr Spina has moved the subcommittee report. All in favour? Opposed? The motion is carried.

The third one is the report of the subcommittee on committee business dated Thursday, January 2, 2003.

Mr Spina: So moved.

The Chair: Mr Spina has moved it. All in favour? Opposed? The motion is carried.

INTENDED APPOINTMENTS

JAMES CROSSLAND

Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: James Crossland, intended appointee as member, Cancer Care Ontario.

The Chair: We now move to appointments review. The first individual to be reviewed is Mr James Crossland, intended appointee as member, Cancer Care Ontario.

Mr Crossland, you may come forward, please. Welcome to the committee. As you have been instructed, if you wish to do so, you may make some initial remarks, and then members of the committee, if they wish, may direct questions to you. Welcome, sir.

Mr James Crossland: Good morning, Mr Chairman and distinguished committee members. I'm very pleased to be here with you this morning to discuss my intended appointment as a member of the board of Cancer Care Ontario and to answer any questions you might have.

I would like to thank the committee, first off, for agreeing to delay my appearance until today. I know that the previous choice for my appearance was in mid-December. I was out of the country at that time, so I appreciate your flexibility in seeing me.

I understand that my resumé has been circulated to committee members, so my comments this morning will focus on why I wish to serve the interests of this crucially important organization and on my general qualifications.

My motivation to serve is both personal and public spirited. On a personal level, like many in this room, I have witnessed the pain and suffering caused by cancer. I lost my mother to cancer. My father, who is with me today, is a cancer survivor. I have lost numerous friends and colleagues over the years to this nefarious disease and I wish to honour their memory. But my motivation is primarily public spirited. In short, I want to give something back to a community that has been very good to me and to my family.

Like thousands of Ontarians, I have helped in the fight against cancer informally at the local level by making donations to cancer-related organizations and by participating in events whose goal is to eradicate the disease and to alleviate the pain and suffering of those stricken with it.

While these efforts are important and we must do all we can to encourage and support them province-wide, I decided that I wanted to do more to make a more formal commitment to helping win the war against cancer and also to volunteer more of my time to this very worthy cause. Cancer Care Ontario is the logical vehicle through which to do this.

The mission of CCO is to reduce the growing burden of cancer in Ontario. This means ensuring timely and equitable access to excellent care and promoting research. It also means developing effective programs in the areas of detection, prevention and education. We know that early detection is crucial in the fight against cancer. So too is prevention. In fact, simple changes in lifestyle could prevent thousands of cancer cases annually in this province. Education is key to both detection and prevention. In all of these areas, effective communication and an ability to build broad coalitions of support are important factors for success.

For this reason, I believe my career and professional experience have equipped me to make a contribution, however modest, to Cancer Care Ontario. Over the past 15 years I've held senior executive positions at two of the nation's leading public and government relations consulting firms. In addition to learning how to build and manage a successful enterprise, I've worked closely with governments, the private sector and not-for-profit organizations, helping them to devise solutions to complex problems in the public policy arena.

I've also gained valuable experience and expertise in the field of public relations and strategic communications. I believe that Cancer Care Ontario's long-term success will depend in large part on the organization's ability to communicate effectively to the plethora of stakeholders who have a role to play in building a world-class cancer care system in Ontario.

In conclusion, while I'm not a cancer expert, I believe I have something useful to contribute to Cancer Care Ontario. I will work hard and will be passionately committed to my duties. The people of Ontario deserve no less. I'm also an optimist. I believe we will find a cure for cancer, but only if we work together.

If my appointment is approved today, I will begin immediately to acquaint myself with the detailed operations and programs of Cancer Care Ontario as well as the excellent people who work there. This will include a comprehensive review of the financial, strategic and business planning materials to which I have not yet been made privy but which I assume will be made available to me as a member of the board.

I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

The Chair: We begin with the government caucus.

Mr Johnson: I don't have a lot of questions for Mr Crossland, but I did want to thank him, on behalf of our caucus, for offering himself for such a worthy cause. There has been a lot of controversy about cancer in particular and the northern concern about travel and so on. It will not be without its difficulties for decision-makers, and our members are pleased, on behalf of all those who suffer from cancer or have close ones who do, and there are a lot of us in that category, that you've offered yourself to help on this very important board.

The Chair: We will move now to the official opposition.

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): Good morning, Mr Crossland. Can you give us some details as to how this appointment came about? Certainly you've eloquently expressed your interest in being involved and some of the personal reasons why it means a great deal to you. But how did the appointment to Cancer Care Ontario come about? Were you working with a member of the government in terms of the appointment coming forward? We're just curious about that.

Mr Crossland: No, I wasn't working for a member of the government. The minister's office asked whether I might be interested in serving on this board. I indicated that I would be, given that I had a personal interest in cancer. This was back in the summer. A few months went by and they asked for my resumé, which I sent to them. Then I got a call before Christmas indicating that the government wanted to make the appointment and that I would be requested to appear here.

Mr Gravelle: How do you think your professional expertise will be useful? You've given it some thought. How do you think that will be useful in terms of the goals of Cancer Care Ontario?

Mr Crossland: There are two areas. One, I've had some experience in managing business and in the human resources area: hiring and retaining people to run a business successfully. I know that one of the most important challenges facing CCO is the recruitment and retention of health care professionals to ensure that we have timely access to care province-wide. I know there's a shortage of a whole range of providers: pathologists, and also in the radiation area. I have an interest in human resources issues -- retention and recruitment -- and I think I have a bit of experience there.

But it's really in the area of strategic communications where I've worked over the past 15 years. I refer in my comments to issues such as detection and prevention. I think there's a huge role to play for communications: communicating what needs to be done to prevent cancer and also to detect cancer in the early stages. We all know that if you detect it early, your chances of survival are far greater.

Mr Gravelle: Mr Johnson made passing reference to some of the issues in terms of northern cancer patients and the fact that for a period of time cancer patients looking for radiation treatment were being sent to the United States, but also were being sent to the cancer centres in northern Ontario, getting their travel costs paid and full accommodation, which was an extremely sensitive matter for northerners who, when they were forced to travel, weren't receiving that full compensation. It was something that we felt was very discriminatory. One of the government's responses was indeed to contract with the private clinic at Sunnybrook in terms of radiation. I would love to get your thoughts on that. Certainly the auditor indicated that he had some concerns related to the costs. I think we tend to believe that indeed the publicly administered and publicly run and funded cancer centres are very effective, and this private clinic, certainly by the auditor's account, was costing more. I would like to get your thoughts on that, on the use of the private clinic, if I may.

1020

Mr Crossland: I'm not sure I can add anything new that hasn't already been said or written on the issue, but I first of all support the principles of the Canada Health Act and I know that that clinic was operating in consistency with those principles. I'm aware there was a debate on the accounting methodology used to calculate the cost of treatment, differences between the Provincial Auditor and some other academics who were asked to evaluate that process, but I'm not an accountant; I'm not an expert on that. I am aware that the primary objective of the organization was to stop re-referring patients to the US for treatment, and they were successful in doing that, so I think CCO and Sunnybrook should be commended for that. I can't imagine anything worse than being stricken with cancer and being forced to leave the country to undergo treatment. So to the extent that they achieved that objective, I think that's good. Also, from my recollection of reviewing the materials, the auditor did point out that it was a lot less expensive treating people here in Ontario than sending them to the United States, for obvious reasons.

I don't have all the facts that were at the disposal of the board when they granted that contract, but I do know that they achieved their objectives, and I think they should be commended for that.

Mr Gravelle: Thank you very much. If I may, Mr Crossland, just to expand on the discussion of private health care, the government also, through Mr Clement, has announced the tendering for private MRI clinics. Certainly I can tell you that I object to that on the basis that we should be using our public facilities, public MRI clinics, and have them before we start moving into -- I don't support it in any event, in that I think we need to set up more publicly run systems. Can I get more of your thoughts on the whole issue of private health care? There are many of us who feel we are going down a very, very dangerous road and that it's not necessary and it's more expensive. Have you given any more thought, even outside the cancer care mandate, in terms of private health care?

Mr Crossland: As I understand it, 30% or 40% of the health care in this country is already privately provided. I support the principles of the Canada Health Act. I think we need a universal system that's publicly funded and publicly administered. At the same time, I think we need to be open-minded as to how we go about solving some of the problems facing the health care system. I know that waiting times for radiation are unacceptably long right now. They are far beyond the four weeks recommended in medical guidelines. That's just one area.

There are waiting lists as well for systemic therapy, and we also know there are waiting lists for cancer surgery. We don't know yet the extent to which those lists are affecting the success of treatment. But I think we need to be open-minded, and as long as it's consistent with the principles of the Canada Health Act, we should take a look at it.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Good morning, Mr Crossland. I did note in your resumé, your curriculum vitae, that you've indicated politics among your interests. If you might explain to what extent you have been interested and/or involved in politics?

Mr Crossland: Well, I'm interested in politics. I have a BA and an MA in political science. I guess I'm a political scientist. I went to York University and McGill. I wrote a thesis on the role of the Charter of Rights in the evolution of the court system in Canada. I've been involved politically over the years at different levels of government as a Conservative, provincially many years ago, and federally as well.

Mrs Dombrowsky: As a member?

Mr Crossland: As a --

Mrs Dombrowsky: As a member of an association?

Mr Crossland: Yes.

Mrs Dombrowsky: As a candidate?

Mr Crossland: No.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I was interested as well in your comments when you indicated that you believe early detection of cancer is crucial. I think there are volumes of research documents that would say that is very sound thinking.

In Ontario at the present time we have the Ontario breast screening program and the Ontario cervical screening program. I have heard from many of my constituents about another screening program that is not covered by OHIP but is believed to be and in other jurisdictions is recognized as an important detection tool, and that is the PAS testing for prostate cancer. Are you familiar with that?

Mr Crossland: PSA testing?

Mrs Dombrowsky: Yes, PSA. I'm sorry.

Mr Crossland: I am familiar with that. Earlier in my remarks I referred to my father, who is here. If it weren't for that test, he might not be here today.

Mrs Dombrowsky: So obviously you have an opinion on how valuable that test is.

Mr Crossland: It seems to be very valuable, based on what I have read. I'm not a practitioner. I know there are debates about it.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Yes, there are.

Mr Crossland: But I'm certainly in favour of doing everything we can to increase funding for preventive measures.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Increased funding for preventive measures: would you, as a member of the board of Cancer Care Ontario, be prepared to advocate for the PSA test to be covered by OHIP?

Mr Crossland: I'd need to learn more about it. I'm not an expert on that. I am familiar with it. As I said, we have personal experience with it.

Mrs Dombrowsky: So even though it saved your father's life, you have some question about whether you would be prepared to advocate that it -- and you've already indicated as well that you believe early detection is crucial. It is a test that does in fact fall in that category, and it's something that I know people in Ontario, and certainly constituents of mine -- there are groups that have been organized to lobby for this very important test. There's a gender issue here as well, and there's a sense that in terms of efforts to offer early detection programs, there really are none for males, and this is a very serious issue for men in the province of Ontario. So for me it's important to understand just how strongly you might feel about this issue and what you would be prepared to do, as a member of Cancer Care Ontario, to move this issue forward.

Mr Crossland: I'm inclined to be very supportive of that --

Mrs Dombrowsky: Would you initiate it?

Mr Crossland: -- but having said that, I would want to review the research on it, because there is conflicting research as to the effectiveness of the test -- I know that -- and I'd like to learn more about the cost implications of covering that provincially, because the system is under enormous pressure right now and there are other conflicting demands for scarce resources. So I would like to educate myself on that. I will be an independent member of the board, and once I'm comfortable with a level of knowledge on that issue and feel it should be advocated, I will be an advocate.

Mrs Dombrowsky: You would be?

The Chair: That concludes your time, and we'll move to the third party.

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): Are you a member of the Progressive Conservative Party now?

Mr Crossland: Not in Ontario; I am federally.

Mr Martin: Did you play any role in the recent leadership contest in Ontario?

Mr Crossland: No.

Mr Martin: OK. Just in looking at your resumé and recognizing your very successful career in business, I'm wondering what you feel you can contribute to the development and evolution of cancer care in Ontario. That's my question.

Mr Crossland: As I mentioned earlier, my experience in managing a business and managing people is something that I think is very important for Cancer Care Ontario. The organization is going to be spending a lot of time and money in recruiting new professionals and retaining existing professionals, and on that whole HR side I think I've had some experience and could probably bring some insight to their efforts in that area.

I mentioned my professional experience in terms of strategic communications in earlier comments about the need to educate the public on detection issues and prevention issues. If I can add something to the organization's efforts in that area, I think maybe I can make a modest contribution there too.

Mr Martin: My concern is that we have some serious difficulties in the province at the moment -- and you've already referenced that -- in terms of delivering. You said yourself that the system is under enormous pressure. I guess my fear -- and I've seen examples of it under this government over the last seven years -- is that we'll try to finesse our way out of it and communicate our way out of it as opposed to actually really fixing it and spending the money that's necessary to do that. Given your background, it runs up a bit of a red flag for me and sets off a bell in terms of -- you know, you're obviously very good in the public relations field and in creating successful private sector operations. You've been very successful in your career in that. What's to give me any comfort that your approach to resolving some of the issues that confront the cancer care health delivery system in Ontario will not be simply turning more of it over to the private sector and finessing your way, the government finessing its way, out of that by having somebody with your skill on board in the public relations field?

1030

Mr Crossland: I'm surprised my background would be a red flag for you. I come here honestly to volunteer my time for a very worthy cause. I approached this open-mindedly and I know, from a communications perspective, that there are very few people in this province who have ever heard of Cancer Care Ontario. I think if you talk to average people, no one has ever heard of Cancer Care Ontario. I think we have an important role to play to communicate to people across the province what Cancer Care Ontario is and what they're doing to improve the quality of patient care. That's a communications issue, as far as I can see. Improving treatments is a science issue, but it's also a communications issue, as I've mentioned in the areas of prevention and detection.

I really don't know how to answer your question except to say that I am sincerely interested in contributing here. It is a complex area with a very steep learning curve. Whenever we can simplify communications for the layman in this province to understand the importance of the issues, then we should do that. If I can make a contribution in that area, then I'll consider my efforts to have been successful.

Mr Martin: I would think you would understand that there is a huge debate happening in the country right now, and in this province as well, around how we deliver health care. It's divided very clearly on a front of, do we do it, do we continue along the publicly funded, publicly delivered track, or do we, as you referenced in your opening statement or in your response to other questions, move more and more into finding ways to expand the already existing portion that is delivered by the private sector that creates for some of us some real and, I would suggest, genuine concern, as genuine as your coming before us here today? Those of us who are charged with leadership in terms of developing public policy and organizing how we deliver those services that are so critical to our constituents have an interest in that and should have an interest in that. When we look at how we've tried to resolve some of the issues over the last five or seven years in this province, given that we've given untold billions of dollars away in tax breaks that could be available to us now to deliver a first-class health care system that wouldn't have the kinds of waiting lists that you referred to a few minutes ago in your comments, you don't understand why I would have a concern with somebody coming forward to be appointed to Cancer Care Ontario with your very successful yet narrow background where that is concerned?

Mr Crossland: Well, no. It's a legitimate concern and it's an important issue. I stated earlier that I support the principles of the Canada Health Act. The CROS clinic was operated in a manner consistent with the Canada Health Act. The result of that clinic was to end the re-referral of patients. Ill people who required radiation treatment and chemotherapy were forced to go to the United States for treatment. I think what they did there was very important and very worthy. I think about 1,500 people have been re-referred to the States for treatment. It would be awful to be away from your family and friends during that kind of period.

That's an operation that was consistent with the Canada Health Act. I support it. It was an innovative solution to a particular problem at that time. If we had to do it all over again, I wouldn't have a problem with doing what they did at that time. But, having said that, I do support the public system. I hope that reassures you somewhat.

I'm not in favour of dismantling the system. I'm not in favour of two-tier health care. I'm not in favour of privatizing the entire system at all. But I do think we need to be open-minded and flexible when it comes to caring for individuals who are suffering from the disease. That may require us to think quickly on our feet and to deal with crises at certain times, such as that which was faced in the province in 2000-01.

Mr Martin: The big issue, and I would guess at the end of the day probably the major issue in all of this, is going to be, how do we find the resources and can we afford the system that is obviously needed? The question then will be, does the government provide the resources through taxation, which is the only avenue we have to the resources we need, or do we move to try to get more money out of the private sector system of delivery and some combination thereof? If it became obvious to you, as a person on the board of Cancer Care Ontario, that more resources were obviously needed to actually do the job, and the government was in a position to make a decision on whether it was going to give more tax breaks to people or put more money into providing better cancer care for people, what side of that fence would you come down on?

Mr Crossland: I think there is agreement on the fact that we need more funding in this province, and indeed this country, to improve the health care system. The Romanow report reached that conclusion; the Kirby report reached that conclusion. I think all of the provincial Ministers of Health support that view.

I know the one thing about the Romanow report that was unclear to many people was how we would raise the money that we need to inject into the system, and I leave it to politicians at the federal and provincial levels to decide how best to do that.

The demand on the cancer system in Ontario will continue to grow, and we need to be innovative as to how we attract capital into the system. I think the public-private partnerships in terms of, for example, managing the physical plant of hospitals -- I read an article recently on that -- is something that is being done widely internationally and is something we should take a look at here in Ontario and in other provinces as well, as a means of attracting capital into the system for non-patient-care-related areas.

The Chair: That concludes the questioning in this particular instance, sir. You may step down. Thank you for being with us.

LYNN BEYAK

Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party and third party: Lynn Beyak, intended appointee as member, Council of the College of Massage Therapists of Ontario.

The Chair: The next intended appointee is Lynn Beyak, who is the intended appointee as member, Council of the College of Massage Therapists of Ontario. Welcome to the committee. You may join us. I think you are aware that you have an opportunity to make an initial statement if you see fit, and then there will be questions from members of the committee if they see fit.

Mrs Lynn Beyak: Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you to tell you a little about myself and to answer any questions you may have concerning my intended appointment to the Council of the College of Massage Therapists of Ontario.

I'm a small business owner in northwestern Ontario and have been involved in my community since 1982 as a classroom volunteer at Riverview school, a delegate for the West Rainy River District Home and School Association and an elected trustee for seven years with the Fort Frances-Rainy River board of education where I served as vice-chair. Our board was a member of the Ontario Public School Boards' Association and I was elected northern delegate for the policy committee there.

In 1994, I attended a roundtable for violence prevention in schools at the invitation of then-Minister of Education Dave Cooke to present a code of ethics that we had initiated at our board that I was very proud of. It was done in co-operation with a 15-person committee consisting of three students, three parents, three trustees, three teachers and three administrators. Our code became a model for others across the province.

In 1996, I chaired the Ontario Parent Council and in 1997 I was selected by a committee of my peers to sit on the inaugural board of the Real Estate Council of Ontario.

I have summarized my resumé in this way to highlight my extensive work on elected boards and councils and to underscore my experience in establishing standards of professional conduct and competence; codes of ethics; policies, procedures and principles; and standards of business practice, ever mindful that consumer protection and the public interest are paramount. I believe this expertise will be an asset to the appointment you are considering today, and I look forward to any questions you have of me.

1040

The Chair: Thank you very much. We begin our questioning this time with the official opposition. Mr Gravelle.

Mr Gravelle: Good morning, Mrs Beyak. How are you?

Mrs Beyak: Good morning, Michael -- Mr Gravelle.

Mr Gravelle: I feel like calling you Lynn as well; we know each other well. It's good to see you. It's been a while, and I do want to begin by expressing my condolences on the passing of your husband, Tony, who was a wonderful guy. It was a shock to all of us and obviously a great shock to you. He was a wonderful man and a great northerner, so our condolences.

Mrs Beyak: Thank you, Michael. He thoroughly valued your friendship and the time you spent together with the chamber and working on northern issues.

Mr Gravelle: Yes, I know it meant a great deal to him.

It's good to see you. Nonetheless I do want to ask you a few questions if I may, Lynn. My understanding is that you are presently on the board of directors of the Trillium Foundation.

Mrs Beyak: Yes, I am.

Mr Gravelle: So it does seem a little surprising to have you in the position of asking to be on another one as well. How did this opening for the massage therapists come about, or can you tell us how that appointment went forward?

Mrs Beyak: I submitted a resumé to the government a long time ago and told them that I would be honoured and pleased to serve in any capacity, but that my strength was codes of ethics, and standards of business practice, principles and policies.

I think if you want something done right you have to give it to a busy person, and I can do both.

Mr Gravelle: Do you have some specific concerns? As you say, you didn't specifically ask for massage therapists, but you see the code of ethics issue. Are there some issues that you think are sensitive in the area of massage therapy particularly?

Mrs Beyak: I don't know of any in that particular college. I have friends, associates across the country -- two in Ontario, two in Alberta and one in Baja California -- who are massage therapists, and I very much admire their professionalism and their work ethic. I don't know of anything that needs to be done, but if there is something there, I certainly have the experience.

Mr Gravelle: I know there has been some movement related to acupuncture. There has been a recommendation that acupuncture become controlled under the Regulated Health Professions Act. Do you have any thoughts on that? It's been recommended, and for whatever reason, the government hasn't moved to make it controlled. Do you have any thoughts as to whether acupuncture should be controlled under the act?

Mrs Beyak: I don't have any knowledge of that issue, but I am a quick learner and I will learn very quickly what the issues are and make myself familiar with it. I think it's important that public appointees not have any agenda on these colleges, and I admit I don't know very much about it. I will learn, though.

Mr Gravelle: Well, they certainly are quite specifically looking for people as public appointees who don't have a background or a particular bias, so I think that is fair ball.

Back to the Trillium Foundation, if I may, are you a member of the grant review team or are you on the Trillium board of directors?

Mrs Beyak: The board of directors. I helped put together the grant review team in northwestern Ontario with a non-partisan selection of people who would serve northwestern Ontario well, and I think it was that experience that made them see fit to put me at the board level for the province.

Mr Gravelle: Let me put you on the spot a bit, if I may. One thing that is obviously a concern here is that there is a casino in Thunder Bay, which of course they call a charity casino. To me it certainly is not a charity casino, but perhaps that's where our politics will show. One of the great concerns, certainly the justification, is that the Trillium Foundation is providing funds to not-for-profit groups and charitable organizations. But there are some real problems since the casino has been in place, certainly in Thunder Bay, and you would probably be fairly familiar with some of the issues that have come out there. The belief is that money is being sort of taken out of the community and the money that is going back isn't a fair representation of what is needed. Certain organizations -- the Regional Multicultural Youth Council in Thunder Bay has had some real problems because they're not able to basically gather the same revenues they had before.

What are your thoughts on it? I certainly have real concerns about it myself. I also have real concerns as to whether a casino is -- I personally do not support a casino. I know there are many who like to take part in them, but I don't. What are your thoughts, if I may ask you?

Mrs Beyak: The issue has actually been raised in different jurisdictions across the province, and the CEO at Trillium is aware of it and has discussed it with the minister. I know they are having ongoing discussions about ways to make Trillium accessible to organizations that used to depend on bingos and other charity events to raise their money. So they're very aware of it and are working on a solution.

Mr Gravelle: Yes, it's a real problem. May I ask you, Lynn, if you're still involved in the political scene? Certainly you've got some real history.

Mrs Beyak: Yes. It's probably in my blood forever, Michael.

Mr Gravelle: I understand you almost won an election in 1995. You came --

Mrs Beyak: Very close.

Mr Gravelle: Any other interest in getting more deeply involved? Can I ask you that?

Mrs Beyak: No, not at this time. Tony was my best friend and my partner there. We did it all together, so it would be very difficult without him.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Thank you for coming. Is there more snow in Dryden than in Toronto?

Mrs Beyak: There is in Dryden but not much anywhere else in the north. There's nothing in Thunder Bay.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Oh, really? We certainly have more at my home in Tweed than we have in Toronto these days.

The position to which you are intended to be appointed is an adjudicative role. While your resumé is very full and rich, have you had any previous experience in this kind of role in particular, where you will have cases brought to you and you'll have to make a judgment? It may not be a black and white situation, and you do have to weigh the merits of both sides of a particular case or issue. Have you had any experience in that particular kind of service role?

Mrs Beyak: I have never had the title of adjudicator, but as vice-chair on the school board, we had many, many instances where we had to decide whether a student had violated the code of discipline or the code of conduct -- and also with the Real Estate Council of Ontario, whether real estate agents had violated the code. So I was never called an adjudicator as such, but I've had a lot of experience with listening to all sides of an issue and coming to, I believe, a fair decision.

Mrs Dombrowsky: So you believe that you bring to this role the tools which would enable you to assess a situation fairly and to make a good decision or the best decision you can with the information you have.

Mrs Beyak: Yes, I believe I do.

The Chair: We now move to the third party. Mr Martin?

Mr Martin: I'm just wondering as I go through your resumé when and how your interest in massage therapy was tweaked and, given your obvious vast experience and connections, why this would be the board that you'd end up being appointed to.

Mrs Beyak: I was surprised at that particular board, but I had offered to do work on any board where my skills for codes of conduct, principles, procedures and business practices would be used. I think that I, as a consumer -- and I worked for a doctor for six years; I don't know if that would count -- but I have an interest in the health care field. Both my parents are deceased. I've had a lot of experience with it. I do have friends who are massage therapists. My husband went weekly for a massage. I think it's as good a role as any that I could play, because I believe there will be times when my expertise will be used.

Mr Martin: I note in your resumé an interesting juxtaposition at one point, where I think you were a real estate broker, a registered insurance broker and also a family counsellor. How did you put that together?

Mrs Beyak: I've been a registered real estate broker since 1975. I have what's called a dual licence for real estate and insurance. They grandfather in some cases if you've been an insurance broker or a real estate broker for a long period of time. The family counselling came through my own and my husband's experience from 20 years ago. It's personal. But we got involved together in helping people with their marriages. I don't have a licence.

Mr Martin: You have no training, background or licence or anything?

Mrs Beyak: No. It's just --

Mr Martin: It says here that you're a member of the Reform Party and the Canadian Alliance. Are you also a member of the Conservative Party?

Mrs Beyak: Of the Ontario Conservative Party.

Mr Martin: And you ran for them in 1995?

Mrs Beyak: Yes.

1050

Mr Martin: Also, there are references here that you are an ambassador on Ontario's Promise.

Mrs Beyak: Yes.

Mr Martin: What's happening with that at the moment?

Mrs Beyak: As ambassadors, we try to promote a better life for children who don't have all the tools that are necessary to have a good life in Ontario, children who are underprivileged. We try to get in-kind donations and dollar donations from corporations, 4-H clubs, Rotary to help children who don't have the benefits we would like them to have. I'm just a spokesperson. An ambassador talks about the program to anybody who might be able to help with it.

Mr Martin: Are you aware of the clawback of the child tax benefit supplement that this government is involved in?

Mrs Beyak: No, I'm not. Is it recent, Tony?

Mr Martin: No, it has been going on for quite a while, actually. The federal government decided, in response to an all-party resolution by Ed Broadbent in 1989 that child poverty would be eradicated by the year 2000, to put in place a supplement to the child tax benefit, which we all get if we have kids, for poorer families in the country. The province of Ontario decided that if you were on assistance of any sort and you were getting the supplement, it would be clawed back dollar for dollar from you, which means, in my view -- and I've been across the province with this -- that those children in our communities who are most at risk and most vulnerable don't get this very important and valuable money. Does that not fly in the face of any promise this province might make to very at-risk and vulnerable children? It certainly does in my mind.

Mrs Beyak: I'm really sorry that I don't know anything about that. I thought I knew just about every issue that the government was involved in, but I'm not aware of that one; I'm sorry.

Mr Martin: I could give you a few more too, if time would allow, but I won't; I'll leave it there. Thank you very much.

Mrs Beyak: You're welcome.

The Chair: Thank you. We now move to the government party.

Mr Spina: Hi, Lynn. It's good to see you. I know it has been a long time since we've seen each other. I have two comments: one a question on the appointment on the council and, after, a comment.

Lynn, I don't know if you have briefed yourself on this council and this industry yet, but one of the problems that has been experienced in the industry is the quality and the number of insurance claims as a result of soft-tissue injuries. Often there is a perceived conflict between doctors who evaluate the patient for additional or X number of treatments in therapy and the actual people who do the therapy. Part of the conflict is that doctors own the therapy clinic, so they're kind of feeding themselves through the back door. This was a problem that surfaced. It has been very difficult for the insurance industry to challenge it. There was some thought about conflicts with regard to doctors assigning X amount of therapy. Now, we curtailed some of the treatments under the Insurance Act. You had some experience, but I don't know if you had any knowledge about this and if you had any thoughts on it.

Mrs Beyak: I don't have any knowledge of it, Joe, but in our town the massage therapists are entirely separate from any of the doctors. They're all independent workers. I think it would bear watching, certainly, and I would want to familiarize myself with it immediately.

Mr Spina: Thanks, Lynn, and you know we all loved Tony.

Mrs Beyak: Thanks, Joe.

Mr Spina: You and I will fight back tears together, I know. We'll miss him. But I'm glad to see you're being appointed, and it's good to see you again. I wish you well.

Mrs Beyak: Thanks, Joe. It was the most devastating time of my life, but it is friends, kindness and condolences that get you through it, and I'm very grateful. Thank you.

Mr Spina: Take care.

The Chair: Any other questions? No?

Mr Johnson: We'll defer the rest of our time.

The Chair: Thank you very much for being with us. You may step down. We wish you well in your travels back to the north.

MICHAEL KING

Review of intended appointment, selected by third party: Michael King, intended appointee as member, Strathroy-Caradoc Police Services Board.

The Chair: Our next intended appointment is Michael King, intended appointee as member, Strathroy-Caradoc Police Services Board. Mr Johnson will correct me if there's any mispronunciation there.

Welcome, sir, to the committee. As you know, you have an opportunity to make an initial statement if you see fit.

Mr Michael King: Good morning, everyone. I'd like to thank the committee for the opportunity to be here today to explain why I would like to sit on the Strathroy-Caradoc Police Services Board and my qualifications for this position.

I have resided in the town of Strathroy for the past six years with my wife and three children. Interestingly enough, this is the longest period of time I've resided in one community, and that is due to choice. My wife and I have strong family values and decided that we wanted our children to grow up in a small and safe community. Having made some life changes involving my career, it was decided that Strathroy fit the bill. I am now settled in this community, and my family is at the age where I can balance my lifestyle to make this important commitment. These days, as a father, I often lose out to the video games, computers, sports and extra activities that preoccupy my children, so I do have some extra time to give back to my community.

I should point out that I currently serve on the Orchestra London Foundation board, and that I am a member of the London Junior Achievement Business Hall of Fame Committee. I do have the strong support of my family in allowing my name to stand.

I understand that you have been provided a copy of my resumé. You'll note that the circumstances of my employment in the financial services industry and the ongoing transferring process that prevails in that industry have not only created enormous opportunity for personal development and growth but have also created my nomadic background in the past.

After spending a few years in business for myself, I have now returned to the financial services in the community-minded credit union system. I believe that I can make a strong contribution to my community as a member of the police services board, and bring to this role the strong leadership ability that I have amassed from over 24 years' experience.

I have been very effective in the past leading restructuring, improving business effectiveness, building employee capability and commitment, and managing change. I have developed these skills through a variety of progressive leadership positions in the financial services industry, both in Canada and internationally. I've led teams at the retail, regional and head office levels. I've also served as the interim executive director for a non-profit organization and guided them through a bankruptcy crisis.

As a senior manager at the credit union, I have a number of responsibilities, including strategic planning, policy development, budgeting, staffing, goal setting, and meeting our performance objectives. It is my understanding that these are the key responsibilities of the police services board.

While policing and financial services are obviously two different areas, they are, as the name implies, both considered services and, in my opinion, share the same fundamental basis.

In my role at the credit union, I focus on five performance drivers: sales, service, operational effectiveness, risk management, and the development of people. I believe that these are interchangeable across any business or organization.

In terms of police services, I view sales as visibility in proactively building the police image in the community, especially with our youth. In terms of service, do we respond in quick order, thoroughly and empathetically and, above all, in a professional manner? Are we delivering services effectively through the use of technology, improved processes and searching out and sharing best practice procedures? Are areas of risk and compliance identified and controlled? Are we committed to being the best we can be, as an organization and individually, through ongoing personal development?

I believe focusing on these drivers will ensure ongoing and future success.

My interest in policing can be traced to the fact that my father, Pat King, spent 40 years in the police services, both in England and Canada, retiring in 1993 as chief of police in my home town of Goderich. I always admired the approach Dad took to his position, and the values that he operated within.

Earlier this year, his name was put forth for consideration for the Ontario Medal for Good Citizenship. I had the opportunity to review some of the testimonials he received from peers, the people he served and the people he supervised. What stood out was that he was visible in his community. He took the time to listen, he was fair but firm, always professional, a forward thinker, and passionate about being a police officer. The bottom line was that he earned the respect of the majority of people he served through his action and dedication to his profession.

In terms of my vision of a police officer, I believe my father provides the image that I want my children and the people of the township of Strathroy-Caradoc to know and expect. From a career perspective, I want the brave men and women who have chosen to serve the public as police officers in the township of Strathroy-Caradoc to be as passionate and proud of their profession as my dad was.

My vision will remain strong in exercising my duties. I take this appointment very seriously, and I'm committed to adding value and doing my part as a member of the Strathroy-Caradoc Police Services Board. I welcome the opportunity to answer your questions.

1100

The Chair: Thank you very much, sir. We begin with the third party. Mr Martin.

Mr Martin: Good morning and thanks for coming. Just referencing a note in your resumé that we have in front of us here, you said you were looking for a board position utilizing your proven leadership and change-management capabilities. I'm just interested in why you've agreed to this appointment, and is there anything in it that you think will provide you with an opportunity to use those change-management skills? Are there any changes that you believe are required in this appointment?

Mr King: In terms of that particular skill, managing change, in the financial services, as you're probably all aware, there has been a huge facelift over the last number of years since the four pillars came down back in 1992. So we've had to embrace change, realize that change is part of our ongoing existence and see it more as an opportunity as opposed to a challenge.

I believe the same holds true in any business, including police services. There will be times when we have to change in relation to what's happening in the environment. For example, when we take a look at the impact September 11 had, obviously the status quo could no longer serve in today's climate. That created an opportunity to change and respond to things that were happening.

In a smaller community such as the one where I reside, there will be change. I guess a lot of people consider that in smaller communities change doesn't happen as rapidly as in the urban centres, but I do feel there will be opportunities to embrace change. For example, on the technology side, I'm aware that there was a new adequacy in standards placed on policing a couple of years ago and I'm sure that has resulted in change in the way things were done in the past. I believe that change will always be part of our everyday life, and moving forward I believe I can help manage that change.

Mr Martin: Are there particular challenges you've identified with this board that piqued your interest, which were one of the main reasons you have chosen to take on this responsibility? Is there anything that needs to be changed in this particular instance?

Mr King: Actually, from what I know of our police services, we have very effective police services in place in our community.

My interest is more around the fact that as a father of small children, and going back to the reasons we moved to Strathroy in the first place, we saw it as a safe community. It's a fast-growing community, and I want to ensure that as we grow as a community we are well positioned to continue to ensure that it remains a safe place to raise children and for our community members at large.

There were no specific challenges that I was aware of in moving forward with this opportunity.

Mr Martin: Just looking at the material that was prepared for us, for example, this police service has applied to the municipality for more money. In fact their request for more money has created some difficulty for them in that it looks like they'll have to increase taxes in the community fairly significantly if they want to respond to it in a positive way. Is that a problem for you?

Mr King: It's not necessarily a problem for me; it's a problem that I see we have to deal with. Obviously, as a taxpayer I don't want to see my taxes raised unduly. But in regard to the budget that was presented -- and subsequent to getting involved in this, I'm aware of that -- it's actually a 14% increase, which is considered a very high increase. That will be a challenge, obviously, for this police services board. I would hope my experiences in managing budgets and setting budgets in the past would have some benefit for the board in what I can contribute there. But obviously, when you talk about the biggest challenges, it's not necessarily things that are happening on the street. I guess that's the biggest challenge I see right at this point for the police services board.

Mr Martin: It's been interesting even recently reading some of the comments of the chief of police for Toronto where, after September 11, there were announcements by all levels of government that more money was going to go into security and policing because of the issues that were raised there, yet he's claiming that he has seen none of it. So he's having to go back to his municipality to ask for more money to do the kinds of things that he needs to do.

With that in mind, in terms of your particular policing area, do you have any connections that you could use to get more money into this particular policing service? Are you a member of the Tory party?

Mr King: No, I'm not.

Mr Martin: You're not connected in any way with the governing structure of this province at the moment?

Mr King: No, I am not. As far as connections, I don't really have any.

Mr Martin: You wouldn't be able to help them develop a new channel of cash.

Mr King: I wouldn't say that. My work with the Orchestra London Foundation -- that's obviously what we're trying to achieve there, so I do have a number of connections, not necessarily on the political side, in focusing on that end.

Mr Martin: Another issue that has come up since September 11 is this racial profiling, particularly, again, where policing is concerned and who is targeted, who is picked up and how they're dealt with etc. There was a huge exposé of that in the Toronto Star just in the last few months and all kinds of anxiety was created because of that. Any thoughts on that, going into this position?

Mr King: In terms of racial profiling happening in Strathroy?

Mr Martin: Yes: how we deal with it, is it something we should be doing, all those kinds of things.

Mr King: It's certainly something we should not be doing, in my opinion. In terms of it happening in Strathroy, I'm not aware that it is happening and I would be very concerned if it was. Certainly the world has changed since September 11, but we have to remember that there are rights that individuals have no matter what their ethnic background or their religious background. We still have to preserve those, so if there's racial profiling going on, I'm on record that I don't support that.

Mr Martin: Thank you very much. I appreciate that.

The Chair: Now we move to the government party.

Mr Johnson: We reserve our time.

The Chair: No questions from the government party. We move to the official opposition.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Good morning, Mr King. I was hoping you might be able to perhaps provide a little more information about your formal education and qualifications that you have.

Mr King: I don't have a formal education. I entered the banking world right out of high school and I've continuously developed. I've taken a number of courses over the years and I continue to take courses. As far as having that degree behind me, no, but I do feel that I have a high enough level of education through the experience I have gained through my employment. I just don't have the degree behind my name.

Mrs Dombrowsky: You did make reference to the fact that you are very interested in your community. You are now involved with the community credit union because of your interest in serving an institution that is focused on the community. So I have some sense that those issues concern you particularly. Are you aware of any policing issues for the area for the police services board that you're about to be appointed to? Are there any policing issues that people have talked to you about that would have motivated you, in addition to the other presentations you've made this morning around why you're here? Are there any community policing issues?

1110

Mr King: As far as issues go, we amalgamated a couple of years ago, the town of Strathroy and the township of Caradoc, which is really the town of Mount Brydges. One of the issues I have is that I live in Strathroy and the police department resides in Strathroy, and we also have an OPP detachment. I understand Mount Brydges has a satellite office. I think one of the concerns I would have is the visibility of our law enforcement officers in the town of Mount Brydges and what we could do to improve that.

One of the other concerns I have is around our youth. There's always opportunity to build relationships with our youth and I think there's opportunity as a community to allow more outlets. We recently created a new double-pad arena. Next to it is housed a joint high school venture, with our public and Catholic schools sharing the same facilities. There's opportunity, I believe, to really reach out to the youth and help them, from the policing side.

Going back to my dad, when he was a detective sergeant of the youth bureau with the Oakville police a number of years ago, he created that. What he did there was create a bridge between youth and the police and help educate and understand at a time when, back in the early 1970s, drugs were very rampant. In our community, there is a drug problem with a small number of individuals and there are alcohol problems, and I think that's something where I would like to see more of a relationship built with the youth.

One of the other things that occurs to me is the diversity of our police force. I believe there are about 30 individuals who make up the police force. I'm sure they are representative of our community, however I think there is opportunity there. I do believe that we could look to have more representation from females. Another interesting fact is that we have a high number of seasonal workers in our area, and most of these gentlemen and ladies are from Jamaica. Because they do become part of our community for a period of time, I think we should look at the opportunity to represent those people as well.

Mrs Dombrowsky: When the police services board was formed, was there debate around whether or not your community would maintain its own force or would become part of, for example, the city of London police force or contract services with the Ontario Provincial Police? Was there debate around that?

Mr King: I'm really not sure what debates were around that. When you're talking about opportunities and thinking outside the box, certainly we're close enough to London. I guess it goes back to response time: would that be the right decision? The OPP policing has been tried. That's very effective in a smaller community. I believe we're big enough now that we do need to have our own community police force. From what I understand, with the OPP initially it looks pretty good, but over time it could become a little expensive. So I truly believe that we need to have our own community police force.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Are you aware that there are members of community police forces, officers, who are concerned about the fact that because they are dependent upon municipal approval of their budgets, there are situations when they don't have the equipment that other police forces and officers would have? An example that was presented to me was where a first-response team responds to a call at a residence or place of business or whatever where an individual might be armed, and the folks on the municipal forces are called to respond. In one particular case, the municipal force did not have the Kevlar vests, which are a significant cost item. They are only able to contain the site until the OPP tactical unit arrives, and they do arrive with their Kevlar vests. Of course, the officers who are the initial responders would suggest that in fact their safety is being compromised in order to save municipal taxpayers' money.

I offer that to you for your consideration because there are areas where municipalities are able to achieve savings, but at what price? I don't know if you've been made aware of situations like that, but they have been brought to my attention. So when you consider the costs of operating a municipal force, certainly I think it would be important to understand from you the kind of priority you would place on ensuring that the officers had the equipment they should have.

Mr King: Actually, I'm surprised to hear that there are police forces that don't have the vests, because I assumed that was common --

Mrs Dombrowsky: I'm sorry, not the vests; the helmets. I'm mistaken. There's a particular helmet that the first-response team does not have but that the OPP do, who then come to the site to resume the presence there. They do have them.

Mr King: I don't know about our community, but the safety of our police officers has to be one of the primary concerns. As the son of a police officer, my biggest fear was, "Is my dad coming home tonight?" I don't want to have anybody have that fear because we decided we couldn't spend a few thousand dollars on a particular piece of equipment that's deemed to be necessary.

I don't know whether we have a response team in Strathroy. We have a unique situation in the fact that we do have the OPP detachment. So again, it goes back to, if such an incident happened and we didn't have that equipment, who could effectively handle that with the equipment? But I would certainly do what I could to make sure that we got the budget for anything to do with safety.

The Chair: That concludes the questioning of our applicant today. We appreciate your being with us, sir. You may step down at this time.

Mr King: Thank you all.

JOHN BROWNLEE

Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: John Brownlee, intended appointee as member, Social Benefits Tribunal.

The Chair: Our next intended appointee is an intended appointment to the Social Benefits Tribunal, Mr John Brownlee. Mr Brownlee, you may come forward. As you are aware by now, you have an opportunity to make an initial statement if you see fit. There will be questioning from members of the committee subsequent to that. Welcome, sir.

Mr John Brownlee: Good morning, Mr Chairman and committee members. Let me first of all apologize for my voice. One of the curses of a politician is that you might lose your voice, and I seem to be in that particular position right now. Hopefully, it will stand me in good stead for the rest of this meeting. I don't know whether it's the air that I've been breathing since coming to Toronto or not that's caused this, but it just seemed to come on me.

The Chair: I think I can say it probably is, but the government members would think I was being partisan if I said that.

Mr Brownlee: I did get it a little bit before I came into the building, but it may be quite true; I don't know. In any case, I have a prepared statement that I would like to read.

I appreciate the committee's interest in me as an intended appointee, and I am delighted to be nominated to the Social Benefits Tribunal. As you can see from my CV, my experience and background are in education, municipal government and community service. In these areas of responsibility, over the years I have attempted to be fair, firm and friendly. I strive to be informed. I'm willing to listen and then work toward what is considered a fair and appropriate resolution to the situation.

I'm proud of the fact that I enjoy the confidence of the community that I've lived in. I've lived in Muskoka for the past 35 years and I've been elected to district and area councils for four terms. People know what I stand for in Muskoka and what I bring to the table.

1120

I have been fortunate enough to be given additional responsibilities and am currently serving in a variety of capacities at both the local and district level in Muskoka. This term, at the district of Muskoka, I am the deputy district chairman, and I am the past chairman of planning and economic development for Muskoka. In the town of Gravenhurst, I'm presently the chair of planning and economic development. I'm also chair of the Muskoka wharf committee and I'm also the deputy mayor of the town of Gravenhurst.

I mention these responsibilities to underline my ability to communicate, make decisions and understand legislation. These skills, I feel, will be beneficial if I'm recommended to the Social Benefits Tribunal. I'm capable of writing decisions in a concise and precise form and style, which I also think will be an asset.

The appeal opportunity is extremely important for the participant and the government. It permits the applicant to tell the story, be listened to and receive a decision. Permitting the appellant to make a case for why their assistance should not have been cancelled, reduced or put on hold is their right. Ensuring that they have been treated fairly based on the legislation is the responsibility of the tribunal member.

I do understand there is roughly a six-week training session to learn about the legislation and the procedure for decision-making and reporting, which I understand is very thorough and comprehensive. I'm certain, even though I have read over some of the legislation, it's going to be very important to me that I participate in that training program. It's my intention to become extremely familiar with the legislation in order to apply it effectively and to ensure I make appropriate decisions.

I believe I will be a productive and effective member of the tribunal. I hope to receive this committee's recommendation, and at this time I'd be happy to attempt to answer any questions you might have.

The Chair: Thank you very much, sir, and we begin with the government.

Mr Frank Mazzilli (London-Fanshawe): We'll waive the balance of our time.

The Chair: I'll move to the official opposition.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Good morning, Mr Brownlee. I believe you have received the same background information around the role of the tribunal and a bit about its history and how it has evolved. Could I ask you to share with me if you have an opinion about the change that occurred in terms of how individuals who would want to appeal a decision about whether or not they should be receiving social benefits -- really, there has been an additional step placed before them. Do you have an opinion in terms of: is it appropriate, is it fair and does it really best serve the needs of the people, particularly those who would be trying to access the tribunal?

Mr Brownlee: I must claim that I don't have a lot of detailed information about that. I am aware that when the tribunal came into existence, there were certain conditions, and I understand one was an internal review that was required in order to have your appeal heard. It seems to me that would probably work in the best interests of the appellant, and certainly anyone judging that, if there was that internal review done in order to have that background information. I don't have enough knowledge to know if that really impedes the process for the appellant or not.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Perhaps I can share with you a perspective that has been shared with me on more than one occasion, certainly by people in my riding and even from across the province, with regard to the internal review. It has been suggested to me that this is yet another layer and in some cases it has been seen as a step that has been implemented to in fact deter individuals from pursuing redress at the Social Benefits Tribunal. I'm sure you can appreciate that in various parts of Ontario -- I represent a rural riding. In rural Ontario it can be especially problematic with an additional step, because the review occurs in a social services office usually located in the county seat or the county office where the services are managed.

There are people who would look to be on social benefits, who obviously are in financial difficulty. They may or may not have a car. They may or may not have access to transportation. In my riding there are no public transportation services. They don't have the option of getting on a bus to get there. Their situation might be urgent and yet we have what can be another very cumbersome step put in front of them before they are able to move on to the Social Benefits Tribunal.

For many, in both the field of legal aid and the field of community social service workers, they see that the review team can even be punitive. It's almost, "Well, if you're going to go to the tribunal, you've got to go through this. We're going to make you go through this."

With that background, does that in any way amend how you think about the additional step of the review team?

Mr Brownlee: It doesn't, in the sense that I don't really know that. I'm obviously from a rural riding too, and if there are impediments, then that's not a good thing. It can cause hardships. I suppose that's something that legislation has to look into. I think that's certainly outside of my jurisdiction as a tribunal member to determine that, but I certainly can sympathize with any additional step being put in any of these things that might, rather than expedite it, cause some problems in accessibility to it.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Mr Brownlee, I think it is important you appreciate that the people who would come to you as a member of this tribunal have been subjected to this additional step. Many would ask, and I think fairly, what is the point in having a tribunal if all of these cases are going to be vetted locally first? Really, that is your job to adjudicate that. There has been a decision made locally. If people are turned down, then they, in our system, in our society, have an opportunity to appeal that. But this government, with its change in legislation, has added a step which really usually does not assist them in any way. I think it's important that you would understand that that's not the first time that people who have come to you have had to sit or stand before a group of people to plead their case. I hope you might then appreciate some of the frustration and desperation that can come with that. It's a step that requires time, and in many cases these people are in dire and desperate need.

Are you aware as well that individuals who have been heard by the tribunal and the tribunal has ruled in their favour -- so you, as a member, would make a decision that would grant social assistance to an individual -- that it can take them up to six months to get to see you? It can take up to six months before they get any money. Are you aware of that?

Mr Brownlee: I was not aware of that. I am aware that there can be some assistance while the appeal process is going on, apparently, from what I've read, but I didn't realize that once an award had been given that it took that long, no.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I would invite you, if you'd be interested, to pursue that. I would think, as a member of the tribunal, you might be interested in understanding how quickly your decisions are acted upon. I would suggest you not just take my word for it but you might want to pursue that, because that may have some impact on how and what you decide at that level. It's a very complex issue. These are issues that come to me on a very regular basis, I'm very sad to report. You must understand that with many of these individuals there are children who are affected very directly by our system's tardiness.

I do want to also ask of you, because we know that in Ontario there are more children living in poverty than in 1995, when reforms in this area took place: does that alarm you at all?

1130

Mr Brownlee: Yes, it definitely does.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Do you think there is any connection between that fact and the fact that welfare rates were rolled back by 21.6%?

Mr Brownlee: I wasn't aware that they had been rolled back that much. The information I have been reading doesn't indicate that to me at all. Once again, I suppose part of that education I referred to on the other issue can be reflected in this as well.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Once again I would invite you not just to take my word for it. I think it would be a very interesting exercise for you if you were inclined to pursue that.

Were you aware that people on Ontario disability support payments have not received an increase in their compensation in about a decade?

Mr Brownlee: No, I was not aware of that.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I do think these are important facts for you to have, because these are the people you're going to be seeing, and it will be their cases that you will be making some decisions about. In my opinion, it is absolutely essential that you would have this kind of background information to perhaps better appreciate the seriousness of the situation they are bringing to your attention. Do you have --

The Chair: That concludes your time, Mrs Dombrowsky. We move to the third party.

Mr Martin: Good morning. I note on your resumé that you are chair of social services, district of Muskoka. Correct?

Mr Brownlee: I was several years ago, Mr Martin. I no longer am. That would have been long ago.

Mr Martin: So you're no longer involved in any way, at this point, with the system that delivers assistance to those who are in need?

Mr Brownlee: No, I am not. I am indirectly in the sense that it's a district function in Muskoka and we do still have a social services committee. I happen to be on the planning and economic development committee. We operate as separate committees. I certainly hear, from reports at district council, what has been transpiring with social services, but I have no input at that stage.

Mr Martin: What is your view, then, of what you are hearing, what is transpiring? Have you developed any opinions or ideas around social assistance and people who are in need of it and what's happening in your area?

Mr Brownlee: I don't have a direct pipeline to that. I do, in various organizations in the community that I belong to, find a number of people who are involved in those organizations through placements and so on, looking for jobs. We utilize that particular aspect of social services. I find that those people seem to be becoming productive members of whatever area they're involved with. So from that aspect I see it going on. When I was the principal of the high schools in Muskoka I certainly had a closer connection with social assistance and seeing the effects of that, but that was a number of years ago.

Mr Martin: As deputy chair of the district and deputy mayor of the town of Gravenhurst, do you get calls to your office or to yourself personally from people who are experiencing difficulty keeping body and soul together?

Mr Brownlee: Very few, actually. It's usually a district function that would be handled through district. I have had one or two people who have had concerns, and we've discussed it and I've tried to get the information for them and make sure they connect with someone at district who can give them an answer.

Mr Martin: Have you ever advocated on behalf of someone that they get what they need?

Mr Brownlee: I've certainly put them in touch with people who know what is appropriate in terms of their capacity for what they can give. Once again, I did that more in high school. I was fairly active in trying to make sure that the kids were getting food and properly looked after. But that function seems to have dissipated over the years, as far as council is concerned.

Mr Martin: When you were with the high school and you confronted kids who perhaps came to school and were hungry or maybe improperly dressed or whatever for the weather, did you form any opinion in your mind as to why people would find themselves in those circumstances and what kinds of efforts those families might be making to better themselves or how we were supporting them as a community to in fact do that?

Mr Brownlee: I certainly did, and we have a number of outreach groups, church groups, community groups and even the chamber in town working toward assisting people who are in difficulty. There's a fairly good pipeline between the educational system with breakfasts and clothes and so on. So I think in the small community we live in there's certainly a feeling that we've all got to pitch in and help each other.

Mr Martin: Mrs Dombrowsky mentioned some of the agenda of this government, where those who are in need of this kind of assistance are concerned. Over the last few years, there have been a number of other things that have been done that have made the challenge for many, many families in our province that much more difficult. You understand that, in being appointed to this tribunal, for the most part you're the last resort these folks will have to get what they need to keep their heads above water and feed themselves. Are you aware of the child tax benefit supplement clawback by the government?

Mr Brownlee: Yes.

Mr Martin: You are. What's your view of that?

Mr Brownlee: I think it does create hardships in some cases; there's no question about that. I think in some ways, it is appropriate. It's very hard to kind of find out just where that need is and how much of it can be utilized. I don't know a lot about it but I certainly have concerns about it.

Mr Martin: Have you followed at all the inquest in Sudbury into the death of Kimberly Rogers?

Mr Brownlee: I have. I've followed that very carefully and have been very interested in it, particularly in light of the possibility of going on the Social Benefits Tribunal. So yes, I'm aware of it.

Mr Martin: Are you aware of the recommendations that were made flowing out of that just before Christmas?

Mr Brownlee: I am, yes.

Mr Martin: And that the government has decided not to implement those recommendations, even though they were made by five non-partisan jurists who spent five weeks listening to evidence surrounding that particular circumstance? As a member of the tribunal, would those recommendations in any way affect your judgment in front of a family who would present, or a woman, in the case of Kimberly, who would come, pregnant and looking to keep body and soul together?

Mr Brownlee: Certainly, I have a lot of sympathy for that situation, and I think the more you look into it, the more you just wonder how something like that could happen. She did receive a court award, as I understand, for enough money even after that particular suspension of her social assistance. So she was in a position before she died to actually have some money, albeit it didn't seem like a lot of money, that's for sure. Yes, I'm certainly sympathetic to that. I just don't know what, as a tribunal member, one could do, since you are fettered in part, or assisted, or whatever the term is, with the legislation. But I think somehow there has to be an answer for that. I guess in so many things, Mr Martin, you can't cover all the bases on these things, and I know that possibly isn't good enough, but that unfortunately seems to have happened in Ms Rogers's case.

1140

Mr Martin: Just to clarify for you and perhaps for people watching, after Ms Rogers appealed the ban on collecting assistance and indicated she was going to launch a constitutional charter challenge to that, she appealed and her assistance was reinstated. She got the usual amount for a single person, which is $529 a month. After they took off the clawback of the student loan she had gotten to get herself through school and paid her rent, she actually had $18 left to buy food for herself and to support the child that was inside her.

It seems to me that there are certainly programs that government delivers where I don't think we have much choice but to say that sometimes people fall through the cracks and sometimes we miss something or make a mistake. In this instance it seems to me that when we miss something or make a mistake, we put some lives in jeopardy -- we put the lives of many children, those who are most at risk and vulnerable in our community, in jeopardy. It's really important that those who serve on these boards understand that, and I get a sense that you probably do. I think that if you have paid close attention to the Kimberly Rogers inquest and inquiry, as you have indicated, then you at least had an interest in that and will understand the tragic consequences of not making the right decision or of government not being there.

I believe very strongly that one of government's most fundamental responsibilities is to look after those people and things they have jurisdiction over that are most at risk and vulnerable. In this instance, we're talking about people; we're talking about our neighbours, our friends and sometimes our family members.

Are you a member of the Conservative Party?

Mr Brownlee: Yes, I am.

Mr Martin: As such, do you support the approach they've taken in dealing with people who fall through the cracks or who become poor or lose their jobs or are out there at the mercy of the system?

Mr Brownlee: Well, I support some of the areas they've gotten involved with. I think that's been important in terms of looking at social assistance more closely than it's been looked at before. But there are some hardships that I feel could be avoided, and I'm not sure just how one does that through government. I think probably the best way is through communities and through caring people in those communities, and I know that's something that is very much a question.

Mr Martin: Yes, but it takes money --

The Chair: It's nice to see you continue, but I think you're out of time. I regret very much that just when we get going on these interesting things, we always run out of time. Thank you very much, sir. You may step down now.

What we're going to do -- I've discussed this with members of the committee, representatives of the three parties -- is deal with the morning intended appointees now. That will shorten our time at the end of the day.

I will now go to those and entertain motions. The first would be a motion on James Crossland, intended appointee as member, Cancer Care Ontario.

Mr Johnson: I'd like to move concurrence on James Crossland.

The Chair: Mr Johnson has moved concurrence. Any discussion? If there's no discussion, we'll have our vote. All in favour? Opposed? The motion is carried.

The second is Lynn Beyak, intended appointee as member, Council of the College of Massage Therapists of Ontario.

Mr Johnson: I'd like to move concurrence on Lynn Beyak.

The Chair: Mr Johnson has moved concurrence. Any discussion? If not, all in favour? Opposed? The motion is carried.

Next is Michael King, intended appointee as member, Strathroy-Caradoc Police Services Board.

Mr Johnson: I'd like to move concurrence on Michael King.

The Chair: Concurrence has been moved by Mr Johnson. Any discussion? If not, I'll call the vote. All in favour? Opposed? The motion is carried.

The next one is John Brownlee, intended appointee as member, Social Benefits Tribunal.

Mr Johnson: I'd like to move concurrence on John Brownlee.

The Chair: Mr Johnson has moved concurrence. Any discussion? If not, all in favour? Opposed? The motion is carried.

That completes our intended appointees for this morning. The committee is scheduled to be back at 1 pm sharp, as we always say in the chair, to commence the afternoon activities. We go from 1 pm, potentially, to the last intended appointee at 4 pm. However, we realize that things do change in terms of the time along the way, so I will take that into consideration.

I'll ask for a motion to recess.

Mr Johnson: I move that we recess until 1 o'clock.

The Chair: Mr Johnson has moved that we recess until 1 pm of the clock today. All in favour? Opposed? Motion carried.

The committee recessed from 1146 to 1306.

The Vice-Chair (Mr Michael Gravelle): Good afternoon. We are going to resume the deliberations of the standing committee on government agencies.

MARY FICKEL

Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party and third party: Mary Fickel, intended appointee as member, Niagara District Health Council.

The Vice-Chair: We will move to our next appointment, Mary Fickel, who is an intended appointee as a member of the Niagara District Health Council. Ms Fickel, if you could come forward and seat yourself at any of those chairs, that would be fine. You have an opportunity to make an opening statement if you'd like, and then we will have some questioning from all three parties, beginning with the official opposition. Welcome to the committee, and please feel free to go ahead.

Ms Mary Fickel: Good afternoon and thank you, Mr Vice-Chairman and members of the committee, for this opportunity to outline my background and experience in the health care field which I would bring to the Niagara District Health Council.

My involvement with health care began in the late 1950s, when I was a member of the team performing heart cathetarizations at Hamilton General Hospital. I took the samples, analyzed them and reported the results, from which appropriate treatment was initiated. In 1974, I resumed my medical technology career and, in 1975, became educational coordinator for the clinical year medical technology students at Niagara Falls general hospital. The program at that time had a provisional accreditation with a review pending. It was my task in the next two months to develop a curriculum, including schedules for the clinical rotation and department lectures. When the committee returned for the re-evaluation, we were granted full accreditation.

In the 1970s and 1980s, I was invited to become a member of the conjoint committee for the accreditation of educational programs in medical technology for the Canadian Medical Association. As part of the team, we were involved in the accreditation of New Brunswick Community College, Michener Institute in Toronto, Lambton community college in Sarnia and Dawson (CEGEP) College in Montreal. While I was a member of the executive of the Ontario Society of Medical Technologists, I worked with the team formulating bylaws for the formation of the college of medical technology. In 1988, I was presented with an award of appreciation for this work.

I became a CPR instructor-trainer in 1979, helping to train the nursing staff at Niagara Falls general hospital. In Fort Erie, I was part of a team of three training the firefighters at the six fire halls, with recertification every year.

I became a volunteer for the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario in the late 1980s as health promotion representative for the area including Kitchener, Brantford and Niagara. When the area was redefined, I became the representative for the volunteers of the 10 chapters in the Niagara area on the provincial development committee in Toronto. I attended their monthly meetings, working to develop a meshing of the chapters to form a team working together in the area. In three years we had become a successful team and were awarded the Luke Vanneste provincial award. I was the recipient of a distinguished service award in recognition of my efforts.

When this term of office was over, I continued to be a speaker for the organization at service clubs and civic organizations, outlining the causes of heart attack and stroke and the ways of prevention.

When the Heart and Stroke Foundation was preparing to bring their stroke initiative to the provincial government, I organized a breakfast meeting with the MPPs in the Niagara area to present the information on stroke and on how early intervention could reduce the health care costs. For those who were unable to attend, I hand-delivered the information to the constituency offices.

After I retired, I became a first-aid instructor for the Canadian Red Cross. I teach at the St Catharines branch. I am a member of the Niagara Falls International Service Committee of the Canadian Red Cross.

With the knowledge I have gained working and volunteering in the health care field, I would like to join the team and be a contributing member to the Niagara District Health Council.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much, Ms Fickel. We'll begin the questioning with the official opposition. Mr Bradley.

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): Naturally, being from the Niagara region, I have some specific interests in specific issues that are arising that may be common across the province but somewhat specific to Niagara in terms of my interest.

The first is, you would be aware of the acute shortage -- and what could become a chronic shortage if allowed to do so -- of family physicians in the Niagara Peninsula, and certain specialists as well. What activities do you believe the Niagara District Health Council could undertake to ensure, first of all, that we retain the physicians that are there, and second, that we can attract new family physicians and specialists to our part of the province?

Ms Fickel: I certainly do understand the problem in our area. The council, I think, through their guidance with the different associations, the groups that they have working under them now, would look at the formation -- I'm talking especially about Fort Erie now, I must admit -- of those walk-in clinics. I find they do relieve a great deal. If I had a walk-in clinic, I wondered if it could be possible that they could have it from 8 in the morning to after-hours at night, with nurse practitioners. They're very good; they're well trained. Then for the drugs that you have to give, you could have a doctor oversee those and come in. But it might relieve the emergency wards and also the patients who really need the care but there's a waiting list for the doctors now.

I think that might help, but it would be under the council's guidance as to where they went and how you developed them.

Mr Bradley: The problem is that you can have all of the walk-in clinics you want -- and some of the established and long-term physicians curse the walk-in clinics, because they will say, "I have to go to the hospital and do my visitations there. I still do house calls. I spend my 60 or 70 hours a week working very hard, and I have to follow the patients, and perhaps even the patients' whole family, on an ongoing basis. I have to keep the records. I have to keep the continuity." If they show up at a walk-in clinic, there isn't necessarily continuity there. Certainly people are happy to see that they're available, because there isn't another option. I guess I'm trying to deal with how we retain full-time family physicians and recruit full-time family physicians to places such as St Catharines and throughout the Niagara Peninsula.

Ms Fickel: Years ago, one of the established doctors in our town would bring in new interns, new people who had just started. Once they got established, they used his facilities, so it relieved their costs when they had to pay back their loans. Then when they developed their own nucleus of patients, they would move out. They all stayed in town with this nucleus of patients. This is one way this doctor used to do it. We used to get physicians in town that way.

At the moment, Niagara Falls General is not designated as a teaching hospital. Perhaps if we could bring interns in so that they got used to the area, they saw what the area provided, what they could contribute, they would stay rather than leave. It would be a way of bringing them into our community at the time, to get them familiarized with our community.

Mr Bradley: I recognize this is a multi-faceted challenge we have to meet, and within a 10-minute allocation it would be difficult for us to find all the answers. But if you are confirmed by the committee, my urging would be that one of the high priorities you would deal with would be trying to find ways of bringing new physicians into St Catharines and Niagara and retaining the present ones.

The second issue is ambulance dispatch, which, if I could give an editorial opinion, is a disaster at the present time. We have ambulances going to the wrong places. We have people who, it is alleged, have died and others whose conditions have been worse because ambulances have not arrived in time. The government had a report that they hid for six months -- wouldn't show anybody for six months -- on how bad things were with the central dispatch out of Hamilton.

The regional municipality of Niagara has asked, and I have supported them in this, to have control over dispatch in Niagara with people who know Niagara to reduce the risk of those problems. Would you support the, shall we say, repatriation of ambulance dispatch to the Niagara region and taking it out of Hamilton?

Ms Fickel: Yes, I definitely would, because I have seen it myself, especially being in Fort Erie. I have seen the lack of ambulance service there because of the dispatch. If I'm not mistaken, it used to be dispatched out of Niagara Falls years ago and it was very successful. Yes, I certainly agree. I think it should be brought back into our area.

Mr Bradley: The conditions under which people work in the central dispatch in Hamilton are dreadful. So that's a problem.

Mental health is another major challenge everywhere in the province. Certainly in the Niagara region I have received representations from people who are concerned about mental health who say we need far more services, far more attention to it, and who would like to inform everyone in the world that we are not a suburb of Hamilton when it comes to mental health but we do have our own challenges to meet.

What do you see in terms of additional funding and resources available for mental health patients in Niagara?

Ms Fickel: There's a study going on at the moment, and I think they will show we definitely -- again, that also relates back to the lack of psychiatrists, of specialists when you're talking about doctors. That's a related cause as well. Yes, I feel that people sometimes have a stigma about mental health, which is a sad, sad state of affairs. They shouldn't have it. They should be willing to say there's something wrong. We need to have a better handle on how many people really are ill, because I think there are a lot more than we have any idea of, and it's based on the government seeing how many really ill people we do have so they can get a better handle on how much money could be appropriately sent down to our area to help them out. We need housing for a lot of them -- they don't have housing -- and again medical attention, services where they can go in and get mental help. I would say that if you had a study that proved statistically that there is a greater need in our area than actually appears at the moment, it would help if it was presented to the government.

Mr Bradley: Nursing home patients were hit with a huge shock last year that said they were going to have a 15% increase in the per diem they pay. For some it would be well over $200 a month. After relentless pressure from the opposition in the Legislature -- I know the government members all agree with that -- and from others in the community, the government sounded the bugles of retreat and went to 7.5% to be imposed over three years.

You recognize how many seniors there are in Niagara and how vulnerable those people are. Do you think it is fair to impose increases that are above the rate of inflation on senior citizens in our nursing homes?

Ms Fickel: I think you have to take into account that a lot are on a very fixed income and it would have a tremendous impact on their ability to pay for the homes if the percentage was put up too high for them.

The Vice-Chair: Last question, Mr Bradley.

1320

Mr Bradley: Last question. You're doing what I do to you. I'm usually the Chair and I do this to the Vice-Chair.

Traditionally, although some would quarrel with this, health councils, at least in years gone by, have been relatively non-partisan. In other words, the suggested appointments come up from below, from the people involved with the district health council and so on, and then are confirmed. Do you think that is superior to appointments which are made based on the affiliation of people?

I remember when I was part of a government, the government of the day was angry because they couldn't make these kinds of appointments, obviously. They wanted people on but they said it was traditionally non-partisan. Do you think that's a superior approach to simply appointing people who are close to the government?

Ms Fickel: Yes, because for myself, I wanted to give back to the community what I had learned and what I had gained through the health care field in my work. To me, why I should do this wasn't politically motivated; it's because I wanted to give back to my community. I think appointees should really be: what can they give to the council or what can they give to any council that you're looking at to most benefit the community in which they live?

Mr Martin: Thanks for coming today and putting your name forward. I want to continue on the train that the member for St Catharines just opened up, which is this whole issue of the role of the district health council. It has changed dramatically. When I first got elected, it was a major force in the community. There were all kinds of health issues and there had been for a long time. The district health council used to be the broker, working with the various groups -- community groups, stakeholder groups -- trying to prioritize and then send that message to the government re "Here's what we in the community think is needed and here's where we think the money should flow," and all that kind of thing.

In the last few years, since the reorganization of this and the bigger areas that are covered, I just don't understand the role any more because we don't hear anything.

My first question is, why would you want to be part of a board that, from my experience, does nothing?

Ms Fickel: Looking in my own area and the different initiatives they've taken, I really feel that they are working toward the betterment of my community and my area.

Mr Martin: Maybe you can explain to me what they're doing in your area, because I don't know what they're doing in my area.

Ms Fickel: One of the committees is physician recruitment. They're looking at that to help us out. They're also looking at mental health issues and mental health housing. One thing they're doing which I think is very good in our area is looking at the French language, finding in Welland and Port Colborne places where the French-speaking people may go and converse in their own native tongue, their own mother tongue, which they feel more comfortable in. That's a very important issue in our area. Long-term beds: we've just opened a new one, which I think is wonderful.

For our area, our health council has, through the different committees, been working for our area very well.

Mr Martin: So they've made recommendations to government and government has acted on those recommendations?

Ms Fickel: They have made recommendations, yes.

Mr Martin: Has government acted on those recommendations?

Ms Fickel: In the long-term-care one, yes, they did, because we got that new facility, which was badly needed.

Mr Martin: That new facility is run by whom?

Ms Fickel: It's a government one; an appointed person runs it.

Mr Martin: I listened to your responses to the questions from the member for St Catharines. You feel, then, that your district health council is listening to and responsive to the local community and local needs and they're forwarding the concerns up and that's why you want to be a part of that?

Ms Fickel: That's right.

Mr Martin: That's commendable. I hope you're successful in that, because it is certainly needed. There isn't an area at the moment that is garnering the kind of attention that health care is. There's a huge debate, flowing from a lot of places but in particular from the Romanow report and the Kirby report, on how health care should be delivered in the province and where the resources should come from.

Those of us who believe in a publicly funded, publicly delivered health care system and continuing to move in that direction are concerned that we might turn too much over to the private sector and eventually create, perhaps by default, a two-tier system. So I'd be interested in your thoughts, given that this is a group that looks at public health and health in general, where you think we need to be going as a province in the delivery of health care, considering the Romanow report.

Ms Fickel: We need to keep, still, our own public access to health for every person in the province. To go to a two-tier system I think would be very disastrous for some people. I know that Mr Clement had gone over to Britain a year ago or more to look at their system. Although I did ask for one, I didn't see a report of their system, but I know from personal experience over there that the two-tier system isn't that great. I would hate to see that happen in our province. I think a lot of people would suffer if it went that way.

Mr Martin: Certainly, in listening to the present provincial government, you get the feeling that in order to find the resources necessary to continue to grow the system and make it responsive and cut back on the waiting lists etc, we need to find another way besides putting more public money or public dollars into the system. Romanow and Kirby both suggested that there were significant resources lacking and that we needed to put them in. The present government has been more interested in giving tax breaks than actually funding some of the public systems that have been in place and that we need.

Ms Fickel: I understand that.

Mr Martin: Are you a member of the Conservative Party?

Ms Fickel: Yes, I am.

Mr Martin: Does your membership in that organization mean anything to you in terms of what you would support and how you would speak or what you would recommend in terms of the discussion that will happen at the table of the district health council?

Ms Fickel: My concern is for the patient, the best for the patient, and that's what I would speak to. If it happened to coincide with what the current government is proposing, then I would do that. If it was going to be the best for every patient and every person in Ontario, then I would support it. But my basic thing is to go in from my community, to make sure my community is well looked after, that we have the services and that we can look after our people in our area.

Mr Martin: Do you think the program that has been rolled out so far in the last seven years, and where we are now in terms of some of the waiting lists and the difficulties and shipping people to the States for different procedures, is good?

Ms Fickel: Waiting lists are not good; no, they're not good. I think it has snowballed, quite honestly, with the health care field. Because you don't pay, there are more and more things that can be done, and then our resources -- I'm talking about doctors now. I'm not talking about money; I'm talking about our resources and the equipment we have, which are not able to keep up with that load. So I think this is what we have to look at. We have to look at what we have and then try to maybe prioritize some of the waiting lists at the moment to see if we can't handle this and work it out. But I think it's something we have to work on very hard.

Mr Martin: OK. Thank you.

The Vice-Chair: Members of the government, any questions?

Mr Johnson: I just wanted to thank Mrs Fickel very much for letting her name stand for this very important position. I'd like to just thank and congratulate you for the work that's ahead of you.

Ms Fickel: Thank you very much, sir.

Mr Johnson: And we'd reserve the rest of our time.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much, Ms Fickel. We appreciate your being here.

Ms Fickel: Thank you very much, everyone.

1330

MARC CHARRON

Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Marc Charron, intended appointee as member, Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corp.

The Acting Chair (Mrs Leona Dombrowsky): At this time, we will hear from Mr Marc Charron. Mr Charron is an intended appointee as member of the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corp.

Mr Charron, welcome. You have an opportunity to make some comments, up to 10 minutes. If you would like to be seated, we would be happy to hear from you.

Mr Marc Charron: I'll start off by saying thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee, for having me appear at this examination in consideration of the appointment.

I'll give you a little bit of background on myself, tell you a little bit about myself. I was born in North Bay in a French-Canadian family. I spent my early years dreaming of leaving and exploring greener pastures. I acquired a taste of Canada and the diversity of its regions by living and working in southern Ontario, Quebec, northern Quebec, Labrador, Saskatchewan and Alberta.

After being away for several years, I returned to appreciate what I had left. I am a northerner. I came back to work at my food distribution business. I worked at it for 15 years. In that business, I basically sold to northern Ontario, so I visited all of northern Ontario on a monthly basis. I travelled from North Bay to Thunder Bay and visited every community in between every month for all those years. I even travelled to places like Moosonee and Moose Factory on a less frequent basis. I called on the grocery stores and the convenience stores in the large and small communities on a regular basis, and I learned much about the people and the flavour of the communities. Most of these people are French, and my background helped me to relate and understand the region.

I have driven in the area and I know the roads. I have flown myself into most of these communities and I know the aviation infrastructure. I have even snowmobiled throughout northern Ontario. I've been to all these cities even on a snowmobile and I know the trails. I know the north; I know the people of the north.

Later in life, after getting out of the food business, I purchased a hotel in North Bay and became involved in tourism. I learned a new industry. One of the first things I was part of was a strategic partnership. We developed what we called a market share group, the Blue Sky tourism market share group, where a bunch of partners came together and made a strategic alliance with the idea of marketing the region. We worked at this and we had some pretty good successes at that. We put a lot of money into marketing for our region and, like I say, we did see some successes.

I've been involved with snowmobiling, obviously. I chaired the snowmobile advisory committee for a couple of years. I'm still part of that committee; I stepped down from the chair a couple of months ago. I'm part of the Discovery Routes trails association, which is a branch of Trans Canada Trails. I'm involved with those trails as well.

I've been a member of the chamber of commerce for many years. I've been a director for a couple of years. I've been involved in and have sat on the committees of tourism and of economic growth. Those are the areas of interest for me within the chamber. That's what I want to see. Those are the things I like and that's where I feel I can make a difference.

I am also a Kiwanian. I sit on the board of directors of Kiwanis. This is my second term. I was the treasurer for the Kiwanis Festival of Music and Dance for a couple of years, and I'm still sitting on that committee.

Business experience: I like to think of myself as a person with business acumen. I've successfully operated three businesses. I know a good business decision and can make a good business decision. I bring that private sector thinking to everything that I sit on or get involved with. I have a nose for what's going to work and what won't. I can read through a business plan. Sometimes a business plan has all the i's dotted and all the t's crossed and you look at it and you say, "This is a wonderful thing," but if the fundamentals of the business plan don't work, and one plus one doesn't equal two, it equals three, you've got to figure that all the other pieces won't fall into place. If you find something like that, usually that's money that goes to waste.

I'm a fiscal conservative and I understand the concept of picking up nickels and the cost of wasting those same nickels. If you don't know how many nickels are in $1,000 or in $1 million, and you invest $1 million, chances are you're going to have some less than stellar successes and a good chance of it being wasted if you don't understand what makes up that big sum of dollars. Every investment should have a return. Some people think this kind of investment, when you're into this kind of stuff, should not have a return, but it should have a return. I think everything should have a return; maybe not a direct monetary income return, but there's got to be some way of gauging a return on it.

Basically, to summarize my skills, like I say, I know northern Ontario. I speak the language. The language of northern Ontario is the French language. I know tourism. I understand trails. I mentioned snowmobiling. I've put thousands and thousands of miles on snowmobiles. I've done it through three provinces, even into the States, all long-distance travelling. I love dirt-biking. We do a lot of that in our area. My backyard is good for that. We have a big backyard where I live. Bicycling, rollerblading, walking. We have walking trails. That's part of the north. That's what makes up the quality-of-life thing in the north.

I have a knowledge of transportation. In my distribution business, I was involved in trucking and transportation. I've been flying for almost 30 years and I have a good grasp on that. Boating as well is something I've done a lot of and it's something I understand.

My business background, the fiscal conservatism that makes me up -- I understand about accountability; I understand about return on investment. I understand about the importance of focusing on core business; understanding and being focused. If there is a business, then there's something that makes that business, and you can easily get sidetracked by other stuff on the outside of the core of the business. It's important to not get out of focus. Sometimes people get focused on infrastructure and then you see the desire to build monuments and legacies. That's something I don't believe in.

That's basically what I'm made up of. Like I said, thank you for hearing me and thank you for considering me.

The Acting Chair: We will begin questions with the NDP, please.

Mr Martin: Thanks for coming today and for your interest in the economy of northern Ontario. As you know, I'm the member for Sault Ste Marie and I know all too well the difficulties the north has had over the last five or seven years, given that our population has declined. I know that every city in the north, particularly my own, has dropped in population significantly, and many of us are wondering.

I read last night on the way here the latest edition of Northern Ontario Business. Some of the folks there are still asking the question why, in such good economic times -- and there's nobody who will deny that the province's economy in the last five to seven years, particularly in southern Ontario and some of the bigger urban areas, has done well -- areas like the north have not done equally as well. Do you have any idea why that would be?

Mr Charron: There are probably a lot of factors that you could attribute it to. I think natural resources -- basically, the border to the south of us has put up big barriers to natural resources, and natural resources are a big part of northern Ontario. So those sectors have been hit very hard over the last decade, whether it's mining or forestry. That's where the wealth of northern Ontario has come from over the last 20 or 30 years. A big part of the wealth in northern Ontario, as you know, has been natural resources.

Mr Martin: Over the years governments, recognizing that fact and the fact that a natural-resource-based economy is cyclical in nature at its best, put in place a number of vehicles: the Northern Ontario Transportation Commission -- as a matter of fact, the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines was put in place. John Lane, the Conservative member for Algoma-Manitoulin for a number of years, fought hard to have the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines and the NOHFC put in place, to be there to take the ups and downs and stabilize that economy significantly. I guess I'm wondering: do you know the history of the NOHFC and why it was put in place and how it operated, particularly in its early years?

1340

Mr Charron: I've followed, from what little information I've had, like from the Web site and that kind of stuff, but basically, my understanding is, it is basically an equalizer for the differences, say, between northern Ontario and southern Ontario; to preserve northern Ontario and to preserve the populations and the lifestyles in northern Ontario, make them more on an even footing with southern Ontario.

Mr Martin: Yes, a bit like the heritage fund in Alberta, which was there to sort of return some of what was taken from the north by way of the wealth that was added to the resource that we shipped south over the years so that we might stabilize what we're doing and create some confidence in some investors who come in and actually set up other industries.

Some suggest, and I'm meeting with our own chamber of commerce tomorrow morning to speak to them, that some of those vehicles have been either taken away or so dramatically diminished that they're no longer useful. So I'd like your comment on that.

I know, for example, the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines is a shell of its old self. If you go into any of the offices that used to exist and now exist -- the NODC, the Northern Ontario Development Corp, is gone. The Ontario Northland Transportation Commission -- the last pieces of that are now out there being picked up by other mostly private sector interests. For example, norOntair, which used to serve all of northern Ontario to give a lot of the more significant communities access to each other and to the south, was taken away. It was suggested at that time that the private sector would come in and pick that up, but they didn't. It was one of the vehicles of the transportation commission that's not there. In your own community, there's a group that is very concerned about what's happening to the rail service between Toronto and Cochrane and, ultimately, Moosonee.

Why would the government, given that we who live up there and try to work up there and represent that part of the province all know the importance of these vehicles -- any idea why they would have diminished them so significantly, or in fact in some instances taken them away?

Mr Charron: Well, no, but I would imagine the cost of it. It's one thing to provide a service, but when the cost becomes exorbitant, when you get a government-subsidized organization, it seems to cost a lot more to provide a service than when you have a private sector organization doing it. You asked why the private sector didn't step up; in certain instances it did, but economic feasibility I would say was probably the main reason.

Once you establish a series of subsidies and ongoing subsidies to create a problem like ONTC, the rail problem, basically the cost is too much, so you have to be able to provide that same service with a private sector mindset where you don't get a loss of money or you don't depend on a massive subsidy every year to sustain it.

Mr Martin: Yes. And I guess there are different ways of measuring cost. There's the actual upfront cost, but then there's the long-term overall cost of not having business because you don't have those pieces of infrastructure in place. If you can't get your product to market, if you can't travel quickly in the economy we're now living in, you're forever behind the eight ball and you'll never get anywhere. We're into recession big-time in the north. Anybody who lives and works up there recognizes that.

Next question: do you think it was smart to eliminate any capacity of private sector interests to access funds from the NOHFC to expand their operations or to restructure their finances or get into another line of business or actually attract new business into communities?

Mr Charron: Sorry, what's the question?

Mr Martin: The question is, do you think it was a good idea to eliminate from the criteria for application to the NOHFC, which is the board you're going to be appointed to, that a private sector entity can no longer apply, a business can no longer make application to that fund?

Mr Charron: I think they're looking for strategic partnerships to resolve that. You talk about the rail service. I was privy to Canadian National -- a bit of information, a bit of their presentation -- and what I was told there is that they take 31 cents down to the bottom of the page. If they take 31 cents down to the bottom of the page and they're interested in providing a service in northern Ontario, to me that is sustainable. If you have another organization that is not running efficiently because they're used to having a gazillion-dollar subsidy every year, I don't see that as being sustainable.

Mr Martin: Well, then, I would suggest that perhaps the north isn't sustainable, because we've discovered -- it was actually Conservative governments in the 1960s and 1970s who decided they needed to put in place things like the NOTC, the NOHFC, the NODC and the ministry to stabilize the economy up there. If you take that away or suggest for a second that the private sector is going to come in and pick that up, I think we're going to be badly served. I'm concerned that we would be appointing somebody to this board who would be of the mindset that there's no need for this any more.

Mr Charron: I never said there was no need for it, but I think there's got to be long-term sustainability. The efficiencies aren't the same when you have a public sector organization and you guarantee them a subsidy to operate. I think that's kind of an incentive not to be efficient.

The Acting Chair: That concludes your time, Mr Martin. We move to members of the government. You have three minutes.

Mr John Hastings (Etobicoke North): Thank you, Mr Charron, for coming in. It's been an interesting dialogue, or whatever you want to call it, between Mr Martin and yourself about the model of ongoing subsidy versus a more market-driven approach where it's feasible.

I'm wondering -- you've lived in northern Ontario all your life; you've been in business -- what kinds of things you think are doable in your capacity, if you are reappointed to this body, that could help the north. You may have some combination of market-driven approaches for getting more jobs and growth -- I see you're on the chamber of commerce in North Bay and on other like-minded groups for a number of years.

Mr Charron: Well, when you talk about the ONTC, I think that's something that's going to go on its own without the subsidy. Basically, the government stepped in and said, "We can still run this without subsidies." It's not going to disappear; it'll operate. If it needs them, the subsidies will go back, but I believe on a different level. A lot of the goals of the NOHFC are good goals. I believe in the north.

Mr Hastings: What specifically do you think we could be doing that we aren't doing? You mentioned, for example, biking. Do you think you could develop a biking festival or --

Mr Charron: Well, development of trails is big. It's a tourism venue. You know, the whole trail thing is economic. It's quality of life, which opens possibilities for economic growth, which leads to possibilities for tourism. Tourism is a big venue in northern Ontario, something that needs to be developed. It's something we have under our noses and don't know it's there.

People from elsewhere come into our area and are looking at things we don't even know we have. Just this week, we were part of a group that we worked with that is looking at an eco-challenge, basically trekking and biking. It's a tourism venue that's under our noses, and if nothing else, we have to put up a billboard and say we have it and put up a map to show where it is.

Mr Hastings: Where do you think your tourists would come from -- more tourists -- in-province, in-Canada, rather than the US?

Mr Charron: You've got both. You've got southern Ontario. We see a lot of tourism. For instance, snowmobiling is a billion-dollar industry in Ontario, and basically there's not a whole lot of snowmobiling in southern Ontario. So we're basically set up to receive a lot of that business. Developing a bridge that opens a trail is a little bit of money that goes a long way to creating an infrastructure of snowmobiling that will draw tourism.

1350

Where do those people come from? You get some from southern Ontario but you get a big number from the northern states -- New York state, Michigan. We're getting calls all the time from Pennsylvania and New Jersey. These people love to snowmobile and they don't have sustainable weather down there, so they come and they bring big wallets. They bring those American dollars and when they change them over, they've got lots of money.

The Acting Chair: I'm sure your remarks would be very worthy, Mr Mazzilli, but I am slave to the clock. I'm sorry, your time is concluded.

Mr Mazzilli: Considering we've waived all of our time --

The Acting Chair: Mr Gravelle, you have 10 minutes.

Mr Gravelle: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, Mr Charron, and welcome. There are a number of questions I'd like to ask you. Certainly, in that you are obviously a northern Ontario business person who has been in a variety of business pursuits over the last 15 or 20 years, I do think you're an interesting person and potentially a very good person to be appointed to the heritage fund. But it does take me back to a point that Mr Martin was making, or at least moving in that direction, related to the private sector. Again, as somebody who has been in the businesses that you've been in, do you think there should be a portion of the heritage fund that should be open or available to private sector operators?

I would certainly make the argument and have made the argument that in northern Ontario, particularly in the smaller communities, there are some real challenges being faced by northern businesses and they could use the assistance of the heritage fund in a variety of ways. The private sector has greater challenges in the north. Therefore, at the very beginning of the heritage fund, the intent was basically to increase job creation. It was really about job creation.

Have you thought about it and are you conscious that at one point the private sector was able to make application to it in a certain proportion? Perhaps you could think of your own businesses, as to whether or not you would have sought it.

I appreciate there are lots of reasons why it had to be carefully handled, because I recall in the past we didn't want to be providing financial help to a person opening up a business across the street from somebody who already had that business.

But anyway, do you feel the private sector should be or could be eligible for funding from the heritage fund?

Mr Charron: I'd need a little bit more information. Like I say, I haven't been privy to the discussions that have taken place over the last decade. I'm sure there are good reasons why these changes were made, and I'd certainly want to be privy to some of that before I pass an opinion.

There are certainly possibilities of abuse there and it may well be one of the reasons that that was eliminated. I don't know what they are, so I don't think I'd be in a position really to give an opinion on that.

Mr Gravelle: I'm a little surprised that you haven't got an opinion on that. Again, as a businessman, I would have thought that you would have had some thoughts on it. I give it a lot of thought because I speak to a lot of business people who really, I think, with some assistance, could create many more jobs. There are situations that are so specific to the north. Mr Hastings was asking about how it could be improved. I know all the members on the government side are interested in this as well, because obviously this is an important and very specific fund.

Let me ask you something else, which may be difficult in light of your previous answer because you may not have the information on it. Another frustration that I tend to have with the heritage fund -- and it's a peculiar one because I don't want to be too critical of it, but here's what it is. It has moved toward now being a funding agency, for example, for health care facilities, for getting an MRI in communities. It seems to me certainly that the whole intent of the heritage fund was to provide funds that were separate from that. In other words, what I think is happening -- and I think quite frankly the Minister of Northern Development and Mines shares my concerns. I asked him this question in estimates. When you get an announcement that $1 million is being provided to help get an MRI in northwestern Ontario, I say, "Thank you very much, that's great. Glad to see that we're getting the MRI; it's important." But it seems to me that funding shouldn't be coming from the heritage fund; it should be coming from the Ministry of Health or whatever appropriate agency. So I'm afraid the heritage fund is being used to some degree as simply a top-up fund for other ministries.

It goes for infrastructure funding as well. Since we've seen the downloading to the provinces, we're seeing various -- drinking water safety: we're seeing a lot of the fund being used for that, and that concerns me. If you're familiar with it, I'd love a response to it. And if you're not, I'd love you to think about it. My concern truly is that somehow the fund is no longer being used for its original purpose, which is to create jobs; it's being used more now because the lead ministries, whether it's environment or municipal affairs or whatever, are not providing the funds that they should be. Any thoughts on that?

Mr Charron: I guess I share your sympathy to both the questions, even the private sector thing. But like I say, with the information I've got, I'm the new kid coming on the block and I'm certainly not going to sit here and second-guess everything that's been done over the last decade and try to pretend that I have enough information to pass judgment, when I haven't sat on this thing for any period of time. I think it would be a little bit premature for me to sit there and have an opinion on something when I don't have the background facts to go with it.

If you ask my personal opinion, yes, the private sector, under a good plan -- we've seen a lot of abuses in the private sector with government money. We seem to have the same people at the trough all the time, some of them more successful and some of them less successful than others. But like I said, I don't think I'd want to pass an opinion as to what direction the heritage fund has taken or why they've taken a direction, having not even sat on it.

Mr Gravelle: Well, I'll tell you, I sure don't think it would be inappropriate for you to think about these things, because as a member of the heritage fund -- I think there are only 12 members on the board, if I've got it right, and the minister is the chair, so I do think this is a board that the minister listens to in a more significant way than perhaps other agencies that the government has.

Interjection.

Mr Gravelle: I'm going to give you a moment for your question. But I do think it's actually something you should feel really free to have thoughts on. Again, as northerners, much like Mr Martin and I think like all members, we're really keen to make sure this works, and I think it may have gone a bit off the rails in terms of how it's being used. I therefore think it's crucial that the members of the board such as yourself have very strong feelings on it, which is not in any sense to be -- obviously, I'm not suggesting that you go out there as an attack dog, but I just think that as northerners, we have to be very clear on this. This is a fund that we obviously want to preserve so I certainly would encourage you to develop your thoughts on it. I know Mr McDonald, I'm sure, has some thoughts on it and is obviously a member who's very interested in this as well.

What do you think about the fact that it appears -- do I have more time?

The Acting Chair: You have two minutes.

Mr Gravelle: There seems to be an awful lot of money that's not being spent. The money in reserve -- I think we're well over $200 million that's not being spent. In other words, the money is coming in and there's all kinds of money being held in reserve. There are certainly some people who think that it's all going to be spent during the election campaign. I'm not so sure that is the case, but the point is that it seems to be a system whereby the money is being collected and held in reserve. Have you got any thoughts on that? Are you familiar with that reality?

Mr Charron: A couple of thoughts on it. I guess it probably says something to the screening of the applicants. I haven't seen the applications and what's been there, but it probably says something to the screening. Also, from what I understand, there's often a time delay between when the funds are allocated and when the funds are committed. So funds could be committed this year but maybe not distributed until next year or the following year.

Mr Gravelle: I'm suspicious that it's more than that, but --

Mr Charron: It's preferable to do that than to throw it away because you're coming up to the end of your budget or the end of your fiscal year.

Mr Gravelle: One would never want that to happen. I did have one more question I wanted to ask you, and suddenly I've gone blank on it. I apologize. It was a brilliant question, I want you to know that.

Interjections.

Mr Gravelle: I'll give my minute up to Mr Mazzilli. Can I do that? Am I allowed to do that?

Mr Mazzilli: Thank you very much. I was parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Tourism, and from the north the complaint of the tourism industry is always that people fly into Pearson and then, of course, it costs $1,600 to fly to Thunder Bay. How do you move people from a massively populated area to the north efficiently and economically so that they can afford to vacation in the north? Would you be open to looking at, with the northern heritage fund, perhaps with a partner like Air Canada or whoever, to getting people out of a populated area to the north for certain venues?

Mr Charron: Absolutely. Transportation is one of the big issues for northern Ontario. Transportation and communication, those are the issues, those are the distances, and those distances are being bridged right now. I don't think the $1,600 is still -- I think those prices have come down quite a bit. We're seeing some substantially reduced prices from North Bay to Toronto. Far be it from me to comment on that, because the transportation industry has had some tremendous hurdles in the last little bit. They've been assessed -- even though the cost of the carrier is not the total cost of the ticket. We see a lot of surcharges now. We're seeing security surcharges, we're seeing NAV Canada surcharges, we're seeing the infrastructure surcharges where the airports had been funded by government -- they have broken their reliance on government and have gone back to these carriers; actually mostly this carrier, Air Canada. They're faced with tremendous increased charges on their surpluses on the ticket. We saw -- what was it? -- WestJet that came out with the $1 ticket and by the time you were done it was $96.

The Acting Chair: That would conclude your time at this committee. We thank you very much, Mr Charron.

Mr Charron: Thank you very much for listening to me and for considering me.

1400

G. MAURICE POWER

Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party and third party: G. Maurice Power, intended appointee as member, Licence Appeal Tribunal.

The Vice-Chair: Carrying on, if I may, our next selection is Mr G. Maurice Power, intended appointee as a member of the Licence Appeal Tribunal. Mr Power, you can come forward. It's good to see you. You have an opportunity to make a few remarks if you wish. We will then begin the questioning with the government party.

Mr G. Maurice Power: I would like to thank the members of this committee for the opportunity to be here today to explain my desire to become a member of the Licence Appeal Tribunal and hopefully to answer any questions that you may have. I would first like to tell you some things about myself and my background that may help you to understand why I want to become an adjudicator with this tribunal.

I was born in Toronto and grew up in Scarborough. My father, the late George Cyril Power, was a lawyer with the Ontario government and was very community-minded, so the tradition of public service goes back in my family beyond myself. My father helped found and served as the first chair of the Scarborough Public Library Board, and it was during his term that the first permanent library in Scarborough was built. From his teaching and his example, I learned early the importance of reason and the proper use of authority and, most of all, of procedures which give every participant in a process a fair opportunity to be heard. Those are skills which have stayed with me and which I hope I have applied in my subsequent career.

From my equally energetic and community-minded mother, the late Mary Power, I learned the importance of trying to direct one's activities toward the improvement of the lives of others and of society, and of bringing a caring and compassionate attitude toward all one's activities. It is these principles and attitudes which I believe I have tried to apply and which have guided me in my career and which I hope to have the opportunity to continue to apply in a role as an adjudicator.

After obtaining my BA from Glendon College of York University and my law degree from the University of Toronto law school, I was called to the bar in 1979. From 1979 to 1997, I practised law with various firms, first in Scarborough and later in Markham. This involved me in working in many areas of law, from real estate to family law to wills, trusts, estate work, and even some criminal and Highway Traffic Act cases. I discovered that I was able to handle many types of work in different areas of law simultaneously with considerable versatility. I became a very quick study and in fact was called upon by other members of my profession to assist them in various cases which involved writing briefs for them. I discovered, as well, that I have some talent for writing and wish to put that to use.

You might say that my first acquaintance with adjudicative functions came when I was a member, from 1980 to 1991, of a panel for representation for children involved in child welfare cases. That panel was operated by what was then the official guardian's office and is now, of course, the office of the children's lawyer. Panel members' opinions were highly respected by judges since we were very well trained in the techniques of eliciting the necessary information to help the judges make a fair decision in each case. Again, those were skills which have stayed with me and which are valuable, I think, to the role of an adjudicator.

My first direct experience with the adjudicative function came when I served from 1990 to 1998 as chair of the admissions and discharges committee of the board of Participation House in Markham. Participation House is a residential home for adults with disabilities and was in fact one of the first such homes in this province. I must say, I don't expect any decision that I may make as an adjudicator in future to be as challenging in some ways as the decisions which we members of the admissions and discharges committee had to make in those cases. We had to decide whom among certainly very deserving individuals we could admit to the very few places that we had opening up in the Participation House home. Fortunately, I had the support of very able and caring committee members in making those decisions and found that to be very important.

Based on this experience, I applied for and, in 1997, received a three-year appointment as a full-time vice-chair of the Social Assistance Review Board. Following my appointment, that board was gradually replaced under new legislation by the new Social Benefits Tribunal. Vice-chairs with the Social Assistance Review Board were of course cross-appointed as members of the tribunal. My term was an enormously demanding but very, very exciting time. We members were called upon to adjudicate in both Social Assistance Review Board hearings under the old system and old legislation and tribunal hearings under the new system. Of course, we travelled all over Ontario. Let me say that that was certainly one of the benefits of membership on that board and tribunal. I got to see many, many areas of our extraordinarily beautiful province and was very impressed. I travelled as a young man but didn't get the chance to see as many parts of this province, especially the north.

Because of the newness of the social benefits legislation, specifically the legislation which created the Social Benefits Tribunal, and the uncertainty as to the continuing applicability of various interpretations of legislation by the Social Assistance Review Board in previous cases and this transitional situation, many of the hearings which we held were very complex. Of course, as always with hearings of such importance to social assistance applicants and recipients, many hearings were very tense and very difficult. Again, I was very fortunate to have the full support of extremely capable staff in what was a difficult transitional period. Fortunately, after a time, and as the end of my term approached, the provisions of the new legislation providing for internal reviews began to take effect and the number of cases which the tribunal had to deal with did decline. I successfully completed my term with the Social Assistance Review Board and the Social Benefits Tribunal.

I believe I am ready to contribute my experience and expertise in adjudication again in the public service. I expect that this new position which I have applied for will in some ways be equally challenging, as it involves a tribunal with a tremendous range of jurisdiction over appeals under many different pieces of legislation. I believe the material before you indicates that there are over 20 different pieces of legislation under which the Licence Appeal Tribunal has jurisdiction to hold hearings of one sort or another. I believe, however, that I have demonstrated great flexibility in my past endeavours and the ability to master many different fields of law very quickly. I think I will bring that experience to the Licence Appeal Tribunal and can assist greatly in the handling of so many different types of appeals. I hope to have the opportunity to do that, should this committee see fit to concur with my appointment to that tribunal.

I would be very pleased to answer any questions the committee has. Thank you for hearing me.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much, Mr Power. We have a little bit of time left for the government side.

Mr Mazzilli: Mr Power, thank you for letting your name stand for this. Obviously this is a very difficult job -- more than others, I would say, because, as you said, there are 20 different pieces of legislation and often contrary medical evidence, where you have one physician recommending one thing and another saying something else. You're going to have to weigh that. We get these complaints at our constituency offices -- I won't say daily, but certainly on a weekly or monthly basis. So I know the challenge you have. All I ask is that you make life easier for us by resolving some of those disputes.

Mr Power: Thank you, Mr Gilchrist. Let me say that I was relieved when reviewing --

1410

The Vice-Chair: It's actually Mr Mazzilli. They've got the wrong --

Mr Power: I'm sorry; I'm reading the wrong tag. Excuse me. Mr Mazzilli, my apology. Thank you for pointing that out.

Let me say I was relieved, when I reviewed the terms for the hearings of the Licence Appeal Tribunal, to realize that in any matter involving medical evidence, the panel hearing the case is required to include a medical doctor, and of course many members of the tribunal are medical doctors. That will be of great assistance.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Hastings, do you have a question?

Mr Hastings: Mr Power, thank you for appearing before us. My principal concern, and I'd like to get your sense on this: having dealt with the Social Assistance Review Board and other such groups, and the law in general, what is your sense of how effective customer service is in these kinds of regulatory compliance type operations? I have a general impression, based on people who have come through the constituency and on talking to people, that there is a less than urgent type of approach to dealing with applicants coming before this kind of organization, whatever the issue. There is sort of a nice, leisurely approach to dealing with an issue, sort of, "We'll get to it when we get to it." What is your sense of whether that may be true, and if you found it to be even partially true, what would you advocate in your role to try to correct that?

Mr Power: I can certainly understand the appellant's point of view in that, because there are delays in the process, inevitably. From the other side of the desk, if you will, as an adjudicator with the Social Assistance Review Board and the Social Benefits Tribunal, I saw an extremely efficient staff who were very motivated to push appeals through just as rapidly as they could, given that they were dealing with a tremendous volume of appeals. During my term, of course, they were dealing with appeals simultaneously under two different sets of legislation and two different systems.

We were given strict guidelines to try to adhere to with respect to trying to get the hearing dealt with as soon as possible. Certainly they had very specific approaches to people who came to the counter and wanted information about their appeal. What I saw convinced me that they were making every effort to both deal with appeals as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with the law, of course, and affording everyone involved a fair hearing, which is very important.

Particularly with the social assistance recipients and applicants, many of them were individuals who did have difficulty expressing themselves. Certainly we were trained to deal with that at hearings, but it may have been difficult and frustrating for them sometimes to deal with the people at the counters in these agencies, although certainly those people were trained to try to give them every assistance in doing so.

Mr Hastings: But in this instance --

The Vice-Chair: Very quickly, if you could.

Mr Hastings: -- you're dealing more with business people under consumer and business services. So I would expect there would be a little bit of a different mindset about customer service.

Mr Power: I think, Mr Hastings, that is reflected in the even more tremendous volume that the materials before you will show the Licence Appeal Tribunal processes in a given year and in the very short turnaround time for their decisions. I'm certainly going to do my best, if I am appointed, to maintain that in every way.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Thank you, Mr Power, for attending this afternoon. I would like to pick up on the theme around the average length of the process that is involved with the appeal process when you consider the acts that are dealt with by your committee and what I hear in my constituency office on a quasi-regular basis from people who have had their licence suspended, for example, or impounded.

In rural Ontario, you can't even feed yourself if you don't have a vehicle. You have to get in the car, go to the grocery store and get your food. We don't have public transit in rural Ontario. In my riding there is not one public transit authority, so people rely very much on drivers' licences. I'm sure you can appreciate that awaiting this kind of decision can, in many instances, be very problematic for an individual and especially for a family.

So I would only ask that you consider this and, as a member of the tribunal make every effort, particularly in those cases of suspension or impoundment where individuals are prevented from driving or accessing their vehicle, to understand how important it is that that appeal be heard as expeditiously as possible. I do want you to have the understanding that for many folks, not only in rural Ontario but particularly in rural Ontario, a week can be a very long time.

Mr Power: Let me say that as a member of the Social Assistance Review Board and the Social Benefits Tribunal, I did become familiar with the difficulties that rural residents in particular experience. They are remote, and transportation is very difficult for them. I fully understand what you're saying.

Although there is provision in the procedural rules of the Licence Appeal Tribunal for an expedited hearing in any case involving suspension of a licence, especially for medical reasons, as has already been mentioned -- if it is a medical suspension, a doctor must properly be involved. There are procedural requirements to ensure a fair hearing, which require advance notice and disclosure of documents and so on, although again those are expedited under the procedural rules, as they should be.

I would be able to do my part in two ways: first of all, to keep up the very fine tradition this tribunal has for a very rapid turnaround on decisions after the appeal. As the material shows, they often get them out within seven days, which is what they should try to do and what I would certainly try to do.

Also, I have considerable experience with the Social Benefits Tribunal and the Social Assistance Review Board in travelling to hold hearings. I'm used to doing that. Although I'm not certain this will be the case, I would expect they might welcome someone who is willing to travel outside Toronto, in appropriate cases, to hold hearings. I know that particularly for people from the north, it must be difficult not only to await their hearing but also to get down to Toronto for a hearing, which I understand is where most of the hearings of this tribunal are held. If I can help to contribute by accepting some travelling assignments, I'm certainly willing to do that.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I note in your curriculum vitae that for a period of time you were a partner with the now-Honourable David Tsubouchi. I would like to inquire at this time about your political affiliation and your political involvement.

Mr Power: I have, over a number of years, been affiliated with the Progressive Conservative Party. I must correct one misapprehension, however. I was never a partner of Mr Tsubouchi. Mr Tsubouchi has been a partner with several individuals over the years. He was initially in partnership with the late Mr Alan Parker, who died tragically young in 1990. Subsequently, a number of years later, he was in partnership with Mr Graham Nichols. After Mr Tsubouchi became a cabinet minister and was unable to continue his duties with the firm, I did stay on as an associate only of Mr Graham Nichols in Markham until my appointment to the Social Assistance Review Board in 1997. But yes, I did work for Mr Tsubouchi and the late Mr Parker over a number of years in the 1980s and early 1990s.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Have you been involved in political campaigns?

Mr Power: Yes. I certainly greatly admired Mr Tsubouchi and what I saw of his work for his constituents. Even when he was a local councillor in Markham, Ontario, he would work literally day and night to do the best for both his clients in his law practice and his constituents in his local councillor position. I was very impressed with that and I wanted to help him get elected, and we did.

Mrs Dombrowsky: With respect to your appointment to this committee, you indicated in your opening remarks that you were very eager to participate with the licence review tribunal. May I ask if this is a role you went looking for, or did some come looking for you?

1420

Mr Power: In a sense, a combination of both. I've been a friend and colleague for many years of Mr David J. Hunt, who was for a number of years -- in fact, going back to the days when it was the Commercial Registration Appeal Tribunal -- a member of the Licence Appeal Tribunal, and in fact a vice-chair in recent years. Mr Hunt was recently appointed as a justice of the peace in Toronto. Of course, that's a full-time position, and he had to step down from his duties as vice-chair of LAT. He encouraged me to apply, and I did apply, to become a member of the Licence Appeal Tribunal. I must admit it helped to know there would be an opening for a lawyer member, certainly, since Mr Hunt was stepping down.

Mrs Dombrowsky: That would conclude my questions. Thank you.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Martin, do you have any questions?

Mr Martin: I don't have a whole lot of questions. I just wanted to know why your membership in the Social Assistance Review Board and the Social Benefits Tribunal ended.

Mr Power: Most of the members during my term were in fact not renewed. That was because many, many members were appointed, as they had to be, during what was a transitional period. In fact, we were told right at the outset that we were not really to expect, most of us, to be reappointed.

The position was very demanding. The travel, especially in the last year -- you come from the north, so you know how difficult travel can be in the north in winter, and yet as a senior member in the third year of my term I was expected to, and I did, discharge those duties.

As the last of the appeals under the old legislation before the Social Assistance Review Board were finally wound up, that board was eventually wound up toward the end of my term. Actually, I think there were still a couple of hearings outstanding of that board at the end of my term, but it was substantially finished. That of course is because there was a deadline for filing such appeals that had passed well before that.

The new Social Benefits Tribunal initially had to deal with some very difficult issues because it was new legislation and no one, frankly, quite knew how to interpret it. By the end of my term, two things were happening. First of all, a number of cases had proceeded to the higher courts, to the Divisional Court, on appeal, and we were getting clear guidance on what interpretations were valid and were being upheld by the courts. That made it much easier to settle cases at the internal review level, which is the second thing that was happening. The new procedures for internal review under the new social benefits legislation were becoming more and more effective as the participants got more and more used to them and they got better guidance from the higher courts on how they should deal with issues from the outset. As a result, the number of appeals began to decline dramatically, which was expected and anticipated, and by the end of my term far fewer members were needed to deal with them.

I also will admit, frankly, that the position was demanding and I was tired at the end of that term. I felt that it was appropriate for me to do other things for a while, which I did. I'm not sure, had I been offered a renewal of my term, whether I would have felt it was appropriate to accept it at that time. In effect, we were running two boards or tribunals at once, Mr Martin, and it's a very, very challenging thing to do. There will be many challenges with the Licence Appeal Tribunal, but it is a single tribunal, despite the many different types of cases it hears.

I don't know if that answers your question fully, but they had less need for my services as a member at the end of my appointment, and I had been warned at the very outset of it that that was likely to be the case. I had done my service. It was a tiring time for me, and I welcomed the opportunity to step down at that time.

Mr Martin: In your resumé it says that from then to now you have done part-time private practice and other tasks.

Mr Power: Little bits of work for friends and things like that, and some private-practice work. Of course, I've been looking for various opportunities to do more, and frankly this opportunity was one that I welcomed when it came along.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much, Mr Power. You may step down now. We'll be dealing with the appointments process later on.

LILA MAE WATSON

Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Lila Mae Watson, intended appointee as member, Council of the Ontario College of Teachers.

The Vice-Chair: We will move on to our next appointment. I'd like to call forward Lila Mae -- better known as Lou -- Watson. Please come forward, Ms Watson. I presume that Lou is what your friends and family call you.

Ms Lila Mae Watson: It depends on who knows me and for how long.

The Vice-Chair: Well, I love Lila Mae. I think that's a great name.

Ms Watson: You're one of the fortunate few who pronounce it correctly. I must confess it is my right name; however, I found over the years that so many people couldn't pronounce it and couldn't spell it.

The Vice-Chair: How do they pronounce it?

Ms Watson: They've pronounced it any way you can imagine.

The Vice-Chair: Welcome, and it's good to see you here. You're here, of course, as an intended appointee as a member of the Council of the Ontario College of Teachers. You have an opportunity to make some opening remarks, if you like, and then we'll begin the questioning with the official opposition party, the Liberal Party. Welcome. It's good to see you.

Ms Watson: Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here.

The Vice-Chair: Please feel free to say a few words.

Ms Watson: OK. I'm going to be brief, so that you have the majority of the time to ask me questions.

Good afternoon, Mr Vice-Chair and members of the committee. I really welcome this opportunity to appear before you today and to introduce myself as an intended appointee to the Council of the Ontario College of Teachers.

Since you have my vitae, I will not reiterate the contents of it but rather highlight some of the experiences I've had that I believe will contribute to my effectiveness as a member of the council.

Originally, I started out in business. I had a business course and worked, and then went into education. Just a quick anecdote: if you're trying to guess my age, the reason I had to change was because I worked at a time when the philosophy of the company was that they didn't hire married women. The minute you got married, it was your automatic resignation. So I had a forced reason to change careers, and I chose education and have been in it for 35 years. I started out in a classroom, rose to become a supervisory officer and retired as a superintendent with the Scarborough board in 1997.

In retirement I've continued to be actively involved, predominantly with committee work and with boards. When I was working, I was responsible, and this is one of the things I'm really pleased about, for the establishment of the Progress Career Planning Centre, since called the Progress Career Planning Institute. I formulated the company, sat as the informal chair of the board and then sat formally as the chair until 1998 and as past-chair until 2000. I'm still involved with the centre on an ongoing basis, just to volunteer and help out and go back and facilitate.

I was appointed to the safe schools section of the Child and Family Services Review Board in August 2001, and subsequently cross-appointed to the Custody Review Board and have been quite active with that.

I am currently the co-chair of the Education Policy Advisory Council -- I have been a member since 1995 -- and I'm also currently a member of the training, colleges and universities policy advisory council since its beginning after the last election.

On a personal level, I'm a wife and mother and a grandmother of four wonderful grandsons. I have one daughter who is a teacher and is in the process of becoming a vice-principal. The other daughter is assistant to the principal of Queen's University. So you can see that I am well immersed in education even in retirement. I'm surrounded with it.

I believe that in becoming a member of the Council of the Ontario College of Teachers my extensive experience in various aspects of education and beyond, my experience in working with the public as well as my involvement in business, boards and committees will bring added value to the administration of the college's affairs and the regulation of the teaching profession. I look forward to your questions and hope that more of the background you may be seeking will come out through the questioning.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much, Ms Watson. We will begin the questioning with Ms Dombrowsky of the official opposition.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Welcome, Ms Watson. I have to tell you that I'm rather amused by your opening remarks relating to your name, Lila Mae Watson. When you have a name like Leona Dombrowsky, I certainly can appreciate how names can be butchered.

In any case, Ms Watson, I noted, and I thank you very much for including in your curriculum vitae -- you talk about your political experience. That's an area that we regularly are interested to know about at this committee. You have indicated that at the provincial level you've been involved on the Education Policy Advisory Council and were a member of the training, colleges and universities advisory council. Federally, you talk about being a candidate in the riding of Thornhill. You talk about being the president of the association and the past president, but you didn't put in writing for what party.

1430

Ms Watson: Progressive Conservative.

Mrs Dombrowsky: For the Progressive Conservatives. Thank you very much. I thought that would have been the case, but I've learned never to assume.

As I review your curriculum vitae, you have indicated that you have experience as a principal with the Scarborough Board of Education. Certainly my colleague Mr Gerry Phillips would tell me that all folks associated, past and -- well, I guess not present, because it's a different board now, but certainly he has very good things to say about anyone who was associated with that school board and the quality of education that you provided. As a principal, it would have been your role to assess the performance of teachers in your school. Did you do that? Maybe you can explain to me how you did that.

Ms Watson: Well, through the course of my career as a principal, we did change the evaluation and assessment process to the point where, when I was a superintendent -- and this is just prior to amalgamation of the boards -- we had a process that was quite intensive and quite thorough. But certainly, to answer your question specifically, the main thing you want to know about a teacher is the outcome of student learning. That's the bottom line: whether the students are learning in that classroom or they're not. Everything else falls into place.

The other thing that's key -- and you certainly look at teaching competencies -- you look at student assessment, student learning outcomes. You look at their communication with parents, with other colleagues and so on. These are the informal things. But one of the things -- and this is a personal note of mine but then became built into our process as a procedure -- was their ongoing professional development. I wanted people who were actively involved in their own learning and therefore their betterment as a professional and a teacher.

So those were sort of my personal guidelines built within the policies of the board. The policies at the end were quite consistent, actually, with what is taking place now.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Perhaps you could explain, then, how you see there is consistency there, with the kind of assessment model that you speak about that happened at the board level, compared to what is in place now, where a teacher test is administered under the auspices of the College of Teachers. Maybe you could make that connection for me, because I have to tell you quite frankly that I hear from a lot of people, certainly professionals in the field, who are having a lot of difficulty around that particular change in the law and change in the regulation of how to assess the quality of a teacher.

Ms Watson: The interesting thing is, and again I make a personal statement because I was involved in the fall --

Mrs Dombrowsky: What fall?

Ms Watson: This past fall.

Mrs Dombrowsky: In what way?

Ms Watson: -- with the process of assessing the teacher performance appraisal that is implemented right now. The interesting thing is that while teachers do testing all the time, they don't like to be tested themselves. It has been historically the case that they do testing and feedback to students and so on, but when it's themselves, they really are not readily amenable to it.

I think what has to happen, though, is the fact that we need to ensure that everybody in the teaching profession, in the education profession, is improving themselves. Whether that be through a teacher test or whether it be through a combination of that and regular upgrading, which is the case now with the PLP, there has to be ongoing performance appraisal; there has to be, in my mind.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Was there ongoing performance appraisal and upgrading of teachers when you were a superintendent at the school board?

Ms Watson: Yes, there was.

Mrs Dombrowsky: How did that happen?

Ms Watson: One thing we had was a built-in requirement, when we evaluated the teacher, for them to do their own professional planning. It was logged, "This is what they are going to do." Now, it might be of their own volition or it might be in co-operation with your recommendations, if there are weaknesses, what they were going to achieve over the next year. Then you would look at that, reassess it and talk about it: "How's it going?" But there was an expectation that there was ongoing professional development.

Mrs Dombrowsky: In your opinion, is ongoing professional development better carried out at the local level or at the provincial level?

Ms Watson: I would say both.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Can you explain that, please?

Ms Watson: The reason being that at the local level it's fine, but it has to be monitored and the people have to be doing it. However, there are times when it has to be monitored above that level. I think if I was going to be candid, my own take on it would be that if over the last number of years people have indeed grown professionally and managed their own professional development -- hundreds and thousands of teachers do, but you've always got some who don't; as a case in point, someone who goes in and teaches for 25 years in the same subject in the same school and hasn't taken a course. If that's the case and there isn't some way of ensuring that that changes, it probably requires some higher level of monitoring. I believe that was part of the reason, because parents felt their children were not receiving an education from the very best. There was considerable concern. We all know that there's been discussion on that.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Perhaps you can distinguish for me, because these are two terms that you've used in your remarks, the difference between someone who is tested and someone who is assessed.

Ms Watson: It's basically the same thing. When we say "testing," we're talking about paper and pencil, but it is assessment. It is assessment, no matter how it's done. I think one of the concerns definitely has been a pencil-and-paper test.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Is it your understanding that that is how teachers are going to be assessed? Is that going to be a component of their assessment?

Ms Watson: That hasn't been confirmed.

Mrs Dombrowsky: That hasn't been confirmed? Do you have an opinion on that?

Ms Watson: Not a conclusive one. I believe that it has to be looked at. I know there's a concern on the part of teachers and their federations that this is not going to determine the competency of a teacher; I know that. So if that's the case, then it probably has to be looked at.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Are you aware of any document or any study that would support a paper-and-pencil test to make this kind of an assessment?

Ms Watson: I know there has been a considerable amount of research, certainly in the States, but I can't quote it.

Mrs Dombrowsky: If I can move on to another area that is particularly important to me --

The Vice-Chair: One more minute.

Mrs Dombrowsky: It relates to the fact that we have a law in Ontario to protect students from teachers who, very sadly, would have abused them. However, that only catches teachers who are employed in our publicly funded school systems. Is it appropriate that we would have thousands of children in Ontario who are, in my opinion, potentially vulnerable, because in a private system, teachers of that system are not required by law to be reported professionally to their college should they have committed these kinds of offences?

Ms Watson: I think the operative word there is "private." I'm in these discussions all the time as to whether we should indeed be imposing greater requirements on the part of the private --

Mrs Dombrowsky: For me the operative words are "children" and "exposure."

Ms Watson: I agree with you. However, I use the word "private" as being operative because of the type of school. A child is in a private school at the discretion of the parents.

Mrs Dombrowsky: They don't deserve to be protected.

1440

Ms Watson: They do deserve to be protected, but those parents very much regard the right to make their decision and are very loath to have someone impose that on them from any other quarter.

Now, there are all kinds of opinions on it, as much as every school in the province should come under the auspices and domain of the government. The interesting thing is that you then go and talk to parents whose children are in private schools and they don't want to have any of that.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much. Mr Martin.

Mr Martin: You taught, did you?

Ms Watson: Sorry?

Mr Martin: You were a teacher?

Ms Watson: Oh, yes.

Mr Martin: For how many years did you teach?

Ms Watson: From 1959 to 1980, when I became a vice-principal.

Mr Martin: Your reason for wanting to be on this college -- primary?

Ms Watson: My reason?

Mr Martin: Yes.

Ms Watson: Because I have a passion for education and ensuring that the very best educational opportunities are afforded to the students in this province. I say that as passionately now as I did when I was an educator. The interesting thing was that I didn't start out as an educator; I started out in business. But I really have a keen interest in education.

Mr Martin: And you feel one of the ways to do that would be to get on this college and do what?

Ms Watson: As a member of the council, they govern the affairs of the college. Since the college has been formed, it is the regulating body of the teaching profession in Ontario. My hope would be that I can contribute because of my experience and background.

Mr Martin: You see, the teachers that I know and interact with in my own community -- and I have nothing but the greatest respect for them. I've got four children myself, all of them in school -- three in high school and one in elementary -- and they participate in all kinds of activities. Every time I attend an activity, there's always a teacher or two there coaching, mentoring, even bringing homework with them if they go away on a weekend for a tournament; they're coaching at the same time they're marking and they're doing all kinds of things. I just have tremendous respect for those folks.

They feel put upon.

Ms Watson: Yes, they do.

Mr Martin: They feel criticized, they feel unappreciated -- even the best ones. Teachers now are looking forward to retiring. There was a time, probably when you were teaching, when teachers didn't want to retire. As a matter of fact, retirement was something that they were being forced to do, in many instances. They loved what they did.

Many of them see the college as an adversarial thing, something that was imposed that they have to belong to, that seems to spend a lot of its time putting in place more and more benchmarks and hurdles and things that they have to do. Is that fair?

Ms Watson: I've been there. I can empathize with what you're saying about the marking and taking everything with you and so on, and it doesn't stop when you end being a teacher, because I never found I was ever in any job where I didn't carry my briefcase and work weekends. Having said that, that's the teaching profession. Yes, you're right; many teachers do feel put upon. However, I meet many teachers who don't, who just go about their business and do their job and are continuing to work for the students. I find that it really depends on the individual as to how they perceive themselves and the support that they see around them. So I'm very cognizant of the concerns that you express.

With respect to the college, the reality is that quite often teachers are not fully apprised of the benefits as opposed to the detriments. I am often in discussion with teachers, even now, where I'll say, "Are you aware that...?" Well, they aren't. And as you just described, too, where teachers are so busy -- they are just up to their ears. They're going flat-out, 150% or 200%. They really don't have time to get their heads around the political world, and that includes the college, but the political world with a small "p." Consequently, I find that quite often their concerns and their comments come from a lack of a real thorough knowledge base, as opposed to being really aware of what their concerns are. But they do feel put upon; that's true.

The teaching profession, as far as I'm concerned, is one of the best there is, and I choose to still call it a profession. Teachers I think have the capacity to raise their level of perception in the community, to stand up with their heads held high.

We had difficulties when I was teaching, we had difficulties when I was an administrator and a principal, but I never, ever felt, even with the criticism or anything -- and there were a lot of difficulties -- that I was denigrated by it or ashamed of my profession. I believe more of that can happen today and I would hope that I can continue to assist as I meet people, either on the council or outside, just in my personal life, in trying to encourage support; but I also support parents, because a lot of parents really don't understand what the teaching profession is all about unless they know someone.

Mr Martin: My concern is that some of the good teachers who are out there are wanting to get out now too, and that's troubling. Also, not only do they feel under attack by the government and in some instances the Ontario College of Teachers, but they feel that parents now have been empowered to attack them as well. Where my parents would go in, and if the teacher told them something I was doing that was wrong, I'd get a whack when they got home and was told to smarten up and get my act in order, nowadays if a teacher confronts a student, he is liable to end up in court. So there's that sense out there that the balance has been tipped. Personally, I wish we could get back to a time when teachers taught and felt supported in that and affirmed in that and appreciated in that, and kids then, because of that, enjoyed going to school.

Ms Watson: I hear what you're saying. I guess my short answer would be that I don't feel as pessimistic about the profession as that. I think there is support there. I think the teachers can feel good about what they're doing. They have to support one another. Within a school, the principal has to be supportive. And you don't get the put-upon from parents as much if you have ongoing, open communication with them. Parents are great, really, if they have that opportunity and feeling of security about the teachers and their sincerity and what they're doing for the children. Some of the best supporters for teachers are parents. I guess there are those that don't and there are those that do. Similarly with teachers, there are some who feel put-upon and there are others who are just doing their day-to-day job and they don't get themselves embroiled in worrying whether they're appreciated or not.

I know there are some who are saying they can hardly wait till retirement. I think that's sad, unless they are truly of retirement age and looking forward to the next phase of their life.

Mr Martin: I guess what concerns me here is that those who feel it's changed and it's difficult and they're not appreciated any more and they're anxious to get out are seeing the government as the perpetrator, and here we are going to appoint somebody today who obviously is a very involved member of the governing party out there, supportive of their agenda, if that's what you're doing, and we're going to put you on this college. I'm afraid of the message we're sending back to communities and to teachers and to the system. Should I be?

Ms Watson: Definitely not. My involvement, particularly provincially, has only been on EPAC, and there it is to ensure that I have an opportunity for input so that the very best decisions can be made for policy for the education of students in Ontario. That's my key interest and that's the interest of an educator. An educator has got to, bottom line, care about the students under their care, that they are learning every day.

1450

I should also interject that when I make my decisions, I do not make them as a partisan person at all. For many years, I wasn't. I care passionately about education for students in Ontario without any kind of partisan label, and I will continue to do that. The people I worked with know that very well.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Hastings, I believe you have a question.

Mr Hastings: Ms Watson, you've been a player in the educational world for 35 years. I'm going to use two terms. I would like to know how you describe yourself regarding process versus outcomes.

Ms Watson: Both, because in order to arrive at outcomes you have to have a process.

Mr Hastings: OK.

I'd like to take the process the college uses for dealing with the registration of teachers, especially the re-registration. In the last year and a half I've had three instances of constituents who allowed, for whatever reasons -- that's their business -- a lapsing or semi-lapsing of their certificates to teach in the province. It was very interesting going through the experience, myself getting on the phone and dealing with the college and the requirements they have for somebody who already has taught in this province before.

In one instance, a Catholic teacher who had taught for 10 years left teaching for about five and went into business and came back. Obviously, when you're doing that you're not going to have your teaching certificate continue. They already have on record -- and this is since they got started in 1998 to 2000 -- his basic qualifications, all his documentation. Guess what? He has to go back and get every original document. They already have these documents. He had to get originals, not photocopies, to prove that he was who he was on the registry.

I'd like to know what you would do with that at the staff level to reduce some of what I call red tape, unnecessary duplication. If it was somebody new, obviously we have to have all the documentation. I'd like to know what you would do with staff regarding that specific issue, given we're going to have a huge number of teachers leaving the profession and a new large onslaught of teachers coming in. You're also going to have this re-registration: people leaving the profession and then coming back later.

Would you support the existing system as it is, that I've experienced for these people, or would you look at some change in the process of dealing with that kind of an issue?

Ms Watson: I'm not integrally involved with how the college handles that, but I would preface it by saying it's not uncommon; it's not unlike what was done by individual boards before, because you always had to have original documentation.

As to red tape, if it's red tape for the sake of red tape and if bureaucratic or administrative procedures can be made more efficient, then I think they have to be. So my take on it would be, you take a look at the process, you take a look at the issue and if indeed what is being done now can be done in a more efficient, effective way, then you would work toward revising it. But if not, and this is what is required -- and there will be instances where it is troublesome, it is burdensome and so on, but I think you have to do it on an assessment basis.

Mr Hastings: I would contend it's needlessly duplicative within those sets of circumstances. If you support the continuing process of that, then I presume you would also support the continuing non-customer -- and I really emphasize that point: non-customer -- approach that the college has to its people, teachers. I think you need to look at it, and when you get there, I hope you'll really take a good look at it because I have found it less than edifying having to deal with it in three instances, and they were all fairly consistent. The rigidity of the operation -- it's truly rigid.

Ms Watson: First off, I would just qualify: I didn't say, "I do support." I prefaced it by saying, "I'm not totally familiar with the process."

Mr Hastings: Good.

Ms Watson: I am familiar, though, with the fact that it has been historically the case that you always had to procure original documents, long before the college was in existence.

Mr Hastings: We understand that. We're talking about re-registration. That's the specific issue here, and the complete reintroduction of this kind of stuff. Even though they're still registered, they're not teaching, they're still there. They have some of that documentation. It's not destroyed.

Ms Watson: Until I was totally familiar with the process, I think it would be unfair for me to comment. On a personal basis, though, if there's no need for it, the person has had documentation there before, they've been a member and that can be validated, then I think that the process could be made more efficient. However, I don't know enough about the process.

Mr Hastings: God bless you. I hope you do when you get there.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Mazzilli, do you have a very quick question? I thought I saw you. Make it quick. We've run out of time here.

Mr Mazzilli: A very quick question. Thank you very much for appearing today. One thing that I hear from predominantly older teachers coming up to retirement -- and they're not that old -- is about the extracurricular part. They often became teachers so they could coach. They're very good at teaching, but they love the other things. One thing I found in my community during some of the work-to-rule campaigns was that some of the teachers said that was their opportunity to get out. That was the excuse to stop doing it after 30 years. What I'm hearing is that younger teachers often don't take on those assignments. Is that a concern for education? Did you notice that as an administrator, or is that just perception?

Ms Watson: Extracurricular was not an issue but it was something that certainly had never gotten to the degree of dispute that it did in the latter number of years. So I'm going to qualify it by saying -- and I had discussions on this topic when it was withdrawn and it was the work-to-rule. Being around as long as I have, I went to school when there was no such thing as extracurricular. It didn't exist. If you go to the European schools -- I asked, "What about that?" "No, that's the job of the parents and the community." There's no extracurricular in Europe and in other parts of the world.

So the extracurricular is something that has sort of evolved over about the last 30 years and, to a large extent, it has evolved because of teachers. They love to coach, they love to do a number of things, and they've offered absolutely everything, so in some schools -- and this is what I ran into as a principal -- it was the tail that wagged the dog. At the end of the day, you might have students who hadn't completed their work. They shouldn't be out of class until they did, but no, they've got to be at a game. I put a stop to that, and I said, "You can be on this team when you have successfully completed your day's work to the satisfaction of your teacher. But don't talk to me about being on a team." However, on the flip side of that, there are some students who thrive, so you have to use judgment. So you say, "OK, Johnny, if you have really put in a day's work to the best of your ability," and that's key.

Mr Mazzilli: I guess I would have never made it through --

The Vice-Chair: That's it. We have to --

Mr Mazzilli: Can I --

The Vice-Chair: No, no. To tell you the truth, Mr Mazzilli, you weren't that short. Anyway, we do have to move on. Thank you very much. I'm glad you had an opportunity to ask a question.

Thanks very much, Ms Watson. We will be voting on the appointment later.

We'll move on to our next appointment.

Ms Watson: OK, thank you. Sorry I didn't answer yours completely.

ROSLYNNE MAINS

Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Roslynne Mains, intended appointee as member, Social Benefits Tribunal.

The Vice-Chair: Our next appointment is Roslynne Mains, intended appointee as a member of the Social Benefits Tribunal. Please come forward, Ms Mains. You will certainly have an opportunity to make some remarks, if you like.

Ms Roslynne Mains: May I help myself to water?

The Vice-Chair: Absolutely. Please do. Make yourself as comfortable as you can. You'll have an opportunity to make a few remarks, and we will then begin the questioning with the members of the government party, I believe.

Clerk of the Committee (Ms Anne Stokes): NDP.

The Vice-Chair: Oh, NDP. I'm terribly sorry. The third party. Mr Martin, you'll be going on first in the questioning.

1500

Mr Martin: OK. Thank you very much.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you, Ms Mains. Please feel free to go ahead.

Ms Mains: I would like to begin by thanking you, Mr Chairman, and the members of your committee for providing me with this opportunity to appear before you today. I'm honoured to have been nominated for a position with the Social Benefits Tribunal and would welcome the opportunity to serve the province in that way.

I believe that you have a copy of my resumé, but I would like to outline briefly some of my background and experiences that provide me with relevant qualifications for the position for which I am being considered.

I grew up in Niagara Falls and attended McMaster University, where I attained a bachelor of arts degree. Upon graduation, I moved to Toronto in order to accept a position with the province of Ontario. I had a career with the province that spanned 10 years and comprised four positions in administrative and financial areas of different ministries. From Toronto I moved to Mississauga, where I've lived for the past 24 years.

Most recently, I was the director of communications and community relations for the United Way of Peel Region for over eight years. As you're probably aware, Peel region comprises the cities of Brampton, Mississauga and the town of Caledon, with a population of just under one million people. While these communities are fortunate to have considerable wealth and offer their residents various opportunities and services, there does exist a paradox of prosperity. Poverty, high youth unemployment, a rapidly aging population and the challenges that accompany physical and mental disabilities face a growing number of people within Peel region. As the director of communications for the United Way, it was my responsibility to raise awareness of these needs within our community in order to encourage those who were able to donate funds to help others who were less fortunate.

The written and verbal communications skills that were required for my position as director of communications would also be important attributes for a position with the Social Benefits Tribunal, both in terms of facilitating the hearing process and in the writing of the decision.

I have also held a position as chair of the board of referees with the Unemployment Insurance Commission. In that role, I was provided with written documentation prior to the hearing, heard oral evidence, and then, after consultation with my panel members, wrote the decision on behalf of the board immediately upon the conclusion of the proceedings.

I have also had the opportunity to serve my community in a variety of volunteer roles. I've been president of our ratepayers' association; I was treasurer of Counter-Act, a group which provided an education program for elementary schools, with the goal of vandalism prevention; I was our ward rep on the Peel community liaison committee; I was a charter member and first vice-president of the Kiwanis Club of Credit Valley; I was a founding director of a Credit River conservation organization; I've done door-to-door canvassing for the cancer society and arthritis; and I was honoured to be asked to represent Canada on a cultural tour to Taiwan in 1990.

I share this experience with you today in order to demonstrate that serving my community has been an integral aspect of my life for over 20 years. I submit to you today that my varied background and wealth of experience with people from all walks of life and from all parts of the world demonstrate that I'm a suitable nomination to the Social Benefits Tribunal. I'd be pleased to answer any questions that you may have.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much, Ms Mains. We will begin with the third party.

Mr Martin: Good afternoon. You're certainly being considered for what I think is a very critical appointment, particularly where the lives of some of our more vulnerable and at-risk residents, most of them children, are concerned. I'm assuming from your resumé, when you reference your political involvement and activity, that you're a Conservative.

Ms Mains: Yes.

Mr Martin: I'm wondering, if you've been watching the program that has been rolled out almost from the beginning of this government's tenure, where initially 21.6% of the income going to those who are at the bottom end of the income chart is concerned and then continuing other roadblocks, hurdles and benchmarks to reach in order to qualify for support, what your feeling about that is, given your political affiliation.

Ms Mains: You referred to the 21.6% reduction and the curbing of the eligibility criteria. I wouldn't presume to know all the considerations and data and research that would be required to go into determining the level of benefits for social assistance in our province. That's not my area of expertise or background. I do know that on average the benefits in Ontario are higher than those in other provinces. When the cuts were made in 1995, there had been a period of 14 years when the various benefit levels had increased between 50% and 60% at a time when the average family income increased by 2.5%. Also, by 1994 someone receiving social assistance was earning 17% more than a male employee at the lower end of the labour force. I would assume that those types of considerations went into the decision to make those changes.

Mr Martin: You certainly seem to be quite knowledgeable in that area and about that information. Certainly a case can be made to support the position you've obviously arrived at in front of this.

Are you aware of the very tragic inquest inquiry on Kimberly Rogers that took place in Sudbury over the five to six weeks before Christmas?

Ms Mains: Yes, I am.

Mr Martin: And the recommendations that were brought down?

Ms Mains: Yes.

Mr Martin: Have you looked at them? Do you support those recommendations?

Ms Mains: Again, my understanding as to the role, if I were to be successful in this tribunal, would not be to judge the merits of the legislation but rather to judge the merits of the cases that are brought before me and to render a fair and impartial decision based on the parameters of the existing legislation. The determination of the parameters of the legislation is up to you, our legislators, the people we have voted for to represent us.

Mr Martin: Because we don't have the time to sit on those panels and do the work you're perhaps going to be appointed to do here today, we count on you to do that. So I guess that for me it's very important to know what your mindset is in front of that, what you are thinking, what you bring to the table in terms of the intangibles where the decisions you will make are concerned. That's why I'm interested, if you've watched that inquiry and read the recommendations and tried to understand them, what your feeling is about them.

Obviously those five jurors, non-partisan citizens of the community of Sudbury, sat for over five weeks and listened to evidence surrounding the circumstance that Kimberly Rogers had to live in in her last months and suggested some very clear and important recommendations to the government, which unfortunately they've chosen not to do anything about. I was just wondering what your position would be on those so that I can be comfortable in the decision I make here today in terms of whether or not I support your appointment.

Ms Mains: Could you repeat the question? I'm sorry; I'm not sure what the question was in that.

Mr Martin: I'm just going back to your own personal view of the recommendations. Do you think they were right? Should the government move to implement them, or do you think the jurors missed the point?

Ms Mains: Well, I think the situation they were reviewing was a very sad one, and my heart certainly goes out to anyone, male or female, wealthy or poor, whose life is so devoid of hope that they feel their only alternative is to end it. My personal opinion on the legislation as it stands, I think, is not as relevant as my commitment to render fair and impartial decisions based on the evidence brought before me in any hearing.

1510

Mr Martin: Just another example of an initiative by the government, and I want your opinion on it, is something that I discovered in travelling the province and looking at the issue of poverty, because in fact poverty has grown in the last number of years. It's gotten wider and deeper across the province, in spite of the initiative of this government and the communication that it puts out. The federal government, after an all-party resolution in 1989 to get rid of child poverty by the year 2000, brought in the child tax benefit supplement for low-income Canadians. In this province we claw back every penny of that supplement from families and children on assistance. Do you think that's fair?

Ms Mains: I am aware of that clawback. As I mentioned earlier, I'm not an expert in determining the appropriate level of benefit for social assistance and all of the considerations that would need to go into making that decision. I also don't know if that's a common practice in other provinces, if that is the norm. So I don't feel that I'm in a position to comment on whether that's appropriate or not appropriate.

Mr Martin: There are two provinces at least that don't claw it back, and the others do. I don't care what jurisdiction it is; personally, I don't think it's fair and I don't think it's right. That money was targeted for our most vulnerable and at-risk children, and because of a political decision, it's not getting there. Those children aren't benefiting from it. Anyway, I think those are all the questions I have.

Mr Johnson: I just wanted to say, Ms Mains, that I'm pleased that you're looking at this challenge, this opportunity, a job that needs doing. You were confronted with a statement by my colleague from Sault Ste Marie, and it was also stated earlier by my colleague from eastern Ontario, that in 1995 the welfare rates were reduced by 21.6%. In neither case was the point made that the individuals concerned were eligible to earn that back without any penalty. So I just wanted to add that in. I make no conclusions about why it wasn't added in before, but I do want to thank you ever so much for putting your name forward for this very important job.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Welcome, Ms Mains. It's good to have you here. Just as I review your curriculum vitae, it indicates "director, communications and community relations, United Way of Peel Region, Mississauga." Am I to assume to that that is your present place of employment?

Ms Mains: No, I left United Way a few months ago.

Mrs Dombrowsky: You left a few months ago?

Ms Mains: Yes.

Mrs Dombrowsky: That would be in 2002?

Ms Mains: Yes, in August.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Where are you presently employed?

Ms Mains: I am presently unemployed.

Mrs Dombrowsky: So you would be perfectly available to take this full-time position.

Ms Mains: Yes.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I like to understand, and I think it's important for the people of Ontario to understand, how individuals come to find themselves as intended appointees, particularly to full-time roles. So maybe you can tell us how it is you are here today.

Ms Mains: I knew I was going to be leaving United Way. I had made the decision that eight and a half years was a good, long haul at that organization. I had had a lot of terrific experiences but was really ready to move on to something new and different. I contacted my local constituency office, that of Mr John Snobelen, to inquire what boards or tribunals might have opportunities. Upon their looking at my background and experience, they suggested that the Social Benefits Tribunal would be most appropriate to my background and, as a result, I applied to that position.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I find that interesting. People with a background in social service don't usually go to their local constituency office to inquire about employment. Are you a member of a political party?

Ms Mains: Yes, Progressive Conservative.

Mrs Dombrowsky: And are you active in the riding association?

Ms Mains: Not currently active in the riding association, no.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Have you been active in campaigns?

Ms Mains: Yes.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Mr Snobelen's campaign?

Ms Mains: I believe at the time he last ran for office I was involved in Rob Sampson's campaign.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I see. With regard to the role at the Social Benefits Tribunal, are you aware that in 1997 the Social Assistance Reform Act changed the way individuals would appeal a decision at a local level in terms of whether or not they would qualify for assistance? Are you familiar with that change?

Ms Mains: Are you referring to the requirement for an initial internal review?

Mrs Dombrowsky: That's right.

Ms Mains: Yes.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Do you have any appreciation about the impact that has had on the appeals to the Social Benefits Tribunal?

Ms Mains: I'm not aware of that impact, no, and I'm not really familiar with or privy to that process at this point in time. Looking at it from the outside, I would assume that it was put into place in order to streamline the process.

Mrs Dombrowsky: For whom? I guess I'm trying to understand how, when you add another step to a process, that's in some way streamlining it.

Ms Mains: As I said, I'm not all that familiar with the process at this point in time. I just know that the internal review was added to the process.

Mrs Dombrowsky: OK. Would you be able to appreciate, for those who would be considering possibly appealing a decision at the local level, that it is seen as another hurdle to cross in their journey to be fairly heard or fairly judged?

Ms Mains: There may be that perception. I can see that.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Can you appreciate that in communities, particularly in rural Ontario -- and in most cases when you're talking about social benefits issues and recipients, these are people who don't have a lot of money. Many of these people don't own vehicles. They live in communities that do not have public transit. So the implementation of an additional step in order for them to appeal a decision can be a formidable challenge, because it places before them yet another requirement to attend at a meeting and make a presentation in a community probably not their own. Can you appreciate how that can be problematic for many individuals who would be seeking the assistance of the social services system?

Ms Mains: If that's the way it's handled, it could pose a problem, yes, but I really don't know a lot about it. I don't even know if they have to do it in person or if it's something they can do in writing.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I believe that it's a review process that does require an interview. At least in the experience that I have locally, that would be the requirement.

Are you aware of the wait times for an appeal at the tribunal?

Ms Mains: I believe they have to receive word of a date within 30 days of their request for an appeal. That's my understanding.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Are you aware that they can wait up to six months to have their case heard?

Ms Mains: No, I didn't know that. But I also believe they can receive interim financial assistance while awaiting their appeal.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Yes, they can be eligible to receive welfare in the interim, particularly if it's an Ontario disability support program appeal, even if it's an Ontario Works appeal.

Are you aware that once you make a decision at the tribunal and you would find in favour of the individual, and you would find that it is appropriate that an individual would be awarded Ontario disability support, it can take up to -- and regularly -- six months for that individual to receive that compensation?

1520

Ms Mains: No, I didn't know that.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Now that you know that -- and I would encourage you not just to take my word for it; I would encourage you, as a member of a tribunal, to make some inquiries about that -- do you believe you have any responsibility to try to address that? First of all, do you think it's appropriate that people could wait upwards of one year to receive benefits that they deserve?

Ms Mains: Well, the process would come out of the specifications of the legislation, and it wouldn't be my position to judge the merits of the legislation, but rather the merits of the hearings before me.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I don't think there's anything in the legislation that says they should have to wait a year, so I guess I'm asking you, do you think it's appropriate that they would have to wait a year to get benefits that they deserve?

Ms Mains: A shorter time frame would be preferable, yes.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Do you think you have any role to play in advancing the idea that people should receive that in a more expeditious fashion?

Ms Mains: I'm uncertain whether it's a role of someone on the tribunal to play a role in that. I really don't know if that's appropriate.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Is that something you're prepared to look into?

Ms Mains: If I am successful, once I am privy to the role and function of the individual, I would see if that was appropriate.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Are you aware that there are more children living in poverty in Ontario today than in 1995?

Ms Mains: Yes, and I'm aware that one in five children in Peel region live in poverty.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Do you think the 21.6% rollback in welfare rates has had a significant impact on that fact?

Ms Mains: I think it's truly unfortunate that children do live in poverty in our country and in our province. It's almost unbelievable, but I do know that it is a fact. I do wonder, however, whether the rate of benefit for social assistance is the panacea for solving child poverty.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I couldn't agree with you more, and I would suggest that it's absolutely unacceptable -- not only unfortunate but unacceptable -- that children would live in poverty in this, the most blessed province and the economic engine of Canada.

Are you aware that people who receive Ontario disability support payments have not experienced an increase in their compensation in a decade?

Ms Mains: Yes, I am.

Mrs Dombrowsky: With that knowledge, would that also not mean that you, in your role as someone at the Social Benefits Tribunal, understand how desperate some people are and how critical and chronic some of their conditions are? How might that impact your decisions at the tribunal?

Ms Mains: I can promise you that I would hear all the evidence and ensure that all the parties believed that all the evidence had been heard. I would weigh the evidence, apply the law correctly, and then render a fair and impartial decision within the parameters of the legislation.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you, Ms Mains. That completes the time period we're allowed. We'll be voting on the appointment later.

STEVEN COUPLAND

Review of intended appointment, selected by third party: Steven Coupland, intended appointee as member, Kincardine Police Services Board.

The Vice-Chair: Our next appointment is Mr Steven Coupland, intended appointee as member of the Kincardine Police Services Board. Mr Coupland, would you come forward? Am I pronouncing your name correctly?

Mr Steven Coupland: Yes, you are. I'm not used to that.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Coupland, welcome. Certainly you have an opportunity to make a few remarks if you wish in advance, and then we will move to the questioning, which will begin with the government party.

Mr Coupland: I'd like to thank the committee for giving me an opportunity to discuss my interest in serving on the Kincardine Police Services Board. As someone who has been involved at sort of the other end of the appointment process, I appreciate the role of the parliamentary review committee and think it's an important part of the process.

I'd like to begin by outlining a few details of my background not covered in my resumé. I was raised in Huntsville, Ontario. At that time, Huntsville was of similar size and makeup to Kincardine. Like Kincardine, Huntsville was policed by the OPP and I certainly remember the OPP being an integral part of the community. In fact, a couple of the officers coached my team in minor hockey. I also had the unfortunate experience of being in Huntsville at the time and watching my community deal with the loss of a member of the force who was killed in a roadside killing. So I know the impact of the police and the role of the police in a small community.

I raise my background in Huntsville because I think it developed and reflects my view of policing in a small town. In a small town everyone is part of the community and everybody knows everybody else. People in positions of authority and trust, such as police officers, are of particular importance. I think it's crucial that the local police detachment have a good relationship with the community and that the community feel confident and comfortable with the local detachment. I feel my background in communications and public relations can assist in that sort of area.

I want to say I take this appointment very seriously. I view policing as one of the most important aspects of government activity and I've always been interested in the role of police. In our country, particularly in smaller communities, we have a tendency to take the safety of our families and possessions for granted, but it's been proven many times over that we need to be vigilant against the possible loss or abuse of the things we take for granted. We give that responsibility to our police, but it's also essential to our way of life that the police policy answer to civilian authorities.

Why do I want to sit on the police services board? One of the major reasons I want to serve on this board is because I believe in community service. I recently moved to Kincardine and I intend to live there for a long time. I want to make a positive contribution to my community, and I have a long-time interest in policing. Part of my interest in this appointment is to me it's an important way of contributing to my local community.

As I said, one of the most important things for policing is strong public relations, open communications. Open communications, in my view, work two ways: the police need to keep the public informed of their goals and concerns, and the public need to feel free to raise any concerns they might have without fear of repercussions. I believe my background in public relations communications can allow me to assist in this.

If I had a priority, it would probably be to focus on the relationship between police and young people. In my view, there seems to be less respect between young people and the police today and I think that's something that needs to be addressed. I'm a big supporter of police in public schools and developing relationships so young people see police as somebody they can turn to if they have problems as opposed to what I think is sometimes more confrontational.

In concluding, I'd like to say that I feel local police services are a vital link between the police and the community and I'm delighted to have an opportunity to serve my community in this capacity. I look forward to your questions.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much, Mr Coupland. Members of the government, do we have any questions?

Mr Johnson: I have nothing other than to say, Mr Coupland, I'm glad you're here and to thank you for putting your name forward. I trust that you'll take your responsibilities seriously and perform them adequately. Thanks for being here.

Mr Coupland: Thank you.

Mr Johnson: We'd like to waive the rest of our time.

The Vice-Chair: All right. Thank you very much. Mrs Dombrowsky.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Good afternoon, Mr Coupland. I would like to understand -- Mr Johnson talked about your putting your name forward. Maybe you could explain exactly how it is you are an intended appointee at this committee.

Mr Coupland: Sure. A very good friend of mine, Dr John Balkwill, is the vice-chair of the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services. John has been in that position for a number of years now. He and I have talked on numerous occasions on a variety of things. As I say, we're friends, but the issue of policing comes up every now and then. John knew that I was interested in it and when a vacancy was coming up there he mentioned it to me and then I expressed my interest and had my name put forward. I guess I received the appropriate approvals and here I am.

1530

Mrs Dombrowsky: You did remark earlier that you have some appreciation for the other end of the appointment process. In your curriculum vitae, you make very direct references to your involvement and work with party initiatives and so on; you liaise with the chair of election readiness and so on. Perhaps you could describe for the purpose of the public record what in fact your job is.

Mr Coupland: My current job?

Mrs Dombrowsky: Yes.

Mr Coupland: I'm currently employed with Bruce Power. I am the manager of issues and media relations.

Mrs Dombrowsky: At Bruce Power?

Mr Coupland: Yes, within the corporate communications division of Bruce Power.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I'm sorry: your title?

Mr Coupland: Manager of issues and media.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Perhaps you can explain, then, your political involvement, please.

Mr Coupland: I've worked in a variety of different political jobs in a paid capacity throughout my career, including stints in the Prime Minister's office and various government ministries, as well as for the PC Party of Canada.

Mrs Dombrowsky: What is your involvement with the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario?

Mr Coupland: I've been a member for 20 years and I'm a supporter of the party.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Have you been active in any campaigns?

Mr Coupland: Yes, pretty much every campaign since 1981.

Mrs Dombrowsky: With regard to your role on the police services board, I'm particularly interested that you have as a priority police and youth, and I applaud you for that. I think that's certainly a very important area. Are you familiar with the VIP program in elementary schools?

Mr Coupland: Not too much, to be perfectly honest. I think I have an idea what the program is about, but I don't have a lot of specifics on it.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I'm not exactly sure if it's a program that is still in place. With budget considerations, it may very well be something that has been scaled back or is not as significant as it was when our children were attending elementary school. But it was a program in grade 6, I think, where Ontario Provincial Police officers came into the classroom for a series of six weeks and provided an educational program for students. They would come home very excited by that, that they had actually been handcuffed by the police and they had actually been able to touch some -- you know, they would bring in different items that would have been seized in the commission of a crime; I would suggest weapons that would not be especially harmful. In any case, I thought it was a very valuable program and I offer that to you for your information. It might be something you would want to pursue.

You are of course aware that in a community that contracts services with the Ontario Provincial Police, it significantly reduces the extent to which you can actually be involved in the management of the service. As a representative of the community and a member of the community, has that ever been raised as an issue within your community, that by contracting with the OPP as opposed to managing your own regional force, you have lost some autonomy that would otherwise be very important?

Mr Coupland: It hasn't been raised with me directly. At Bruce Power, half our employees live in Kincardine and the other half live in Port Elgin. Port Elgin, or Saugeen Shores as it now is, does have its own municipal force, and I know the folks from that end are strong supporters of a municipal force. But I've not had anybody from Kincardine come to me and say they're unhappy with the OPP as opposed to a municipal force.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Have your municipalities always enjoyed the services of the Ontario Provincial Police?

Mr Coupland: To be perfectly honest, I don't know when the transition occurred.

Mrs Dombrowsky: That would conclude my questions, Mr Chair.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you, Ms Dombrowsky. Mr Martin.

Mr Martin: I want to say right off the bat that this is quite an impressive resumé for anybody involved in politics. How do you get the time to do that and have a full-time job? How does all that happen?

Mr Coupland: Most of the political background --

Mr Martin: Was your full-time job.

Mr Coupland: -- was my full-time job. I've been employed in the political process for about 15 years or so. I just left last May to join Bruce Power, so I'm not employed as a political partisan any more.

Mr Martin: How are things at Bruce?

Mr Coupland: Very well, actually. Yesterday was a big day for us. We started our refuelling on the two reactors we're bringing up and things are moving well on that. So we're having a good time.

Mr Martin: This appointment: in accepting it or seeking it, are there things in policing that you have some concern about or issues that you particularly want to address?

Mr Coupland: Not per se. If something troubles me, I think it's what I perceive to be a lessening of respect between police and some elements, particularly younger people, in terms of how they go about their jobs. Some of the things that trouble me apply more in urban centres, quite frankly, some of the different relationships between the police and some of the ethnic groups. As near as I can tell, that's not a major issue in our area.

But generally what I'm interested in is, as I said, my experience with police growing up in a small town. They're an integral part of the community and there was a comfort level there and I think that's the sort of thing that -- nothing has come to my attention that that's not the case in Kincardine. I think that's the sort of thing we need to carry on.

Mr Martin: We had the police and the chiefs of police in before Christmas lobbying us, all three caucuses, on issues that were of concern to them. Mostly it was a question of lack of resources. You've heard recently, if you've been watching, the Toronto chief of police say that after September 11 we had all kinds of announcements by federal and provincial governments that tons of money were going to go into security but he has in fact seen none. Is that a concern?

Mr Coupland: I haven't had any concerns raised with me that there's inadequate funding in Kincardine. Nobody specifically has come to me. It may well be an issue when I get on the board -- if I'm accepted on the board; I shouldn't prejudge -- that people may raise that concern with me. I think police have to be adequately funded to do their job, but nothing has come to my attention that they're not adequately funded in our area.

Mr Martin: You don't have issues of motorcycle gangs and the subsequent drug trade and that kind of thing that seems to be growing? At least it's certainly a growing concern in the province and raised by the police when they were here.

Mr Coupland: Again, I haven't heard that raised to us in the context of the Kincardine area. I know from time to time it pops up in Wasaga Beach or Sauble Beach, but I haven't had anybody raise it with me directly in Kincardine.

Mr Martin: One of the issues that I think falls under the rubric of concern for youth is this whole question of racial relations and racial profiling -- it seems, anyway. They seem to be a group that's raising it in the bigger centres, as you say. But I think it's a problem overall, or at least it's a perceived problem. The Toronto Star put out a whole array of statistics that indicate that it's real. What's your take on it? What is the problem and do you have any suggestion as to how it might be dealt with, even though, as you say, it doesn't seem to be a big issue in Kincardine?

Mr Coupland: We're a fairly homogenous area, so it's not so much a problem there. I guess on racial relations, I tend to get nervous any time people tend to categorize a certain group, whether it be a racial or ethnic group, whether it be sexual orientation. When you start to get into stereotypes, I tend to get a little bit nervous about that. My belief is that if there's a problem within a particular community -- I suspect it's my own view, and I really haven't researched this enough, but my own instincts would tell me it's probably more socio-economic than anything else. I think those sorts of issues need to be addressed. Probably in the major centres, if there's a problem with a particular ethnic community, then I think the police need to make a concentrated effort to get involved in that community, deal directly with the community and try to understand where the problem is coming from. But I don't have a lot of concrete research on that or anything. That's just my instinctive sort of approach to it.

Mr Martin: Thank you very much. That's all my questions.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much, Mr Coupland. It's good to have seen you. We will move forward.

1540

HARRIET WALKER

Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Harriet Walker, intended appointee as member, council of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario.

The Vice-Chair: We're looking for Ms Harriet E. Walker. Can we check outside to see if she's there?

Interjection.

The Vice-Chair: Excellent. We're a little bit early, Ms Walker, so thank you for being here.

We will call Ms Harriet E. Walker forward, intended appointee as a member of the council of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. Thank you for being here. You have an opportunity to make some additional remarks. Are you ready to go?

Ms Harriet Walker: Yes, I'm fine. Thank you.

The Vice-Chair: Good. We invite you to proceed when you're ready to say a few remarks and then we will begin the questioning, I believe, with the official opposition.

Ms Walker: Thank you, Mr Chairman. My name is Harriet Walker. I'm here today to request your confirmation of my appointment to the council of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. Perhaps it's useful if I provide you with some of my background in order to determine my qualifications for appointment.

I've lived my adult life basically in London, Ontario, and Toronto, having graduated from the University of Western Ontario with honours in languages and from the Ontario College of Education with a secondary school teaching certificate, as well as having a degree in music from the Royal Conservatory of Music of Toronto.

After a number of years of teaching French and Spanish in London, I became director of communications with the Museum of Indian Archaeology for eight years, and followed this with three years at the Robarts Research Institute, a world-renowned medical research facility affiliated with the University of Western Ontario and University Hospital. I was director of communications.

In 1991, my family and I moved to Toronto and I started my own business, called Harriet Walker and Affiliates, which involved me in a number of events, including one year with the Canadian Diabetes Association, Ontario division, as development and conference organizer, and a very exciting few months organizing the royal visit to Ontario of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth and the Duke of Edinburgh, in the role of Ontario protocol and event coordinator.

My volunteer experience has seen a focus on both medical and cultural involvement. Most recently I have just completed six stimulating and educational years as a member of the board of trustees of the Royal Ontario Museum, four years as vice-chair of the board and this past year as co-chair of the board. The legislation doesn't permit me, or a member, to continue beyond the six years. However, the board there asked me to join the ROM Foundation, where we have a substantial job now in the next few years to raise the $200 million for the expansion.

On the medical side, I've been involved in a number of projects that might be of interest to the committee. To begin with, while I was chair of Westminster College, which is affiliated with the University of Western Ontario, I was a founding director and ultimately vice-chair of the Westminster Institute for Ethics and Human Values, which for decades served a substantial role in addressing medical matters in particular, an experience I expect to be of value on the council of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. That particular board had such luminary members as the Honourable Allan Blakeney, former Premier of Saskatchewan; the Honourable Bertha Wilson, a former Supreme Court justice; Dr George Connell, the president of Western and also U of T.

I took a very substantial role in creating the institute and recruiting the executive directors, one being Dr Abby Anne Lynch, one of Canada's leading ethicists, who is now in Toronto.

Since coming to Toronto, I've been involved in a number of endeavours related to the medical field. This includes stints with the Ontario Kidney Foundation for special fundraising events; New Directions, which is a crisis help centre for women; canvassing for the Ontario heart and stroke foundation, the Ontario diabetes association and the Kidney Foundation, along with working with Wellsprings, an organization for cancer survivors and their families.

Since 1993, I have been involved with Women's College Hospital and the Centre for Research in Women's Health in various fundraising events; in particular, assisting with the organizing committee for Sunnybrook hospital and Women's College Hospital, where I was in charge of protocol for various personalities, such as Elizabeth Dole, Christopher Patten, Peter Jennings and this past year, just a few months ago, Rudy Giuliani, where, I'm proud to say, we raised over a million dollars for the Centre for Research in Women's Health.

In other volunteer activities, I've been a director on the Ontario Chamber of Commerce here in Toronto and in London, and the Canadian Native Arts Foundation and the Women's Musical Club of Toronto, and of London.

My husband of 34 years is Gordon Walker, whom some of you may know, and we have two daughters, one a recent graduate from the London School of Economics and the other who is a doctor of clinical psychology in New York.

It appeals to me a great deal to be appointed to the council of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario because I feel I can make a contribution for which my past involvements have prepared me and also heightened my understanding of the medical field from a larger perspective and given me insights that I think can be useful to the college.

As the governing body of the College of Physicians and Surgeons, a council member is charged with the task of administering and regulating the profession of medicine in the public interest by establishing, monitoring and enforcing standards of practice. I believe that my medical involvement noted above, along with my communication and organizational skills and being fair-minded, will be essential ingredients to the task of a council member, should you see fit to endorse my appointment.

Thank you, Mr Chairman, for this opportunity.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you, Ms Walker. We will begin with the official opposition.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Welcome, Ms Walker, this afternoon. Perhaps you can explain how it is you have come to be an intended appointee. Is this a role that you pursued? Did someone pursue you?

Ms Walker: When my term as a trustee was completed with the Royal Ontario Museum, Minister Tsubouchi spoke to Minister Clement, and I was approached to consider to sit on this board.

Mrs Dombrowsky: And when you were approached to consider, then you made application?

Ms Walker: Yes.

Mrs Dombrowsky: I see.

In your remarks you talked about how your various involvements to date would be of some benefit in your role as a member of the College of Physicians and Surgeons. In this particular role, some of the work that you will be required to do will be of a quasi-judicial nature, so I guess I'd be interested to know what previous experience you would have in that type of role.

Ms Walker: As I mentioned, when I was vice-chair of the Westminster Institute for Ethics and Human Values, it was dealing with ethical issues relating to all the professions, mainly medical, but they related to the law society also.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Were they specific cases?

Ms Walker: Yes.

Mrs Dombrowsky: This is a significant commitment, of course. You are aware that there are some 2,000 complaints a year lodged at the college. You're prepared to make that commitment and address that kind of a workload?

1550

Ms Walker: I certainly am. My own business I have put on hold.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Are you familiar with the HPRAC recommendations around streamlining the complaint process for the college?

Ms Walker: Only what I have read. The recommendations came in in March, I believe.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Yes, of 2001.

Ms Walker: I believe they have not been implemented yet.

Mrs Dombrowsky: No.

Ms Walker: I hope I can help in making that happen.

Mrs Dombrowsky: That does require the government to take some action, but would you be prepared to press for those recommendations that would enable the process to be streamlined?

Ms Walker: I certainly would.

Mrs Dombrowsky: You probably did receive the same background material that the members of this committee received, so you have the cases that were presented, the number of physicians who were in fact suspended by the college last year. Do you have any comment on those cases? Do you believe that these cases were handled appropriately, expeditiously and fairly?

Ms Walker: I only know what I read in the newspapers, and I certainly hope that is the case.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Do you have any political affiliation?

Ms Walker: Yes.

Mrs Dombrowsky: Would you explain that to us, please?

Ms Walker: Yes. I'm married to Gordon Walker, who was a member in this Legislature for many years, and I am a Conservative.

Mrs Dombrowsky: And do you continue to be active?

Ms Walker: I vote.

Mrs Dombrowsky: And you are a member of the party?

Ms Walker: I am.

Mrs Dombrowsky: That would conclude my questions.

Mr Martin: Thank you very much for being here today and for the very impressive list of ways you've contributed to the public life of this province. It's quite impressive.

In taking on this new challenge with the college, and given the challenges that are out there that are bigger in terms of health care, do you have any other aspirations that you've thought about or considered in looking at this, anything that you would hope to accomplish?

Ms Walker: Like other citizens of Ontario, I've been a user of our health care system, and with the family. I would like to see more physicians practising in Ontario, particularly in our rural areas. I think we are lacking physicians there.

Mr Martin: Do you have any views on the use of other health care professionals and how they might be helped to play a larger role, perhaps, in the delivery of health care than they have up to now? Would there be any opportunity, in your view, to influence the so often imperial organization that's there now, with the doctor at the top and everybody else at the bottom?

Ms Walker: I believe the minister did say that there would be a lessening of the amount of time -- I believe it's two years for doctors out of province and out of country -- that they have to be here before they can get into the system and practise. Ontario is longer in that term than some other provinces. I believe it was proposed that that term would be shortened so that more doctors who are qualified would be able to get into the Ontario system to alleviate the shortages that we have. I'd like to see that pursued.

Mr Martin: That's certainly an important initiative. I know that in my own community of Sault Ste Marie we're short of doctors, as probably in almost every community, particularly in the rural areas in the north. We have had opportunity from time to time to recruit a doctor who is foreign-trained, but the obstacles have been too many and the process too long to actually make it happen for a number of reasons.

Ms Walker: And we lose good people, don't we?

Mr Martin: Yes, we do, lots of good people, although in other instances, like just recently, we were able to recruit an oncologist to come to the Soo from out of the country. The provincial government in fact has been very helpful to that end and has given him all the credentials he needs and done the necessary paperwork for him to work until such time as he has his landed immigrant status or whatever else he has to have in order to do that. So it's very good.

I'm keenly interested in how we reorganize the system so that people like midwives, nurse practitioners and other health care professionals get to play a larger role. I know that in some of the more isolated communities, where perhaps you're not going to be able to attract a doctor, you might be able to get a nurse practitioner to go in or a professional of some rank other than a trained doctor. But again, it's difficult, because in many instances they have to be under the governance of a doctor in order to get the funding to do that.

Ms Walker: I believe the supervision aspect is an important part, isn't it -- if there was some way of having other health care professionals do that and yet be supervised in some way to keep the quality and educational control? I don't know; it's a pressing problem and I'd very much like to become more familiar with that and try to alleviate that, because I've heard from many parts that it is a problem.

Certainly having organized a royal visit to Ontario has taken a lot of organization. I intend to try to apply some of those skills to my committees and what I'm involved in on the board to do what I can to help.

Mr Martin: To that end, I think it would probably be helpful if people like yourself, appointed to positions such as this, would actually travel and meet and see, in order to more fully understand the difficulties that exist and that many people have to deal with in terms of getting access and that kind of thing.

Ms Walker: I think that would be great. I'd like very much to travel to do that. I think that way you get a better feeling in the community than having them come down here. I don't know how much travelling out and around is undertaken by the committees at present.

Mr Martin: I don't know either. I haven't personally been aware of any of the committees of this particular college coming to my community, for example, and holding a meeting or meeting with folks or whatever, but I think it would be an excellent opportunity and the thing to do.

Ms Walker: Certainly, I'm available. I have no family at home at this point. I have a politically involved husband who is seldom home anyway. Anyway, I think it's a good idea.

Mr Martin: Thank you very much. That's all the questions I have.

The Vice-Chair: Are there any questions from the government side?

Mr Mazzilli: Just a brief comment. Thank you very much for putting your name forward for this very important board, and could you just pass along to Gordon that many of his constituents, particularly in the Lockwood Park area, continue to bring up his name, and that they are well served under the new riding of London-Fanshawe.

Ms Walker: I'd be happy to.

The Vice-Chair: Any other comments or questions?

Mr Johnson: We'll waive the rest of our time.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much for being here, Ms Walker, and thanks for getting here early. That worked out really well, and we appreciate that.

We will be moving to concurrence, but before we do, I just want to inform the committee that one item included in the December 6, 2002, memorandum has been withdrawn and we will not therefore be considering it. That was the appointment of Mr John Edward Albert Tyson to the Licence Appeal Tribunal. Mr Tyson apparently has withdrawn himself from that, so that will not be in there. We did want to make sure you were aware of that.

If we can move to concurrence, our first appointee is Mary Fickel, intended appointee as member, Niagara District Health Council.

Mr Johnson: I'd like to move concurrence on Mary Fickel, in spite of her last name.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Johnson has moved concurrence. Any discussion?

1600

Mr Martin: It's not particular to Ms Fickel, but I just wanted to bring to everybody's attention that today 95%, at least, of the appointees are members of the Conservative Party. That's pretty good.

Mr Johnson: What about that other 5%?

Mr Martin: I'm not sure about that. I'm going to do some research --

Mr Johnson: I'm really concerned about that other 5%.

Mr Martin: -- to find out how that fits.

Mr Mazzilli: On a point of order, Chair.

The Vice-Chair: Have you finished, Mr Martin?

Mr Martin: Almost. We're doing some more research on that other 5%. I may be wrong; it may be 100%. But I know it's at least 95%. But that's not going to colour my voting. You'll note that I did support one of the appointees this morning and there are a couple here this afternoon that I'm considering, even though they have an affiliation that's different from my own.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Mazzilli, I apologize if it was really a point of order, or was it a comment?

Mr Mazzilli: Just a comment for the record. As you know, Mr Chair, and the people of Ontario, the people who come before this committee are selected by the opposition and the third party. Many people who are appointed to boards, particularly if they're of Liberal background, somehow are not selected to come before this board. So just a clarification for the record: these are not all the people who are being appointed to boards. Others never make it here, so I think that's the logical explanation for what Mr Martin just pointed out.

The Vice-Chair: Thank you. Any further discussion? We will then vote on the concurrence for Ms Fickel. All those in favour? Opposed? The motion is carried.

We then move to the appointment of Mr Marc Charron, intended appointee as a member of the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corp.

Mr Johnson: I move concurrence of Marc Charron.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Johnson has moved concurrence for Mr Charron. Any discussion? Having seen none, all those in favour? Opposed? The motion is carried.

We then move to the appointment of Mr G. Maurice Power, intended appointee as a member of the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

Mr Steve Gilchrist (Scarborough East): I move concurrence of Mr Maurice Power as an intended appointee as a member of the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Gilchrist has moved concurrence. Is there any discussion? No discussion. All those in favour? Seeing none opposed, the motion is carried.

We next move to the appointment of Ms Lila Mae Lou Watson as an intended appointee as a member of the Council of the Ontario College of Teachers.

Mr Johnson: I move concurrence of Ms Watson.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Johnson has moved concurrence. Is there any discussion of that? No discussion. All those in favour? Opposed? The motion is carried.

We next move to the appointment of Ms Roslynne Mains, intended appointee as a member of the Social Benefits Tribunal.

Mr Johnson: I'd like to move concurrence of Roslynne Mains.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Johnson has moved concurrence of Ms Mains's appointment. Any discussion?

Mr Martin: I'd like to request a recorded vote on this one.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Martin has asked for a recorded vote, but is there any discussion? OK.

AYES

Gilchrist, Hastings, Johnson, Mazzilli.

NAYS

Dombrowsky, Martin.

The Vice-Chair: The motion is carried.

We next move to the appointment of Mr Steven Coupland, intended appointee as a member of the Kincardine Police Services Board.

Mr Gilchrist: I move concurrence of the appointment of Mr Steven Coupland.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Gilchrist has moved concurrence of Mr Coupland's appointment. Any discussion?

Mr Martin: I just wanted to make the point that in this instance we have the granddaddy of PC appointments. Not that I'm concerned about the particular appointment, but holy mackerel, this guy is loaded.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Martin made a comment. I know Mr Mazzilli wants to respond.

Mr Mazzilli: I just want to respond by saying that Mr Coupland obviously cares about his community, and this is a volunteer position. This is what we put our citizens through to volunteer in their communities.

The Vice-Chair: I'm not sure Mr Martin was actually being critical particularly; he was just noting it.

Any further discussion of Mr Coupland's appointment? Seeing none, all those in favour? All right. That certainly is carried.

We then move to the final appointment for the day, the appointment of Harriet E. Walker, intended appointee as a member of the council of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario.

Mr Mazzilli: I move Harriet Walker.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Mazzilli has moved concurrence of Ms Walker's appointment. Any discussion? No discussion. All those in favour? Opposed? The motion is carried.

That completes our work for today. We will not be discussing when we further sit at this point. We'll probably have a subcommittee to discuss that. If there's no other business, I would accept a motion for adjournment.

Mr Mazzilli: I move adjournment.

The Vice-Chair: Mr Mazzilli moves adjournment. All those in favour? Opposed? We are adjourned. Thank you very much.

The committee adjourned at 1606.

CONTENTS

Wednesday 15 January 2003

Subcommittee reports A-181

Intended appointments A-181

Mr James Crossland A-181

Mrs Lynn Beyak A-185

Mr Michael King A-188

Mr John Brownlee A-191

Ms Mary Fickel A-195

Mr Marc Charron A-198

Mr G. Maurice Power A-203

Ms Lila Mae Watson A-206

Ms Roslynne Mains A-211

Mr Steven Coupland A-215

Ms Harriet Walker A-217

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

Chair / Président

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines L)

Vice-Chair / Vice-Président

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North / -Nord L)

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines L)

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington L)

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North / -Nord L)

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex PC)

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie ND)

Mr Frank Mazzilli (London-Fanshawe PC)

Mr Wayne Wettlaufer (Kitchener Centre / -Centre PC)

Mr Bob Wood (London West / -Ouest PC)

Substitutions / Membres remplaçants

Mr Steve Gilchrist (Scarborough East / -Est PC)

Mr John Hastings (Etobicoke North / -Nord PC)

Mr AL McDonald (Nipissing PC)

Mr Joseph Spina (Brampton Centre / -Centre PC)

Clerk / Greffière

Ms Anne Stokes

Staff / Personnel

Mr David Pond, research officer,

Research and Information Services