STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
COMITÉ PERMANENT DES ORGANISMES GOUVERNEMENTAUX
Tuesday 7 May 2019 Mardi 7 mai 2019
The committee met at 0900 in committee room 1.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): I’d like to call this meeting to order. Thank you.
Before we begin our review of intended appointments, I would like to take a moment to remind committee members that in order to participate in debate, you must be properly recognized by the Chair. Only once you are recognized will broadcast and recording services turn on your microphone.
Ms. Leslie Lewis
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Leslie Lewis, intended appointee as member, Workplace Safety and Insurance Board.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): With that, our second order of business is, we have Leslie Lewis, nominated as member for the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board. Could you please come forward? Good morning.
Ms. Leslie Lewis: Good morning.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): As you may be aware, you have the opportunity, should you choose to do so, to make an initial statement. Following this, there will be questions from members of the committee. With that questioning, we will start with the official opposition, followed by the government, with 15 minutes allocated to each recognized party. Any time you take in your statement will be deducted from the time allotted to the government.
Welcome. The floor is yours.
Ms. Leslie Lewis: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning, everyone. I am delighted and honoured to be nominated to serve as a board member of the WSIB.
Before I begin, I would like to extend my sincere appreciation to the committee members and to your colleagues in the Legislature. I acknowledge that many of the communities you represent have been impacted by the terrible flooding our province is experiencing. Thank you for your service.
I would like to take this time to introduce myself and give you a sense of my affinity for the WSIB.
My appreciation for the work of the WSIB stems from the values instilled in me by each of my parents. My mother is a career federal public servant. Her dedication has earned her a Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Medal, and she gave me a profound sense of civic duty and a desire to do public good.
My father is a small business owner. He operated a local pest-control company for most of my childhood. He continues to operate a small rental business where he and his team renovate houses to provide a safe home environment for people with intellectual disabilities, in partnership with a not-for-profit society. In both businesses, workplace safety was of critical importance, and those who worked in our businesses were considered part of our family.
But even when the greatest care is taken, accidents do happen. I’d like to share with the committee that I understand what it’s like to see a parent in pain after an accident at work. I was, thankfully, too young at the time to understand that my father’s fall at work was caused by the failure of a stepladder that shattered and entered his upper leg. Luckily for our family, he returned safe and had a full recovery, but I also understand how this could have ended differently.
This experience gives me a strong sense of empathy for those who need the WSIB’s help after an accident at work, and how devastating workplace accidents can be for workers and their families. It also helps me to appreciate the great lengths that business owners take to provide a safe workplace for their employees.
My first opportunity to represent my community was to wear the maple leaf for Canada as a member of its sprint kayaking national team. I represented Canada on the world stage, including to a sixth-place finish at the junior world championships, which was an experience I will always cherish. In my early 20s, I retired from competitive sport and studied business at Acadia University.
After university, I had the opportunity to work in investment banking, where I performed analyses for transactions completed in a broad array of industries: mining, oil and gas, power and utilities, diversified consumer and real estate.
Next, looking to incorporate an aspect of public responsibility into my financial career, I moved to Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan. There, I worked in private equity, and I focused on the consumer and industrial sectors—again, a very broad range of industries, which I believe is very important, because the WSIB’s coverage extends to more than 300,000 workplaces in Ontario.
While at Teachers’, I had the opportunity to complete an Action Canada fellowship to improve my knowledge of Canada’s policy landscape and to learn how government works. The knowledge gained from Action Canada allowed me to answer a unique call to serve in the office of the Minister of Finance of Canada. To me, this was an opportunity to contribute my experience in the financial sector in the service of Canada. It was a distinct privilege, and I stepped away from my career in order to serve.
Following my time with the government, I have since returned to private equity. I work at Onex Corp., where I have earned the title of “principal.”
During my time at Onex and Teachers’, I have been trained by some of Canada’s most sophisticated investors on how to analyze a business’s financial performance, identify areas for improvement, and deliver on the goal of value creation and improved performance. I believe these skills would be of value to the WSIB board of directors; namely, its audit, finance and investment committees, and also true to the board’s role to improve the corporate financial statements, corporate plan and strategy documents of the WSIB.
Additionally, both organizations taught me that winning businesses perform on more than just financial metrics. Safety was a critical aspect of our due diligence and, to us, it was a key indicator of the quality of a company’s management team and its leadership.
Lastly, my current investment focus area is technology. In 2018, I was part of a team at Onex that acquired PowerSchool, which is a leading provider of software to K-12 schools. Through this experience, I have an appreciation for how challenging it can be for public organizations to implement and transition to a technology-enabled environment. The WSIB is embarking right now, as part of its core services modernization plan, on a similar journey, and I hope my technology experience can be of value to them.
I also continue to actively contribute to my community and to my development as a board member to serve my community better. I currently serve as a vice-chair of the investment committee for Rise Asset Development, which is a partnership between the University of Toronto and CAMH here in Toronto that provides low-interest loans to entrepreneurs who have overcome mental illness challenges.
Further, building on my athletic experience, in April I was appointed by the city of Toronto to serve on the board of directors for the Toronto Pan Am Sports Centre. I’m really excited about this, given my history as an athlete. Also, it speaks to my financial experience, as it was critical that the nominee from the city of Toronto had financial management experience.
I have completed the Institute of Corporate Directors crown director effectiveness course and its not-for-profit governance essentials program.
I am also a member of Women in Capital Markets and Women Get On Board Canada, two organizations that champion the rise of more women to the board table. This is especially relevant in the case of the WSIB, as 67% of its workforce is female.
In closing, I believe my commitment to public service, my financial expertise and my exposure to a broad array of industries will make me of benefit to the WSIB board.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for your time. It would be my great honour to assist the WSIB to deliver on its mandate. I am now pleased to take your questions.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Thank you very much. The first round of questions will go to the official opposition. Mr. Natyshak?
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Thank you very much, Ms. Lewis, for appearing before us today at committee. Also, congratulations on your imminent appointment.
Just a couple of questions here, routine stuff. I don’t know if you followed the appointments committee, but on our side, as the official opposition, we’ve seen a disturbing pattern in terms of the partisan nature of appointments. It’s one that we have to question and call into question in terms of this pattern and the reluctance of the government to explore any other potential non-partisan appointments that may be up and available within the government. That being said, please don’t take offence to any of my questions. They are direct in nature.
Have you ever been a member of the Conservative Party of Canada?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I have.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Are you currently a member of the Ontario PC Party?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: Yes. I joined to participate in the leadership.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Did you support the leadership of the current Premier, Doug Ford?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I supported Caroline Mulroney’s leadership campaign.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Have you ever worked on a political or partisan campaign for either the Conservative Party of Canada or the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: While I worked in the finance minister’s in Ottawa, I was—
Mr. Taras Natyshak: On an election campaign? Sorry, I wasn’t clear.
Ms. Leslie Lewis: Yes. During the 2015 campaign, while I worked in the Minister of Finance’s office, I was appointed the liaison to the public service. It was a time when a lot of international events were happening, and that fell under my portfolio. During that campaign I was there as a representative of the public’s—just to ensure the continuity of the management during that 2015 campaign.
I volunteered on Caroline Mulroney’s leadership campaign, but I did not continue to volunteer on the provincial election campaign.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: You weren’t a part of any campaign during the election provincially?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: This one, no.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Have you donated financially to either the federal party or the provincial party?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: Not provincially; the last time I donated federally was 2015.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Was that to Joe Oliver, or was that to—
Ms. Leslie Lewis: That was to the Conservative Party just generally.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Do you have any apparent or perceived conflicts of interest that may arise through your current employment with Onex?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: No, I don’t believe so.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: So you don’t see that there could potentially be any conflict with you as a board member of the WSIB and any of the connections that you have through your current employment and any of the stakeholders you deal with on a day-to-day basis?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: No, I don’t believe I do. The majority of our investments, and certainly most of my investments, are all headquartered in the United States, just given the size of transactions that we complete.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Hypothetically, if there were to come up, in your current full-time employment, a potential of conflict, how would you deal with that? If one of the firms that you dealt with had expressed a concern with the current regulatory regime under the WSIB, what would be your actions?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I can give the example of when I worked in the finance minister’s office. Just to even avoid the perceived conflict that I might have serving on the investment committee of Rise Asset Development, which received support from the federal government and also provincially, I stepped aside from the investment committee. There was no actual conflict, but I just thought that that might be a good measure. Eventually, when I got more comfortable with the conflict-of-interest rules and was clear that there was no conflict—and also, Rise had asked me to come back—I rejoined the committee. I think that’s a good example that I take conflict of interest and ethics very seriously.
I would be very proactive to ensure that there wasn’t even the appearance of conflicts—and if there was, to ensure that I sought out the appropriate guidance on how to handle that, and to follow that to the letter.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: You were employed with former federal finance minister Joe Oliver as an adviser? What was your title?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I was the tax, international finance and trade policy adviser to Joe Oliver.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: So you offered him suggestions on policy initiatives, reforms and communications. Did you write communications for Mr. Oliver?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I didn’t do a lot of communications. That was definitely left to the experts. I was really there as someone who had industry experience in financial services. That was really important to the minister and his chief of staff, who both had financial services backgrounds, and I think is highly applicable to the work of Finance Canada. I was an industry person who had a desire to serve the public.
I went to Ottawa, actually, in sad circumstances, after Minister Flaherty passed away. A new finance minister was appointed, and a good number of Minister Flaherty’s staff found it—I think, very understandably—difficult to continue. So when the opportunity came to fill those vacancies, I was happy to do it, and I thought it was a great privilege.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: I’m sure it was.
During the tenure of Mr. Oliver as the finance minister, he once said, in a quote, that asbestos can be used in a “safe and effective manner.” There are well-established health issues, obviously, with prolonged use of asbestos. Were you connected with him at that time?
Mr. Roman Baber: Point of order.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Yes, Mr. Baber?
Mr. Roman Baber: Perhaps that question should better be addressed to Mr. Oliver, as opposed to this witness. I don’t propose that it is within the scope of this witness to be challenged on all statements previously made by Mr. Oliver. At some point, you’ve got to draw the line. This is a reasonable line.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: I’m actually not done the question.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): If the member could connect the question directly to the appointment process.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Thank you very much, Chair. I was about to do that before I was interrupted. I’ll start over again.
Mr. Oliver, as finance minister, once said that asbestos can be used in a “safe and effective manner.” I guess now it’s a two-part question. At that time, do you remember or do you recall Mr. Oliver saying that, and what are your thoughts on that direct quote? Do you believe that asbestos can be used in a safe and effective manner?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I would say that I’m not sure about the time of the quote because it touches an area of policy that I did not support or work on. Tax policy is quite mundane. Actually it’s quite technical, and that was really why I was brought in—to communicate the tax policies that were coming up from the department to the minister so that they were well understood and to just give that version and then he could communicate to Canadians—
Mr. Taras Natyshak: At that time, I believe that the debate at the federal level was around Canada’s exporting of asbestos into developed countries. Were you involved on that front in terms of exporting?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: No. I honestly do not believe I had any involvement with that policy.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: That’s okay. And you said that you didn’t support that. Does that mean you weren’t involved in terms of supporting that or—
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I meant that I didn’t contribute to the review that the minister did to inform that comment.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Do you have any institutional knowledge around the use of asbestos and what it means to workers in Canada and abroad?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I don’t specifically. I believe that the WSIB right now is doing reviews to better understand occupational diseases and occupational cancers. So I believe—and maybe that quote is a good example of this—that definitive statements on how those tie to safety in the workplace are best deferred to the experts.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: We’ve long held the practice that asbestos is a known-carcinogen under the WSIB, as a compound that causes cancer. It’s one that has a long track record of causing an enormous of harm and one that we, rightfully, don’t allow workers to use any longer, but it’s one that, as a developed country, we should play a role—in my opinion, of course—to reduce that harm or eliminate that harm completely. I would hope that as a member of the WSIB you would reinforce that long-standing knowledge and the history that we have around that compound.
One other question: In your previous dealings and employment with the federal government under the Harper government, did you have any connection with Prime Minister Harper’s chief of staff, Kory Teneycke? Do you remember him?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: No.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: You would not have had any dealing with Kory Teneycke at all?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: No. I came in right towards the end of the mandate, and I believe he had already moved on.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: You have no involvement with him at this point, like through Onex? Does his firm connect in any way with Onex in your capacity?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: No, I don’t believe he is.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Okay. All right. One more: In September, the Ford government implemented a 30% reduction on employers’ work and safety insurance premiums. The case that was given for that reduction was that, magically, the unfunded liability had been eliminated; therefore, employers now receive a massive 30% reduction on their premiums at the same time as workers get no increase in premiums for any claims that are made, and even in fact we’ve seen the incidence for application for claims being denied increase. Do you have any comments on that and what the impact is on workers in this province who have been injured on the job?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I believe that the WSIB right now is in a position of strength now that it has resolved its unfunded liability, which basically meant that it did not have the appropriate reserves to meet the claims of injured workers. To remedy that, what the WSIB did is, they levied an additional past claims cost that was paid by employers. Of the measures taken to resolve the unfunded liability, that contributed 45% of the resolution. So that past claims cost, now that the unfunded liability has been resolved, has now served its purpose. That’s part of the reason why it is now no longer part of the premium that Ontario workplaces pay.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: The unfunded liability was based on an actuarial calculation whereby the WSIB hypothetically at some point in time would have to pay out every claim for every worker covered under WSIB at the exact same time, which statistically would be improbable—almost impossible, that every worker that currently pays into WSIB would be injured at the exact same time. So the unfunded liability, as we see it, was a ludicrous position from the outset for the WSIB to start to reduce claims benefits for workers, and I don’t think is justifiable in any actuarial circles that aren’t outside of a framework of government control.
That being said, we see a continued higher incidence of workers being injured on the job year to year, day to day, and we don’t see any action on the part of this government or the previous government to reduce the amount of injuries.
What role do you think the WSIB should be playing to enhance and ensure health and safety in a time where more workers are getting hurt at work and less of those workers are being compensated by the regime that we currently are governed by?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I would start by saying that in regard to the unfunded liability, that was an issue that was identified as a problem by the Auditor General, so I would defer to that experience there. I do think that it was appropriate to just ensure the sustainability and stability of the organization—that it had the appropriate resources to meet its future obligations.
In regard to worker safety, if you look at the mandate of the WSIB, the first thing it says is “to promote workplace ... safety, to facilitate return to work, recovery”—
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Do you believe they’re doing a good enough job when we don’t see the incidence of workplace accidents going down under this regime? Do you think we could do a better job? What are the ideas that you might have around enhancing health and safety at work?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I think you can always do a better job. I think that the WSIB is trying to do a better job. Ontario’s safety record—I believe from the 2017 report on that—was actually quite good, comparatively, to other provinces.
So I do believe that as part of the WSIB’s mandate and the constant fulfillment and renewal of that mandate, they should be looking at new ways to make Ontario workplaces safer.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Thank you very much. That concludes the time for the official opposition. We would like to turn it over now to the government. Ms. Fee.
Mrs. Amy Fee: Good morning, and thank you for coming here this morning. It was great how you started off talking about the influence of your parents and how they’ve led you down this path that you have in your life. I think just hearing your background and everything that has gone on in your professional career has certainly made you an outstanding candidate for this position.
Ms. Leslie Lewis: Thank you.
Mrs. Amy Fee: You talked a little bit about some of your skills and how they would benefit you on certain committees and that sort of thing. I’m just wondering what sorts of unique skills you can talk about that may benefit you being on the WSIB board.
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I believe that, first and foremost, my exposure to a broad range of industries will be really helpful to my role on the WSIB board. There are very few experiences like private equity, where your job is to learn about a new business very quickly and to be able to get at the heart of what drives value in that business and how you can improve it. So I believe that not only the breadth of exposure to different types of businesses that I’ve had in my career will help, but also that skill set in order to get up to speed quickly, not only from a financial standpoint but also to put yourselves in the shoes of that work environment.
I’ve toured many, many industrial facilities. I know what a safe facility looks like. That’s something that we’re trained to look at as industrial investors. I think that that will also be a value to the WSIB.
I mentioned that I believe that my financial skill set and my investment skill set will benefit the audit and finance committees of the board and the investment committee. But I also believe that my experience in the government and the holistic decision-making that you need to make as a public service—I think that public sector decision-making is not something that you would find with every financial executive, so I’m very pleased to bring that as well to the WSIB.
Mrs. Amy Fee: Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Mr. Ke?
Mr. Vincent Ke: Good morning.
Ms. Leslie Lewis: Good morning.
Mr. Vincent Ke: Thank you for coming to our committee.
In your opinion, what is the biggest challenge or issue that the WSIB is facing now, and how will you assist them in addressing this concern?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: I’ll start by stating that this is an outsider perspective, and I look forward to posing the exact same question—it’s a great question—to the WSIB chair, Elizabeth Witmer, to CEO Thomas Teahen, to my fellow members of the board and any members of the WSIB staff that I have the pleasure to meet.
I think that the WSIB is at a really great time in its history. With the unfunded liability eliminated, I believe it’s in a position of strength. I believe that there are more opportunities than challenges ahead for the WSIB. But I believe that to act on those opportunities still requires some work, and so to do them properly is, in turn, also a challenge. I think the areas of opportunity are sustainability, equality and modernity. I think those are areas that would benefit the WSIB to focus on. When I review their corporate reporting, those are themes that jump out at me.
For sustainability, I think it’s very important to maintain that position of strength. During the great recession, the unfunded liability doubled between 2006 and 2009. So it’s very important, as someone who has experience investing in cyclical industries, to ensure that you are prepared for the next crisis, just like we do in our own households in the event that that would strike.
I think for equity, it’s very important to ensure intergenerational equity. We had a situation with the past claims costs, where today’s employers were effectively paying a surcharge that was not paid by yesterday’s employers to resolve that. I think that’s very important.
I think compensation equity that provides fair treatment to our injured workers and evolves in step with our increasing social consciousness of issues like mental health and PTSD is extremely important.
I also believe insurance equity—we have a system in our mutual insurance environment where the premiums of the many pay the claims of the few. I think it’s important that good employers are rewarded for creating a wonderful and safe work environment.
For modernity, I think of things like the expectations of people for online services. The insurance industry, just broadly, is undergoing a shift to technology. All of us use technology in our daily lives and that’s how we expect to interact with organizations. I think that is a great opportunity, but it’s also a difficult thing to accomplish. I think using that improved technology to make data-driven decision-making is important—and to help your stakeholders make those data-driven decisions too and publish that data and make it transparent. I believe delivering a modern rate framework is another opportunity of modernity.
Lastly, evolving with the changing nature of work: How I work is different than how my parents work. There are a greater number of folks in Ontario that work in the gig economy, that work in the sharing economy. These are things we didn’t have 10, 15 years ago. So I think modernity is also an important element for the WSIB’s future and opportunity.
Again, I believe there are more opportunities than challenges ahead.
Mr. Vincent Ke: Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Mr. Cuzzetto?
Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: First of all, I would like to thank you for representing Canada in the 2005 world championships. I was a property manager at the Mississauga Canoe Club for many years, and I’m working very closely with Katie Vincent, who will be our next Olympian. I hope she’ll bring home gold for Canada.
Another thing: What are you doing to prepare yourself for this role?
Ms. Leslie Lewis: That’s a great question. I think it’s both: What am I doing in my current role, and what am I doing on top of that to make myself a better board member?
At Onex, we generally constitute the majority of the boards on the companies that we acquire, so I’ve had great experience participating in board meetings through my employment at both Onex and Teachers’. So that has been a great boon to my experience level.
Extracurricularly, I assumed the position of chair of Rise Asset Development investment committee. As part of a national expansion, they added another committee, and so that has grown my governance experience. To supplement that, I have completed the Institute of Corporate Directors course on crown director effectiveness and its not-for-profit governance essentials program, which I think is really important. The WSIB audits the skills of its board members, which I think is a great governance practice, and so I want to continue to evolve my skills and develop as a stronger board member while I’m there, as well.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): You have 15 seconds. Ms. Khanjin.
Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Hi. As someone who has worked with you in the past, I know your dedication to public service. I just wanted to kind of get a high level from you in terms of the sacrifices you make and the balancing of the skills you do in order to contribute to public service with this role.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): I apologize; you won’t be able to answer that question because the time is over. That concludes the time allocated. Thanks very much. You may step down.
Ms. Leslie Lewis: Thank you.
Ms. Colleen McCleery
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Colleen McCleery, intended appointee as member, Ontario College of Art and Design University Board of Governors.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): We have Colleen McCleery, nominated as member, Ontario College of Art and Design University Board of Governors. Could you please come forward?
Welcome. As you may be aware, you have the opportunity, should you choose to do so, to make an initial statement. Following this, there will be questions from members of the committee. With that questioning, we will start with the government, followed by the official opposition, with 15 minutes allocated to each recognized party. Any time you take in your statement will be deducted from the time allotted to the government. The floor is yours.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appreciate the privilege of appearing before you today. I am honoured to be nominated to be a member of the board of governors of the Ontario College of Art and Design University.
I am sure you’ve had a chance to review my CV and you have an idea of my qualifications.
A little history: I attended the University of Waterloo in systems design engineering. I worked at Procter and Gamble and Bell before returning to do an MBA at Queen’s. I found consulting exciting, and I followed that path until age 50, when I pursued a medical degree at Ross University, something that I had long wanted.
I worked with clients in my consulting career, developing business plans, annual reports, market research, strategic reviews and studies in small start-ups to large corporations and government, gaining expertise along the way in manufacturing, marketing, engineering and consulting, areas which are important for OCAD.
I have been a candidate of the PC Party. This is public record. I entered politics because I wanted to help my constituents. Helping others has been a mainstay of my life, from volunteer work to teaching sports to mentoring young women and pursuing a career in medicine.
My qualifications for appointment to the board of governors are:
—my desire for public service and helping others to achieve their goals and dreams. I enjoy giving back.
—my educational background, which includes a bachelor of applied science in systems design engineering from the University of Waterloo, a master’s in business administration from Queen’s University, and a doctor of medicine degree from Ross University.
—my desire to help young people with their careers. I have spoken at Women in Science and Engineering events, the organization known as WISE, encouraging young women to enter the STEM fields and mentoring young women. I have helped young people find work and would like to believe I have changed their lives for the better.
Systems design engineering is a program which applies traditional engineering concepts to design systems with a holistic view. I research spine modelling for Harrington rods for children with scoliosis and did ergonomic patient handling device design during my school terms.
I have a multidiscipline perspective—business, medicine and systems design engineering, which brings a strong integration focus, an area where OCAD is focusing. For instance, design in medicine takes into account physical, social and mental well-being and a relationship between health and physical space, something that architects are now working on, to improve patient experience and health outcomes.
My strategic management background and my MBA provide me with strong business and transformation skills to help achieve the outcomes expected of OCAD by the province of Ontario. At KPMG, I assessed the trend for skills that were needed to support the telecommunications industry. Myself and a retired president of Bell Northern Research met with 50-odd vice-presidents of HR in the telecom field to determine the skills we needed to keep telecom at the top of the world. This gave me the insight into what we needed to teach schools in order to produce students who have the skills to help our economy.
I have managed staff in high tech. I was a mature student. I was a co-op student at Waterloo, which is also at OCAD, and I was one of 5% of women in engineering when I attended Waterloo, so I think I bring perspective to a school that is applying technology to art and design.
I have enjoyed serving others in a caring as well as a business role. I will work hard for OCAD. I am a passionate learner who has sought knowledge all of her life and believes in the value of good education. I am pursuing this opportunity for personal fulfillment.
A reference by a consulting partner, Steve McDonald:
“To whom it may concern:
“I have known Colleen McCleery as a professional colleague for two years and found her to be an excellent person, both as an consultant and an individual. She is intellectually stimulating and challenging. She works well with people, and they relate to her, which is important in her position as a consultant.
“Her professionalism is displayed in her dedicated performance of assignments, her high integrity and values and ethics.
“She works long hours, is very organized in her public and private lives, and is someone on whom I can totally rely. She easily ranks in the top 5% to 10% of consultants and individuals I know.
“One of her significant strengths is her ability to synthesize and discover important pieces of information from the great mass of detail faced in some consulting assignments.
“Not only an excellent consultant, Colleen is well rounded in her outside activities and keeps herself in excellent condition, thus contributing to her amazing level of energy.”
Thank you for the opportunity to meet with you and to be considered for this opportunity. In summary, I am well educated, motivated and have a diverse background that should serve OCAD well.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Thank you very much for your statement.
The initial round of questioning will go to the government. Ms. Fee.
Mrs. Amy Fee: Good morning, and thank you for being here, Colleen.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Good morning.
Mrs. Amy Fee: You certainly talked about how much passion you have for supporting people in the community and being that volunteer in the community and helping people out. One thing that’s important, I think, to note on this committee is that there isn’t an honorarium. You do have expenses covered. So I think it’s just that passion for supporting people and that fulfillment that you mentioned for yourself that’s bringing you here. It’s not about financial reward.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: That is my passion. The number of young women who have come into my life whom I have mentored—and it’s just a deep fulfillment that I get, as much as helping someone else. And I do feel that I have all of the business skills, the investment-analyst skills and the business transformation skills as well, I think.
Mrs. Amy Fee: Wonderful. I’m happy that you are here today to seek out this opportunity.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Ms. Kusendova.
Ms. Natalia Kusendova: Good morning. I’m very impressed by your resumé and your education. As someone who has pursued a few degrees myself, I find it very interesting that you decided to pursue your doctor of medicine later on in life as another career. Can you tell us a little bit about how each of your degrees and how each of your educational backgrounds will contribute to your role at OCAD?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: All three apply. I am someone who, with an engineering and a systems engineering background, has actually studied the design of a system from a holistic viewpoint. That was something in each of my engineering terms: We had to do a systems project. So I have the design background element.
I have the business background element with my MBA and my years as a strategic management consultant. The work I did when I was at KPMG was always on the strategy side.
I have my own investment portfolio, which I manage. I’m proud to say that I have outdone the market in the last four years, over the S&P, so I have a very strong interest in investments, which is a subcommittee of OCAD.
The medicine does apply. It’s a growing field in the future, from long-term care to hospitals to clinics. It is an area that OCAD will be doing design and research in, and I think that could be one of the growing areas of OCAD, in the interior design.
Ms. Natalia Kusendova: Can you highlight for us your understanding of the unique nature and characteristics of OCAD?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: OCAD is the top design and art school in Canada. It’s very much studio-based, but it’s very broad. It covers writing, advertising, drawing and painting, cross-disciplinary integration of art, nature and science, and then the whole realm of technology, from Web design, advertising design—everything that involves modern Internet design and advertising.
Ms. Natalia Kusendova: Can you tell us a little bit more about what motivated you to seek this appointment, as someone who clearly wants to dedicate her life to the service of others?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: As I said, I ran. I only started to think about politics six months before, because I was approached. It took a little while for me to say, “Gee, I’m helping people,” and as soon as that light went off, I said, “This is what I want to do.” I enjoyed the election experience so much, meeting people, knocking on doors. I had done as many doors as those who had been nominated a year before. I enjoyed very much engaging with people at the doors, listening to their problems, trying to come up with solutions to even help them on their doorstep as to what I knew. So the idea of public service and my ability to use a lot of knowledge that I have was important.
I pursued a friend who told me about the Public Appointments Secretariat, who said, “Colleen, apply.” I did, and I received a call.
Ms. Natalia Kusendova: Wonderful. Thank you for applying.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Mr. Ke.
Mr. Vincent Ke: Good morning. Thank you for being here. I have visited OCAD University and area this year—
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Sorry?
Mr. Vincent Ke: I have been in OCAD University, in the area, this year.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Okay.
Mr. Vincent Ke: My question is, what is your working experience as a management consultant that would benefit this educational institution?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Yes. In terms of management consulting, the skills that I can bring to the board are—I have spent 20-plus years solving problems for management. In other words, I have been hired as an outside expert to do things. I am very strong with numbers, so financial statements and so on, very strong at setting priorities and making these recommendations to senior executives who are spending money. So my ability to be on a board and set priorities, discuss numbers and make recommendations to the chair is something I’ve already done, and I would very much appreciate the opportunity to do it for such a renowned school.
Mr. Vincent Ke: Okay, thank you.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Further questions? No further questions? Oh, Mr. Baber.
Mr. Roman Baber: Ms. McCleery, thank you so much for being here, and thank you for your willingness to serve the public. I want to put it on the record that irrespective of the line of questioning that you’re about to hear from my friends in the opposition, I want to thank you for your service and I want to say that I’m incredibly proud of the type of calibre of people who we’re putting forward, notwithstanding their political affiliation—
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Point of order.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Point of order.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Chair, the member’s comments suggest that he knows what our line of questioning is. I don’t know that he can infer that we’re going to ask any question that he has any idea of, or has any idea of anything of—
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Can you possibly reword your line of questioning, sir?
Mr. Roman Baber: Sure. One of the recurring themes, Ms. McCleery, that we have been hearing during the questioning from my friends in the opposition is that they have been imputing the intentions of this government or of the witnesses appearing before the committee—all notwithstanding the fact that yourself included, the witness before you and practically almost everyone I have seen who pass through these doors and attend before committee has been of excellent calibre.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Chair, point of order.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Ms. Stiles.
Ms. Marit Stiles: I don’t believe that the Chair has ruled in any way that we are imputing motive or anything like that. We’ve actually stated some facts about what we know about the appointees that have been confirmed by appointee after appointee after appointee.
Mr. Roman Baber: I don’t understand what the—
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Member, could you please complete your line of questioning without specifically mentioning impugning motive, which you just did? Thank you.
Mr. Roman Baber: Sure. Thank you. I think I’ve made my point clear.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Thank you.
Mr. Roman Baber: I’m grateful for putting your name forward, and I’m proud of the people we’re putting forth.
Our government, within its education policy and higher education policy, is seeking to close on what we refer to as the skills gap. This is a very prevalent issue that—specifically in terms of STEM and technology in particular, we have a considerable shortage of skilled employees. OCAD is now a prime example of how it helps employers and students fill the skills gap.
I’m wondering if you can speak for a minute to how you would propose to address the skills gap, as a board member at OCAD, and stimulate admissions and interest in OCAD.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: The things I did in my past—the Women in Science and Engineering is something that encouraged women who have still, in many ways, traditional stereotypes of the types of jobs for males and females.
Also, when I went into public schools and high schools, I found, in the election—I knocked on one door and the woman said, “Are you the woman that was at my daughter’s school? She came home—she’s eight years old—and she said, ‘Mom, she’s a doctor and an engineer.’” I think when children see that at a young age, they grow up with that. I think it has to be done quite early and I think there need to be more mentors and role models.
Mr. Roman Baber: Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): You have 30 seconds. Mr. Sabawy?
Mr. Sheref Sabawy: Hi. I’m very impressed with the background and specifically speaking about engineering and communications. I would just ask you what you think you can bring on the board about promoting more remote and online education, and getting us to the next generation of education.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Excuse me, but the time for the government is over.
We will now flip to the official opposition. Ms. Stiles?
Ms. Marit Stiles: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Marit Stiles: I hope it will quiet down a bit more so I can hear what I have to say.
Thank you so much, Ms. McCleery, for appearing here today, and congratulations in advance for your impending appointment.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Thank you.
Ms. Marit Stiles: You have a very interesting and varied professional background, which I think has been really great to hear about.
I don’t know if you were here for the previous appointee. We are going to ask you some questions, and I appreciate that you raised, right off the top, your own role as a candidate in the last provincial election and put that right out there. But we have seen a rather troubling trend, to say the least, of very partisan appointments, which is why we are asking. We are going to ask some questions around that, which I know you probably expect.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Fine.
Ms. Marit Stiles: I guess my first question is, you were appointed by now-Premier Ford as a candidate in 2018?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Yes.
Ms. Marit Stiles: How did you find out about this position in particular? I can’t recall what you said about that in previous questions.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: When the election was over, I really wanted to continue public service. I had a friend who was not involved with the campaign at all, but he ran 20 years ago, and he said, “Colleen, apply to the Public Appointments Secretariat.” I said, “Well, where’s that?” He sent me the link, and I went through it, and I applied to numerous universities in Toronto.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Did you speak to anybody in particular—anybody, for example, from the Premier’s office—about this appointment?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: No, I did not know anything about the political—
Ms. Marit Stiles: Sorry, and are you currently a member of the Conservative Party of Ontario?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Yes, I am. I had to be to run.
Ms. Marit Stiles: And you still are?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Yes.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Okay. Have you donated anything to—
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Yes, and that is public record.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Okay. And have you donated to leadership campaigns as well? Did you donate to any of the leadership campaigns?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: No.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Okay. I guess we’ve talked a little bit about why you’re interested in being on this board; I have a few things I just want to run through.
The government right now has made some pretty significant changes to post-secondary institutions, and particularly to OCAD. I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but there was a recent cut of about $20 million to OCAD’s planned expansion. Were you aware of that?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Yes, I was, and it’s also in the document I received. I don’t know where or how that came about, because—
Ms. Marit Stiles: Certainly for OCAD, it was a shock, to say the least, as I think you’ll find when you’re on the board there. They have been quoted as calling this “devastating news,” partly because the project is already under way.
Could you comment on whether or not you think it’s appropriate that the government would have removed those funds while the project was already currently under way?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: I can’t say to what decision was based. I don’t know what the criteria, what the decisions in the whole were. Something that I’m proud of is my ability to synthesize or solve the problem, but without knowing all the factors that would—
Ms. Marit Stiles: How would you feel, as a former candidate for this government, this party now in government, as now a member of the board of governors, potentially, speaking out against cuts if they negatively affect the institution?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: If they negatively affect—I do respect the fact that when I was on doorsteps, I was overwhelmed with the number of people and the amount of money that had to be allocated in so many ways. So I do respect that somehow, things that are important to some places have to be cut. Obviously, I would do my best to do best for the school, but I do not know what the decision was based on. So I can’t really answer that.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Okay. Are you aware of the government’s so-called Student Choice Initiative with regard to post-secondary institutions?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Are you talking about fees?
Ms. Marit Stiles: Well, it’s actually more like a performance-based—mostly, what I’m talking about is some of the performance-based measures and also some of the cuts to the fees, yes.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Yes, I am aware of the cuts to the fees, and also the outcome measurements for the universities to attain better graduation rates and better student employment rates—all of those things that are the most important for our—
Ms. Marit Stiles: How do you think that those performance-based measures will impact an institution like OCAD? I mean, certainly OCAD is doing a lot of work in technology and digital media, but I think it is fair to say—and I worked for many years in the arts sector—that employment in the arts is a little bit different. It doesn’t come quite as quickly as in an applied field. So what would your advice be to the government about how to apply the same measures to different fields, including the arts?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: I actually looked at the numbers, and I was very impressed. They were, like, 90% after two years. That was employment in the field, from OCAD. So they’re doing very well.
But I also support, in this day and age, with digital animation and digital media, that these skills are going to be in high demand and that we need good partners. I know that—
Ms. Marit Stiles: Which is really one of the reasons why I think it’s so disappointing, the overall education—you’ve talked about going and speaking at schools. The government is cutting, as you’re probably aware, about $1 billion out of our education system over the next four years. What we’re hearing repeatedly is that where the cuts are going to be most felt are in those classes that must be smaller, like technology, arts programs in our K-to-12 schools. I think what many of us are concerned about, and what we’re hearing from educators at the post-secondary, and at the secondary level in particular, is that as these classes are squeezed and these class averages are applied across the board, that’s where we’re going to see the loss.
Would you care to comment a bit on what that means in terms of the future of students who might be applying to programs like OCAD?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: I understand what you’re saying in terms of programs that may not lead to the economic benefits. But I support a general philosophy of having more people trained in areas where there can be work. So the trades, for example: It’s nothing related to universities, but I do support more training in the trades.
Ms. Marit Stiles: That’s a really good example. The government has talked a lot about wanting to prepare more young people to go into the skilled trades, but what we’re hearing from schools, from educators and from boards is that because those are exactly the classes and the opportunities that have to be at a smaller number in a classroom—and, frankly, as you probably are aware, they’re the reason why a lot of students stay in school, right? Those doors are going to be closing because those opportunities will not be offered in the current model with this kind of back-to-basics approach, which I think is concerning. I don’t know if that concerns you.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: I’m not sure what—you’re talking the size of the classroom or the cuts?
Ms. Marit Stiles: Well, the size of the classroom is directly related to the course offerings that are going to be available to students.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Going with my personal experience, I attended med school with 200 to 300 people in a class. A lot of it was done—
Ms. Marit Stiles: Yes, but you were a mature student at the time. We’re talking about 15-year-olds and 14-year-olds. It’s very different.
Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Point of order.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Yes, Ms. Khanjin.
Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Chair, I’m just reminding the member opposite about relevance and how this relates to the actual appointment. We’re going back to elementary school days. I just don’t see the relevance here to being on a board for OCAD.
Ms. Marit Stiles: If I may, Mr. Chair, I believe that’s the Chair’s job, to remind me of the relevance.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): I’ve been listening carefully. You could perhaps point out a bit more relevance, but up until the last minute or so, you have brought it back to OCAD.
Ms. Marit Stiles: The reason I’m raising this is because OCAD obviously depends upon those students who are coming in who are going to come in and be interested and have the skills to be actually applying for the programs that are offered at OCAD. So I think it’s directly relevant—how prepared our students are coming out of secondary school. But anyway, we can move on.
There was another change that came in through the so-called Student Choice Initiative that the government has instituted which I think we believe, certainly on this side, is going to significantly hamper the ability of students to organize themselves and provide the services on campus. I’m wondering if you’re familiar with some of the services that, for example, those fees provided so that students could organize opportunities for themselves on campus, and how that’s going to be affected at OCAD.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: I support the policy because I went to university. I had to pay for it out of my own money. I worked in co-op. I saved every penny, and I felt there were a lot of fees for myself that I didn’t utilize. And so, if the student chooses, it’s their choice.
Ms. Marit Stiles: But should it be a choice for the student? For example—
Ms. Colleen McCleery: I thought it should have been a choice for me.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Well, maybe for you. For myself as well, as a white woman, I may not need a special space for racialized students.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: I think people can organize themselves. I’ve taken on volunteer—I believe these things can be run, and they do. There are all kinds of things—
Ms. Marit Stiles: What about—and I don’t know if you’re aware—other things that were provided at OCAD through those fees, like the student gallery, which would seem to be a pretty important thing; the student academic advocate; and, as I mentioned earlier, the space that was for racialized students who are, unfortunately, very underrepresented? That is something that benefits OCAD because it creates that safe and supportive space to ensure that more of our racialized students are participating at OCAD.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: I think the priorities were set. I wasn’t there—it was before my time—but the priorities were set. And there have to be cuts. We just can’t afford everything.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Why do there have to be cuts?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Because I don't think our economy is strong enough to support all the spending. If we had so much income that our revenues could support all this, we could do it.
Ms. Marit Stiles: But if I may, because this is very important, and this is absolutely relevant, just so we’re all clear, to the funding that is being cut to post-secondary institutions, we know that students are going to be carrying more debt, not less. And we know that, at the same time, this government is giving tax breaks to very wealthy people. Does that seem fair to you? Is it not an issue of priorities?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: I have talked to people about it, and I have supported myself through school. I didn’t come from a wealthy family. I went to school; I supported myself. My father was from a very below-wealthy—
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): We have a point of order.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: —and I just think anyone can do that.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Ms. Kusendova.
Ms. Natalia Kusendova: Once again, I don’t see how this is relevant to Colleen’s appointment to OCAD, this line of questioning.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Would the member please bring back her questions directly to OCAD?
Ms. Marit Stiles: The reason I’m asking these questions is because you’re being appointed to the board of governors for a post-secondary institution, and this government is directly impacting the ability of students in post-secondary institutions to pursue their education and is restricting the ability of students in those institutions to organize to support themselves as students.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: I support the best education possible with the most means possible, and if the best faculty would provide you the best education, then maybe if a classroom is not specific for a specific area, I still support that we do the most we can with what we have. I don’t know what the priorities were where other cuts were made, or who had more cuts or less cuts, but I do support the idea of the role of government in terms of setting those priorities and making the right decisions.
Ms. Marit Stiles: As we just discussed—again, this is a post-secondary arts institution—we have seen many of the government’s cuts falling—speaking of priorities—on arts and media-based programs, and that’s whether it’s secondary or post-secondary. What I want to know is, really, what will you do in your role at OCAD to defend those programs against more cuts from this government?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: I would fight for the school that—
Mr. Roman Baber: Point of order, Chair.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Yes, Mr. Baber?
Ms. Marit Stiles: She’s answering the question.
Mr. Roman Baber: One second, one second.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Mr. Baber?
Mr. Roman Baber: If I may, please, on a point of order?
Ms. Marit Stiles: Mr. Chair, I hope you’re stopping the clock with all these points of order again.
Mr. Roman Baber: At the end of the day, there must be some fundamental fairness to the witness.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: She was answering the question—
Mr. Roman Baber: If we’re going to put specific inquiry about cuts, then we should be clear which cuts are being referenced. I don’t believe—
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Excuse me, but that is a debating point, not a point of order.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Thank you. She was actually—continue. I’d like to hear her response. Thank you. I’m sorry that you’re being interrupted so much.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Sorry. Can you repeat—
Ms. Marit Stiles: Yes. Most of the government’s cuts are falling on arts and media-based programs, whether that’s secondary or post-secondary, which of course would impact OCAD. What will you do in your role at OCAD to defend these programs against more cuts from this government?
Ms. Colleen McCleery: For me, the practical solution to that is to get the most number of employment opportunities for these students, so they can contribute to the economy.
Ms. Marit Stiles: If I may; sorry—if they come at you with another $20-million cut to a program, are you going to stand up to this government? You’re well placed to do so.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Yes.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Thank you.
Ms. Colleen McCleery: Yes, I would stand up. I am very principled. I have very strong values. I have gone on consulting assignments where my client said, “No way. We’re not doing this.” I’ve gone into a room of DMs—just a side story—and the First Nation chief said, “This is what we want.” He did a 180-degree, and when I walked out of the meeting, everyone there said, “We thought you were doing a hara-kiri. You went directly against what your client wanted, and you stood up to him.”
So I would stand up for what I believe in. I would fight for what I believe in. Obviously, as much as possible, if I believe it’s the right thing, I will fight for it, and hopefully, they will see my logic.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): And that concludes the time allocated. Thank you very much for your presentation. You may step down.
We will now consider the intended appointment of Ms. Leslie Lewis, member for the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board. Ms. Fee?
Mrs. Amy Fee: I move concurrence in the intended appointment of Leslie Lewis, nominated as member for the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Concurrence in the appointment has been moved by Ms. Fee. Any further discussion? Seeing none, I would like to call the vote. All those in favour? Opposed? Concurrence has passed. Thank you.
We will now consider the intended appointment of Ms. Colleen McCleery, member for the Ontario College of Art and Design University Board of Governors. Ms. Fee?
Mrs. Amy Fee: I move concurrence in the intended appointment of Colleen McCleery, nominated as member for the Ontario College of Art and Design University Board of Governors.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Concurrence in the appointment has been moved by Ms. Fee. Any further discussion? Seeing none, I would like to call the vote. All those in favour? Opposed? Concurrence has passed. Carried.
The deadline to review the intended appointment of Nancy Shaw, selected from the April 12, 2019, certificate, is May 12, 2019. Do we have unanimous agreement to extend the deadline to consider the intended appointment of Nancy Shaw to June 11, 2019? I heard a no, so we do not have agreement.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Chair, may I ask if we could—I know that the Clerk, as far as I can see, has been providing us with information about why. Would you mind reviewing that with us now, about what the reasons are for her inability to appear within the time allocated?
Mr. Roman Baber: Provided that the Chair believes that such an inquiry would be in order, I’m not sure why the person’s schedule would be in order.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): That information can be provided to the committee, but we have yet to receive a response from the intended appointee.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Oh, okay. If I may, Mr. Chair, I appreciate the Clerk has been attempting to provide us with that information, as was discussed and agreed to at this committee previously. I appreciate you taking that on because it seems kind of concerning that we are so routinely unable to get people to appear before this committee, which really is—and then the government won’t agree to extend the time to allow them to appear here, which really provides very little transparency and accountability for the people of Ontario.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Mr. Baber.
Mr. Roman Baber: If I may, we routinely have two witnesses every Tuesday morning and I believe that the concern you raise is better suitable for the subcommittee.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Thank you for your opinion on that. It’s appreciated.
Mr. Roman Baber: You’re welcome.
The Chair (Mr. John Vanthof): Any further discussion? Seeing none, the committee is adjourned.
The committee adjourned at 1006.
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Chair / Président
Mr. John Vanthof (Timiskaming–Cochrane ND)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Président
Mr. Taras Natyshak (Essex ND)
Mr. Roman Baber (York Centre / York-Centre PC)
Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto (Mississauga–Lakeshore PC)
Mrs. Amy Fee (Kitchener South–Hespeler / Kitchener-Sud–Hespeler PC)
Mr. Vincent Ke (Don Valley North / Don Valley-Nord PC)
Ms. Andrea Khanjin (Barrie–Innisfil PC)
Mrs. Marie-France Lalonde (Orléans L)
Mr. Taras Natyshak (Essex ND)
Mr. Rick Nicholls (Chatham-Kent–Leamington PC)
Mr. Jeremy Roberts (Ottawa West–Nepean / Ottawa-Ouest–Nepean PC)
Ms. Marit Stiles (Davenport ND)
Mr. John Vanthof (Timiskaming–Cochrane ND)
Substitutions / Membres remplaçants
Ms. Natalia Kusendova (Mississauga Centre / Mississauga-Centre PC)
Mr. Sheref Sabawy (Mississauga–Erin Mills PC)
Clerk / Greffière
Ms. Jocelyn McCauley
Staff / Personnel
Mr. Andrew McNaught, research officer,