CONTENTS
Wednesday 25 September 1991
Subcommittee Report
Appointments review
Bonnie Burgess
Angelo Towndale
Mary-Ellen Tyler
John Eakins
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Chair: Runciman, Robert W. (Leeds-Grenville PC)
Vice-Chair: McLean, Allan K. (Simcoe East PC)
Bradley, James J. (St. Catharines L)
Carter, Jenny (Peterborough NDP)
Frankford, Robert (Scarborough East NDP)
Grandmaître, Bernard (Ottawa East L)
Hayes, Pat (Essex-Kent NDP)
McGuinty, Dalton (Ottawa South L)
Stockwell, Chris (Etobicoke West PC)
Waters, Daniel (Muskoka-Georgian Bay NDP)
Wiseman, Jim (Durham West NDP)
Substitutions:
Cooper, Mike (Kitchener-Wilmot NDP) for Mr Frankford
Murdock, Sharon (Sudbury NDP) for Mr Hayes
Ward, Margery (Don Mills NDP) for Ms Carter
Clerk: Arnott, Douglas
Staff: Pond, David, Research Officer, Legislative Research Service
The committee met at 1009 in room 228.
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
The Chair: Come to order, please. The first item on our agenda is the report of the subcommittee on the committee business. I hope you all have a copy in front of you. We will need a motion to adopt.
Mr Grandmaître moves that the report of the subcommittee be adopted.
Any discussion on the subcommittee report? Do you want to take a minute or two, if you have not looked at it, to scan through it?
While you are looking at it, I will make reference to one change. The opposition and the government members selected a number of appointees for review and asked they be scheduled under the first two meetings of the committee. The clerk and staff were able to comply with that request with the exception of Mr Gary Carmichael, the Board of Funeral Services, who is at the top of the selections of the official opposition. He was unable to attend either the first or second meeting of the committee, but he has been scheduled to be the first witness to appear before us at our third regularly scheduled meeting. That is the only change.
Motion agreed to.
APPOINTMENTS REVIEW
Resuming consideration of intended appointments.
BONNIE BURGESS
The Chair: The next item on our agenda is the commencement of the half-hour review of the selection by the official opposition, Bonnie Burgess, who is an intended appointee as member of the Guelph Police Services Board. Ms Burgess, welcome to the committee. Are there any brief comments you would like to make before we get into the questions?
Ms Burgess: I would just like to thank you for the opportunity to come this morning. I said a lot of what I wanted to say to this committee in my opening letter. I am a little nervous this morning. I have never had to answer to so many MPPs. I usually ask questions of them, not the other way around.
I have lived in the city of Guelph for 12 years, and before that I was there for four years as a student at the University of Guelph. I am very familiar with my community. I also am an educator in the community and a parent in the community.
My concerns are around a number of those issues. I really am concerned with young boys growing up and coming into their teen years with teen violence, gangs coming into the communities, and drug- and alcohol-related incidents. I am also concerned about the family violence I see and how we can better handle that and educate the community in that area. I am concerned about developing a better perception of the police in the community. I think the police are not often given the support they need to do their job. We need to develop a better perception for them so that they can get out and be part of the community and develop some of those relationships that will help them provide better service and protection for all of us.
The Chair: For the benefit of the new members of the committee, this is a half-hour review. These time allocations are selected by the party asking for a witness to appear and we split it up evenly among the three parties, beginning with the party that chose the particular witness to appear here. We will begin today with Mr Grandmaître.
Mr Grandmaître: Ms Burgess, feel at ease. Think of Bob Rae. He has to answer to nine million people, not nine MPPs.
Ms Burgess: I will try to keep that in mind.
Mr Grandmaître: I was going through your CV and your past responsibilities. You have shown great leadership in Guelph. Tell me a little more about the Guelph Police Services Board, or maybe any board in Ontario. In the last couple of years, police forces have been accused of racism and so on and so forth. Is this happening in Guelph? If not, give me your impressions of what the people think of certain police forces in the province of Ontario. Do you think it is a widespread affair?
Ms Burgess: Do I believe that racism within the police is a widespread affair?
Mr Grandmaître: Not within the police forces, but treating the general public.
Ms Burgess: I think the perception of the police has changed over the years, as you recognize. I would have grown up in the era when people called police "pigs." I think the perception of the police in the community has changed a lot. There has been a lot of education going on. I think the police are becoming more involved in the community, becoming part of different programs happening in the community, developing an awareness from kindergarten right through to different adult programs. If there has been that perception, I think it is changing. If you were to ask people in the community in Guelph, you would probably still get some feeling that there are some areas that need to be worked on, some things that are not perfect at this point. But I think the perception is much more positive.
Mr Grandmaître: Do you think police services boards' agendas should be more on educating the public than trying to enforce municipal or provincial laws?
Ms Burgess: No, I think we need a good balance. In order to provide a good service to a community, we have to have education and we have to have the enforcement of the law as well, but we have to see more balance.
Mr Grandmaître: I was chair of a police commission at one time, 10 years ago. As you know, police commission or police services board budgets have to be approved by municipal council. If the municipal council does not approve the police budget, it can go to the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services to have it ratified. Do you think we should have more municipal representation on the police services boards? As far as they are concerned, they are paying the shot and they would like to have more of a say on the expenditures of the police services boards or the police force. Do you think municipal councillors should have more of a say?
Ms Burgess: Are you saying should they have a right to veto?
Mr Grandmaître: I am not asking you if they should have a right to veto. I am asking you, do you think it is fair that a municipal council has to approve a police budget but has very little input in --
Ms Burgess: In the development of the budget?
Mr Grandmaître: Development, yes.
Ms Burgess: I do not know truthfully how to answer that at this point. I do not think I have enough experience with it to give you that kind of feedback. As I already work in the public sector, I know council certainly has to approve boards' taxation as well. We come forward with our budget and say, "We want city council to look at this, and you're going to have to raise property taxes." I know the same situation exists there, but I do not have the experience at this point to tell you yes or no, that I really feel they should have more input.
Mr Grandmaître: What are your thoughts on pay equity? As you know, the former minister responsible for police services boards indicated that all police services boards should have a plan to introduce equal pay. What do you think of this?
Ms Burgess: Are you asking me about pay equity or employment equity?
Mr Grandmaître: Pay equity.
Ms Burgess: Pay equity: I believe when people are doing the same job they should be paid the same. I do believe in pay equity.
Mr Grandmaître: Good.
The Chair: That was not my definition of pay equity. In any event we will move on to Mr McLean.
Mr McLean: You can relax, Bonnie. This is a meeting where nobody gets carried away. We just ask a few questions. Did somebody approach you about the position or did you send in an application?
Ms Burgess: Actually I saw the position advertised in one of our local newspapers and you applied?
Ms Burgess: And I applied from there.
Mr McLean: Do you know of any other people who applied?
Ms Burgess: No, I do not.
Mr McLean: When was that?
Ms Burgess: It would have been back in May, I think, that I first saw the advertisement.
Mr McLean: When were you notified that you were the one who was being recommended?
Ms Burgess: I was away all summer. I was notified the end of August.
1020
Mr McLean: Crime in Ontario: I am wondering how you would handle or make any recommendations on the services board. Violent crime is increasing dramatically right across the province. How do you feel police should combat this in the short term and in the long term?
Ms Burgess: I guess in the short term we have to look at law enforcement, but the long term is the more important question because I think we have to start educating the public and we have to start at very early ages. One of the things that is happening in our community right now is a lot more police involvement in the school system. We have a violence in the schools policy and we have police involved in coming into the schools and working with students.
Some of the programs they have set up are values, influences and peers programs where they come in and talk to very young students about violence and gangs and how to avoid being involved in these situations. In some of the high schools we have an adopt-a-school program where a policeman comes into the school and is given space to work there. Students can come to him anonymously and discuss any concerns they have around violence or drugs or any illegal activities that they have seen or been involved in, or abuse at home, all of those issues. The policeman then has admit slips that are signed by the vice-principal so that the student can get back into class and no one ever knows he was out talking to this person. Those kinds of programs are the things that are going to make the difference in the long run because I think that until we start changing attitudes within the community, we are not going to see a change in that area.
Mr McLean: Would you support the police having better weapons, such as a 9 mm over the .38?
Ms Burgess: I know nothing about guns. Sorry.
Mr McLean: You are willing to learn about them?
Ms Burgess: I am willing to learn, yes. At this point I do not know guns.
Mr McLean: Let me talk a little bit about the process. I do not have many questions for you because I have looked at your résumé.
In the municipality I come from there is a board member being appointed to the police services board in that community. In that community the council was asked to make recommendations and the police services board was asked to make recommendations. A lot of the recommendations were the same from both boards, and there were other individuals within the community who had made application. There was one selected who nobody had recommended, other than somebody had probably written in to make the recommendation. One of the ones who had sent in an application got a letter back on September 9 indicating: "The police services board advisory committee will be making an appointment to this board in the near future. Therefore please complete the form and return it to us by September 18."
Back on July 31 we had a list of people who were recommended to the police services board and that individual's name was there, who was recommended, and yet these other individuals in my community got a letter from the Solicitor General's office telling them to send in their application for this position. Do you know if that has happened in Guelph? Do you know any others who had made application and were told two months after it was made that they should send in their application?
Ms Burgess: No.
Mr McLean: The point of my bringing that up is that these recommendations and this process is such a farce that the government does not really even understand what is going on. It is writing letters to individuals who have taken the time to fill out their applications for this services board when the appointment is already recommended. I really find it hard to accept.
The Chair: We have three questioners from the government party, three members who have indicated an interest. You have 10 minutes to try to divide that.
Mr Wiseman: Before we begin, Mr Chair, I would like to clarify what Mr McLean is pointing out.
The Chair: It is part of your 10 minutes.
Mr Wiseman: That is okay. It will only take a second. Part of the process, Mr McLean, is that there will be many more than just one appointment to the police services boards across Ontario. Therefore, it is essential that people who have an interest and who would like to be on the board send in those applications, whether they will be considered for the short term or in the long term. There are many more to come. Those names will be kept on file and those people will then be considered in the process, so I do not think what you are implying, that it is unfair and ludicrous, is true. I think it is an ongoing attempt to make sure we get the best people possible. Also, your party then has the choice of determining whether they should come before this committee to be heard, and your party chose not to participate.
I would like to turn the questions over to the other New Democrats.
Mr McLean: On a point of order, Mr Chairman: I believe the member should read the correspondence individuals are receiving. I quoted from where this board is making the appointment in the very near future and there are no other appointments at that board that are going to be available for the foreseeable future. To anybody who got this type of letter, it would certainly have indicated that it would have been for the vacancy that was there.
The Chair: That was not a point of order, but I allowed you to get it off your chest because you had not utilized your full 10 minutes.
Mr Cooper: Ms Burgess, I have two pet projects back home. I am involved in Block Parents and Neighbourhood Watch. You talked about education and I am wondering how widespread or how much you would endorse the Block Parents program in Guelph.
Ms Burgess: I am very much in favour of the Block Parents program. In fact, I have a nine-year-old who has to walk from school to the baby-sitter and we do not have a Block Parents in our neighbourhood and that is something I would like to see get started. It has been an organization that had a lot of support at one point and it is having lot of difficulty right now and really needs a lot more support to get it going again.
Mr Cooper: That is a good start. That gets the children on side with the law enforcement officers in town. Neighbourhood Watch brings the adults in line, and a lot of them are really ignorant of a lot of things that are going on. I know a lot of them are lobbying, along with the municipal councillors, to keep taxes down so they do not want to hire a lot of extra services, so Neighbourhood Watch is a really good program. I come from Kitchener and I actually do not even know how good the Neighbourhood Watch program is in Guelph. Is there a program?
Ms Burgess: There is a program, but again it is not a strong program in our community. It is one that really could stand to be developed and used much more efficiently than it has been in our area right now.
Mr Marchese: Two questions, Bonnie: The first one is, what is your involvement presently or in the past with visible minorities or other cultural or linguistic groups -- involvement, participation, anything you might have done with them?
Ms Burgess: Other than growing up in a neighbourhood that had a couple of different ethnic groups in it, I have not had a lot of experience in that area. I was thinking as I was coming in on the GO train today that it was not until I was in my mid-teens that I actually saw my first black person. Since that time I have really had to develop an awareness of different races and ethnocultural groups within the community. I am always having to question my own biases and prejudices and to develop and learn, because I think unless we continue to challenge those things, we do not grow.
I do have one project that is under way right now. I am a speech-language pathologist with the board of education and we have a race and ethnocultural policy that is being developed within our board, talking about how to take out some of the biases we have in our curriculum and bring in an awareness of other people. Part of that is that we have to look at how we assess children who come to us who are from different races and who may not speak English at this point. How do we make sure we are providing the best education for them and are not taking away any of their opportunities by saying, "Obviously, this child does not fit in"?
Right now I am developing a policy that looks at how we can assess these children in a culturally fair environment and provide the best support for them so they can come into the community.
Mr Marchese: The other question is very much connected to that. What do you think are the perceptions of the visible minorities or the other linguistic groups? What is their perception of the police and their relationship with each other?
Ms Burgess: I think it partly depends on where they have just come from and the background they bring with them. A number of the people who are coming into our community are refugees from where authority has been misused. I think they bring with them a lot of justified fear. Until we can educate and work more with those populations, that is still is going to be there. There is going to be mistrust on their part of any authority. Even coming into a school situation, they are very nervous of someone like myself -- I was very nervous of all you people -- and they are saying, "I can't give you honest information because you may use it against me in some way." So when it is an authority like the police I think there is some difficulty there.
1030
If you look at the more established groups, people who have been here longer, I think this has been part of the education of being within the community, but I think we still need to work on that. There are still some problems there and you see it in the newspaper all the time, what is happening more in the bigger municipalities than in our area right now. It is a question that has to be asked all the time. Are we looking fairly at the different cultural groups and are they being treated fairly?
I think it is because we all need education in that area. As I said, I have to challenge myself all the time and say, "Is this a true belief or is this something I have learned along the way and never questioned before?" I think this is a question we have to look at.
Mr Marchese: You talked about race relations programs. I think you are doing something in that area.
Mr Burgess: Yes.
Mr Marchese: Many boards are getting involved with anti-racist programs and policies. Is that something you would be advocating as a board member?
Ms Burgess: Yes, I would, actually. I believe very strongly in that. I think we have to look at representing all the people in our community. In order to do that, we have to develop policies. It is very nice to say that these things will happen and it is part of growth in a community and it will eventually come about, but unless we set ourselves some goals for doing that, I am not sure that we keep on track. We need to make ourselves aware that we have to keep paying attention to this, because we can let it slip too easily.
Mr Wiseman: About four of the questions I had have already been asked, but I would like to pursue a little bit what you feel the police services board can do in conjunction with the education system in order to break down barriers. I come from an education background. That is a very important issue because tensions are starting to develop in the school system and so on. Do you have anything else? You mentioned a couple of programs. Are there any other projects you have in your mind that might be able to assist?
Ms Burgess: I would like to see more involvement between parents and teens and the police, more opportunity for them to have an open forum. One of the ways we can look at doing that is through some of the parent organizations in the schools. The Wellington county board, for instance, is starting to go back to developing parent organizations, to encourage those. Perhaps we can get the police as part of the group on an ongoing basis, to provide information, to be there to answer questions for parents and to bring some of that background so the parents feel more comfortable about the kinds of things that are going on in the community and can get some information from the police about how they can handle that with their own children.
Mr Wiseman: A lot of this has to do with the community identifying with the police force and the way our society is changing. How reflective is the police force in Guelph? How well does it look like the community it protects?
Mr Burgess: In one of our high schools we have Constable Gazzola who comes in. We have a large Italian population in the city of Guelph. When you look at some of the cultural groups within the city, you see some representation. Where you do not see a lot of representation is in different races. That is an area we would have to look at and see, through our demographics, what the population is we are representing and whether we are represented in the police service in equal proportions.
Mr Wiseman: Your background is communications, so my last question would be, do you envision any kind of courses or any kind of new training that perhaps police should be looking at in terms of becoming better equipped to deal with the 1990s situations?
Ms Burgess: Yes, and of course communications is always an important area. I think one of the things that we have to develop for police is an awareness of the different groups they are working with, so that if they are going into a situation where there is wife abuse going on, for instance, I think they not only have to be aware of what the situation entails, but how to communicate with those people about those situations. I think we also have to be culturally aware. We have to know what is going to happen if we approach a person of a certain racial background or culture, what some of the concerns are that we should be sensitive to in meeting their needs.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Ms Burgess. We appreciate your appearance here today and wish you well.
ANGELO TOWNDALE
The Chair: Next with us, again a selection of the official opposition, Angelo Towndale. He is an intended appointee as a member of the Cornwall Police Services Board. Welcome to the committee. Are there any brief comments you may wish to make at this time?
Mr Towndale: I have been a resident of Cornwall for the last 24 years. I have been active in a number of organizations in the community. I come from a background of social work and have lived with family violence and child abuse, and I have dealt with the police force in that aspect. So I feel I will be able to contribute something to the police services board.
Mr Grandmaître: You have been quite a community person in Cornwall, if I can you describe you as a community person, and Citizen of the Year. You are very well respected. I am sure you will be an asset to your police services board. How would you describe the relationship between your community of Cornwall and your police force, being a border city to the United States and being involved with one or two or maybe three native reserves? What is the relationship or the feeling between the Cornwall Police Service and your community? How would you describe it?
Mr Towndale: Last year when we had that Oka crisis, we had to bring a lot of families and children to Cornwall from Cornwall Island. It was through the Transport Canada training institute and there was good co-operation. The community all pulled together. It wanted to help. In other words, we have a good relationship with the natives on Cornwall Island. I understand the Cornwall police force now has three natives on the force, so the police force is already trying to improve the relationship with the native groups.
Mr Grandmaître: You will bring to your board a lot of community experience. What will be your first priorities on the board? What changes would you like to see happen on the board?
Mr Towndale: One thing I would like to see in the Cornwall police force is that I think there are only three female officers at this point and I feel the police force should reflect the community. There should be active recruitment to bring more females into the police force. I come from a social background, as I mentioned, about social problems and what not, family violence and child abuse. I feel more female police officers could bring a different perspective. That will be one of the things.
I would like to see police officers maybe spending more time in the school system with schoolchildren, for the children to learn about crime; in other words, crime prevention. I would like to see police officers maybe becoming a part of the community, becoming more involved in the community, knowing the people in the different locations.
1040
Mr Grandmaître: How would you accomplish this involvement? I know Cornwall very well. Would you, let's say, instead of having one central police station, have precincts to have a better presence in Cornwall? How would you do this?
Mr Towndale: For example, the police force could walk around spending time, wherever the need is. That is one way to do it. The cost will be a factor that has to be taken into consideration if you are going to have different police precincts there. Maybe that should be looked at under the financial situation. Can we do it or not? At least there will not be any cost if you are going to walk around talking to people, getting to know the community, to know the people. I think it is also going to help build a better relationship with the police force. Rather than people looking at the police as being hard, there to enforce the law, they could be perceived as helpers.
Mr Grandmaître: Talking about the cost of police services, I know there has always been fighting among municipal representatives and police services board members, that they should not get involved in their budget. What is your feeling on this? Do you think the taxpayers should have a better say or more of a say on how police boards spend their budget or on where they should put more moneys on certain priorities? What do you think? Do you think the public should be much closer to the police boards? Most of your meetings will be behind closed doors; 95% of your meetings will be behind closed doors. Do you think your meetings should be open to the public as often as possible?
Mr Towndale: I agree they should be open, unless we are discussing secret issues or personal issues. Apart from that, I think public issues should be discussed openly and be open to the press and what not.
Mr McLean: I want to congratulate you on becoming Citizen of the Year for Cornwall, an achievement that many people do not have the opportunity to make. With your outstanding dedication to Big Brothers and Big Sisters and the hospital fund, I think you are an excellent choice. You will have the opportunity to further represent your community on the police services board, and I wish you well.
Mr Waters: I come from a small town. One of the things I have noticed in our town is, to be very blunt, the vandalism that is being blamed on the youth. The police seem to go into the schools to try to deal with that. I was wondering if there were any other alternatives to it that you might be interested in looking at, such as having a police officer speak at church on Sunday. After all, we do not import these children; they are our children. I was wondering if there was anything in that. I would like you to comment on that.
Mr Towndale: One thing I would like to see is police going to the schools and talking to the kids and what not. I never thought about whether the church will allow them to do that or not.
Mr Waters: Whether it is church or service clubs or whatever, I was just wondering how you felt about expanding the discussion beyond talking to the youths. That is what I want the opinion on.
Mr Towndale: I think the police should do more public relations, in the sense that at at every opportunity they get, they should be able to go and speak to any groups and what not. For example, one thing we did at the theatre was when we had a big building extension. We wanted $400,000. What we could get from the three different levels of government was about $200,000, and we wanted $400,000. To raise $200,000 in Cornwall is a big sum of money, and one of the things we started is a bike-a-thon. We got the police chief to chair it. He has been doing for the last seven years as chairman of the bike-a-thon, which means that not only he is participating in that fund-raising; he also brings other policemen to participate too. That kind of PR involving charitable work brings a different perception and also people get a chance to speak. The bike-a-thon was attended by about 800 people.
Mr Waters: Thank you, and congratulations once again on being Citizen of the Year for Cornwall.
Mr Wiseman: I would like to pursue an area where I think you should have some expertise, and that is the children's aid relationship to the police force. Do you think it is satisfactory as it exists right now?
Mr Towndale: Whenever we have to do an investigation, we call the police department. We have a good relationship. In most of the cases investigation is done jointly by the social worker and the police force, rather than have the social worker interview the child, especially when the police have to go through it again. In most cases, we are doing joint investigations. We have a good relationship with them along the lines of investigation.
We have had a child abuse, a sexual abuse treatment program for the last five years. Right now we cannot continue that program for financial reasons, so within the last three weeks we have been forming a board and we have the police chief on that committee now. We formed a new board to start a new organization to deal with sexual abuse. So there is co-operation in that area of sexual abuse.
Mr Wiseman: As a member of the police services board, what kinds of projects and development would you like to see take place, with specific reference to any need you have identified that might be useful from the children's aid point of view?
Mr Towndale: Dealing with family violence is one of the areas I would like to see the police force more attuned to, the needs in dealing with family violence. I personally feel that more women on the police force is going to bring a different perspective in dealing with family violence, and I would like to see that done more effectively. Also child abuse; I would like to see what the police can to do in the area of prevention.
Mr Marchese: Angelo, could you explain why you want to do this job?
Mr Towndale: I have been active in the community and I feel I could be an influence in making the police force more understanding of social issues. I am not only involved in social work. Recently I have been involved in labour relations as manager of human resources, so I could bring a human resources perspective to the police force. We are assisting police officers who are going to deal with the problems. I could help in that area. I would like to bring a social perspective in dealing with social issues. At the same time, I could contribute something in the personnel-labour relations end. I also want to see the police more community-oriented.
Mr Marchese: As an additional question, what is the experience of your own community vis-à-vis the police? What do they think about the relationship between the police and your community members?
Mr Towndale: That relationship between the police and the community, I would say, is a good one Are you talking about minorities in that respect?
Mr Marchese: Yes.
1050
Mr Towndale: If you look at minorities in Cornwall, I think the East Indians and Pakistanis will be about 1%. That will be a visible minority right in Cornwall. We are also dealing with Cornwall Island, with the natives there. I have not seen any racial tension within the police force or heard anything about that.
Ms S. Murdock: Some of what you have said has gotten me to think about community policing, which is something that is being done in my riding of Sudbury. It is an expensive proposition but it puts the police officer into the different sections of the community. Just generally, is that what you were talking about when you were having the police officer on the streets?
Mr Towndale: Yes, that is what I was talking about, not only on the streets but also in the residential area. That is what I am talking about.
Ms S. Murdock: With a base within that community?
Mr Towndale: A base in the community so they could walk and talk with people. I have to look into the cost of putting a building there. I am thinking of the police officers spending more time with the people.
Ms S. Murdock: You said too that public relations is very important for the police; in other words, communicating what they are doing with the community. With the fiscal restraints that are coming -- every community is suffering and municipalities are complaining about the cost of police service -- if you had to choose between the PR and policing, what would you decide and on what basis would you decide that?
Mr Towndale: I would go for policing.
Ms S. Murdock: And your reason?
Mr Towndale: We have to enforce the law and have crime prevention. The laws have to be enforced and crimes have to be investigated, so that is a priority that has to be done. It can be done without much cost too. Using the media, I think it can be done without that much cost.
Ms S. Murdock: Yes, I agree with you.
Mr Towndale: Also, you can use auxiliary police officers to go and speak. It does not have to be police officers going and speaking. It could be commissioners, whoever is on the service board. Maybe we should solicit their co-operation to go and speak to groups. Auxiliary police officers could be used.
Ms S. Murdock: Cadets.
Mr Towndale: Cadets could be used.
The Chair: The opposition did not utilize all its time. I want to ask you one quick question, sir. You mentioned wanting to see the police force in Cornwall more reflective of the community. You talked about more women officers. That is a commendable objective and something this government is pursuing as well.
I know when the former Solicitor General made an announcement some time ago with respect to the numbers of women on police forces, he indicated he wanted to see it reflective of Ontario society. We are talking about 50% or more of police officers being women. The reaction from an awful lot of people was very negative, especially police officers who are out there and have to go and deal with some pretty rough situations. They have some concerns about that direction in respect of breaking up a barroom brawl, those kinds of things that police officers have to face on a daily basis. Do you have any concerns about that?
Mr Towndale: I am not for a quota saying if the community is 51% female, you have to have 51%. The only thing I am saying is that there should be active recruitment to bring more women to the police force.
The Chair: So you do not have any views on what an optimum level is?
Mr Towndale: I think we should make it the recruitment of women who are capable of doing the job. In other words, we should not have people because they happen to be female. Good training and active recruitment: If women are able to do the job, we should bring more to the police force, but I am not for a quota saying it should be 51% or 40%.
The Chair: I am glad to hear you make your comment with respect to policing versus public relations, because I am certain that education and a better understanding of policing the community is very important. But looking at crime statistics now and the way they are going through the roof, certainly in many instances -- perhaps at the provincial level, not so much at the local levels; I am not sure about that -- we lack front-line officers who are out there and able to combat crime on a daily basis. That is my own view, and certainly from talking to a lot of police officers across the province, that is their view as well.
Thank you very much for appearing before us today. We wish you well with your new responsibilities.
MARY-ELLEN TYLER
The Chair: We are now moving on to selections for review from the government party. Dr Mary-Ellen Tyler, who is an intended appointee as a member of the Agricultural Research Institute of Ontario, is next. Welcome. Do you have any comments before we begin the questions?
Ms Tyler: No. I would just like to thank the committee for seeing me today. I am really hoping I will be able to answer the questions. I think the ARIO presents a tremendous opportunity and an exciting challenge in terms of the future of Ontario.
Mr Wiseman: Thank you for coming. I am the person who chose you and I have a very specific reason. I believe the planning process in southern Ontario lacks any resemblance to intelligent planning. I think what we are doing to our agricultural land in the greater Toronto area is a crime against the next generation. I really felt that it would be important to have someone come who has your kind of background to either tell me that I am losing it or perhaps explain how it is that so many intelligent people can continue to go down a path that is so totally without any intelligence. Perhaps you do not feel that way, so we could start off with that.
Ms Tyler: Great. You have probably picked the most pressing issue in terms of southern Ontario to start off with. Perhaps it might be useful that a friend of mine who was a reeve of one of the municipalities adjacent to Waterloo, where there is a great deal of pressure for urban development, put it simply that the best cash crop for farmers right now is houses. I think that has, in part, driven much of the loss of agricultural land, the incredible pressure for growth, which to some extent has slowed down given recent economic conditions.
I think the issue of how we use our land and the loss of that land in terms of the future legacy is a problem I know the government has taken a strong stand with respect to sustainability and agricultural and environmental interaction. Part of it is simply the institutional framework within which planners work and the competing pressures and interests that go for a scarce resource. As the land resource becomes scarcer under pressure, it becomes more strategic, and that means the use of it is prone to far more pressures, both economic and social, not to mention environmental, than before.
There has been a strong feeling, certainly in the part of Ontario I am currently living in, that the economic interests have far outweighed the social and environmental interests. That has been part of the concern for why development seems to go unchecked. To some extent, reflecting planning theory and planners in the trenches on the front lines, in terms of advising political leaders both at the local level and at the provincial level about the options available, planning theory has not really established itself very clearly as providing direction. It is still a process of working towards social goals, and those social goals are established through the political process rather than through planners individually.
The issue of the tradeoffs that both politicians and planners have been put in the position of having to make has simply been relatively overwhelming in the period of time the pressure has been on. The new trend in planning that has been developing to try to address this is a concept of something called the "working landscape," where there has been an attempt to identify at a regional level planning strategies that try to maintain necessary landscape ecological processes -- soil, water, air, energy -- at the same time as maximizing use on the land.
It is an inexact science, but I think the problem you started off with and pointed out has reached a critical threshold, certainly within southern Ontario, as well as within other areas of Canada, the lower mainland of British Columbia in particular. I tend to agree with you that the tradeoffs from an agricultural point of view are getting to the point where, economics aside, in terms of wise future resource use and any hope for so-called sustainability, a balance between social, economic and environmental is not going to be met if there is not strong policy with regard to the management of that land with respect to land use.
1100
Mr Wiseman: Your appointment is to the Agricultural Research Institute of Ontario. How would you see the Agricultural Research Institute of Ontario helping to alleviate the pressures on the farmer? We all know the farmer is not getting enough payback for the labour and investment he is putting in. This is a really serious problem in southern Ontario. Do you have any insights or anything you can offer in terms of what you think could be done at the research institute?
Ms Tyler: The research institute itself has come forward with 17 recommendations that outline what it thinks the priorities should be, including two major research thrusts, one in world community development and the other in environmental management, at least air, water and soil. I think that if they proceed with those recommendations to establish those two new research trust funds, research in both of those areas would go a long way to addressing that.
I think more specifically of two aspects of it. The sustainability or the ongoing maintenance of the rural community or the development of the rural community is a consequence of new technology. Again, there are essentially six priorities. Both the ARIO and the Ontario agricultural services co-ordinating committee agreed on six priorities. Of those, two, the idea of identifying the role of future community development interests within rural communities and the aspect of new technology, could go a long way, because I do not think agriculture as an industry is really that much different from any other industry in the sense that there is going to be restructuring, there are going to be changes in technology and there is going to be retooling with respect to human resource training as well as technical training.
I think agriculture is moving into that transition zone, so potentially these issues of technology transfer, as well as a relook at the role of development priorities and lifestyles within rural communities, could go a long way to addressing some of those things. It is a mechanism of social change, but computerization, the use of computer technology and information technologies in agriculture to increase efficiencies in productivity is coming. They are here. To do that requires a certain human resource base and training. I think that if the institute is able to pursue two new research areas in community development and in technology and is able, together with OASCC, to address its research priorities, particularly dealing with human resources and technology, that may form the basis for a new vision for agriculture as an industry.
Mr Wiseman: Is there a continuing role for the family farm in this vision?
Ms Tyler: I certainly hope so. I hope there is a continuing role for families in any vision, but I think that actually more than anything we seem to go in linear trends. There has been this incredible migration away from the family farm and into urban areas and urban agglomerates, but I think what we are beginning to see -- I do not think the area around Toronto is that different from the area around Waterloo -- is almost a reversal of that trend. The Waterloo region's Citizens' Advisory Committee on Environmental Quality, which I was involved in, identified a strong preference among people to return to the country, to return to small towns in search of the village vision of a form of lifestyle and a quality of life that people feel is represented in those agricultural areas.
In some ways I think that is still very much a part of our cultural value system, but on the other hand we also have to be careful we do not kill the goose that laid the golden egg. This same problem, the first one you identified, of this incredible mass migration back into farm areas to take it over in terms of subdivisions and bedroom communities has to be balanced by this need to maintain environmental quality and a quality of life that is available in agricultural communities, meaning the family farm.
Mr Marchese: What kind of farming? I am very interested in that. Is it viable economically?
Ms Tyler: The nice thing about economics is that you can prove anything if you use the right statistics or the right formula. If we start taking into the equations and into the cost-benefit analysis the types of costs in terms of environmental resources that are borne by the public sector in terms of the downside of not using organic farming, then you can certainly make organic farming look very attractive from an economic point of view.
Mr Grandmaître: I listened to your planning concerns with great interest. If you were the Minister of Municipal Affairs and were given the responsibility of amending the Planning Act, how would you do it?
Ms Tyler: To be perfectly honest, I think I would probably follow a line of thinking that previous Ontario governments have done, and that is not to look just at the Planning Act, but to look at a group of acts or a series of acts that are related. I think the process is called getting our acts together. It would involve looking at the Municipal Act, probably at the Planning Act and quite possibly at one of the acts with respect to the ministries of the Environment and Natural Resources.
Mr Grandmaître: The Ministry of Agriculture and Food.
Ms Tyler: Yes. What we need to do is start linking these together, because the repercussions or the interrelationships between them are so significant that with respect to Municipal Affairs we need to broaden it to include a more regional perspective, rather than simply looking at small institutional areas, and start looking more at process and interconnection because of the types of dispersed, deconcentrated settlement patterns that have begun to evolve in the urban region of southern Ontario.
I guess my answer to that is that I would try to address it by linking it to other acts and strengthening its ability to deal with environmental issues -- in the sense of air, water, soil quality -- but also local controls over land use, on which there is some debate as to exactly how much power local authorities actually have under the current act, which is good business for the OMB, but I think in terms of local control and planning it lacks something.
Mr Grandmaître: The process you have pointed out is happening now. Municipal Affairs and Agriculture and Food and all these ministries and offices do get together and amend the Planning Act. My big concern, and it has been my concern for the last 15 years, is that we would take months and months to introduce legislation to make the Planning Act much stronger, yet we are providing people with intervenor funding, with all kinds of opportunity to object, not a second but a third and a fourth time, to to that same Planning Act that we spent millions of dollars in introducing. I find this ridiculous, that we would spend millions of dollars introducing what we think is a solid Planning Act, and then we provide moneys for groups to fight that same Planning Act.
Ms Tyler: All I can say is that it is perhaps endemic in the style of democracy or the style of government we have within the province and within Canada and by tradition. This is not in any way to indicate that the type of work that has been done in putting new ideas together is lacking in any way. I think the biggest problem in any plan is its implementation. Unless you are able to deal effectively with all the different interest groups and stakeholders who will be involved in implementing it, then the effectiveness of the planning is limited. I am not going to try to defend the costs involved, but potentially, in the long run, the implementation may be more effective because we at least have had a forum through which groups of different interests have had a chance to either mediate or identify some common ground so that the implementation would be more effective.
1110
Mr McGuinty: Dr Tyler, I have just been reviewing some of the literature put out by ARIO and it seems fairly sophisticated in terms of the kinds of research it is conducting. I am not from a farming community and I do not pretend to know much about farming, but I have met with farmers and one of the concerns they are expressing is that it is very difficult today to make a dollar on the farm. They are also concerned that with regard to their ability to use pesticides and other forms of chemicals to keep production up, that practice may no longer be permitted. What are your views on that?
Ms Tyler: It is not just a question of rights to pursue an economic activity. One of the things the majority of farmers understand is that it is very expensive to use artificial or chemical means to stimulate productivity and that you get caught in that vicious cycle of having to spend a lot of money to stimulate production to make money. But the problem, and most farmers I have talked to and I am sure you have talked to have identified it, is that the long-term problem of chemical agriculture is that it depletes the organic content of the soil to such an extent that it becomes incapable of production without that kind of chemical stimulus. In the long run, you not only lower your production, but you lose money. The majority of farmers are not so much concerned with being able to continue to use pesticides, but they are concerned with being able to find ways and means by which they can increase or continue the productivity of their land, at the same time meeting certain economic ends.
Mr McGuinty: Do you know if the institute is conducting research specifically in that area?
Ms Tyler: Yes, it is, and also part of this new research recommendation -- I think it was number 14 of the 17 it recommended -- was to enhance concentration on research into soil, water and air in terms of the basic elements that go together to create the agricultural layer of the landscape. I think that in people's minds the issue is, if our agricultural practices are decreasing our productivity, then we have a real problem. There is some research in that area now, but the enhancement of it, particularly long-term effects in terms of potential climatic change and aridity and irrigation and the impacts that has on soil, some of these longer-term horizons are also targeted in those research recommendations.
Mr McGuinty: Is our location in terms of our position on the globe any particular obstacle? I know they are more advanced in terms of some of the programs they have for organic farming in California and some of the southern states than we are. Does that factor into this at all? Is that going to make it more difficult for our farmers to adopt those kinds of programs?
Ms Tyler: The best understanding I have from the research institute on climatic change at the University of Waterloo is that for southern Ontario, the particular type of change we are going to experience is going to be in the type of storm we get. We are not going to get seasonal rains; we are going to get convection storms, and the problem that creates, somewhat along the lines of Texas, with more wind storms and very intense convection storms, is an incredible impact on storm water runoff.
Mr McGuinty: Actually, what I was getting at is the length of our growing season. How does that affect the approach we would take to organic farming?
Ms Tyler: Let's go back to the previous point. With the soil erosion problems and the type of agricultural drainage and engineering we are using may have to be modified. We may have to modify that because the growing season will potentially be longer, but more extreme. In other words, there is a certain range which, in terms of temperature, is optimal, but then you start pushing the optimal range, which we would do. Then we may identify a more adaptive switch in the type of cropping that is done and the type of agricultural engineering and irrigation for drainage purposes for clay soils, of which we have a number, which create particular problems. So it will be specific and regional. My understanding from talking to ARIO is that the research stations that are administered under contract by the University of Guelph and the two that are proposed are intended to look at similar impacts on different soil types. I think the answer is soil-specific in terms of type.
Mr McLean: Can you tell me what experience you have had in the agricultural field?
Ms Tyler: I would be happy to. I grew up in a family where my father was a crop adjuster for Co-operative Hail Insurance Co, so I started out having some familiarity. I worked for the federal Department of Agriculture at the Lethbridge research station in veterinary entomology, doing biological control for the warble fly, a particular pest in southern Alberta. Then at one point I worked as a ranch hand at a canyon ranch in Hundred Mile House, BC, for a year on a sabbatical from graduate school. We were doing a specialized breeding program in artificial insemination of Simmental cattle and quarter horses, a particular American quarter horse breed that the owner of the ranch was doing. We had the whole mixed farm -- sheep, cropping, irrigation -- so I have had some direct experience in terms of working in a farming area and also through the agriculture research station in Lethbridge.
Mr McLean: You have been asked some questions, and one question pertained to farmers not getting paid enough for their produce. You answered it by talking about the research trust fund and community development. We never got an answer to how farmers are going to get paid more. You were asked a question with regard to how they can stay on the family farm, and you said economics can prove anything if you have the right formula. You are talking like a lawyer now. Farmers cannot make a dollar on the farm was another question, and you talked about chemicals. I would like to know from you how we are going to keep the farmers on the farm when they are getting $2 a bushel and $75 for a ton of grain, less than they were getting in the 1930s. How are we going to keep them on the farm?
Ms Tyler: I have to qualify my answer by saying that if I knew the answer, I would probably be an elected official or someone far more important than I am right now. What I am trying to get at is that my area of expertise is not economics, and I am also not in a position to talk about some of the global externalities that are affecting market prices, not just in agriculture but in all other industrial sectors that are experiencing the same problems that agriculture is. I do not think even the government of Canada or the government of Ontario really understands or knows what is best in terms of approaching that problem.
All I am trying to suggest is that from the point of view of what research can do, which is the function of the Agricultural Research Institute of Ontario, there are certain areas that we can look into that would try to balance or change economic efficiencies. Technology can change economic efficiencies. The types of chemicals or the types of farming practices can change economic efficiencies. But the things that influence market factors go well beyond local issues and well beyond my expertise and the mandate of ARIO. In all honesty, I could probably try to give you a personal insight, but it would not be based on any kind of expertise.
Mr McLean: I do not think anybody has the answer, and if they had, I would like to know who it is. We were talking to the bankers the other day with the Minister of Agriculture and Food here, and nobody seems to know what the answer is for better prices for their products. Somebody has to find it pretty soon or we are going to have thousands and thousand of people out there who have land sitting vacant. It is unfortunate. I think methanol to use corn is going to be one of our saviours if we can get on with making fuel out of that.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Doctor, for being here today. We appreciate it. Good luck.
JOHN EAKINS
The Chair: The next witness, again a selection of the government party, is John Eakins, who is the intended appointee as a member of Ontario Place Corp board of directors and no stranger to this room. Mr Eakins, come forward, please. Welcome to the committee. It is good to see you again. Do you have any opening comments before we get into questions?
Mr Eakins: No. It is great to be back. It is, I guess, one year since I was in the building, and it is great just to come back and say hello and see how things are going.
Mr Waters: I would like to welcome you to the committee. It is nice to finally actually meet you. As an aside, I have a brother-in-law in your riding with the same name who keeps getting your mail, so in my family you have been well known for a number of years.
I would like to congratulate you on it. I would like your opinion on the change that has been instituted this year at Ontario Place, without having the admission charge, whether you feel that is a positive step or you are supportive of that. I guess the mind is still open on the topic.
1120
Mr Eakins: Thank you for the opportunity to be here and answer any questions any members might have. With regard to Ontario Place, it is an institution close to my heart. I have some very strong feelings about Ontario Place.
With regard to your question, I think that was an interesting initiative they took this year. I do not know the full background of how successful it has been, but it has always been my view that Ontario Place should be available to all citizens and that many people who cannot afford to access that facility should not be kept away because of financial resources. I see it as a focus for Ontario and I think the step the board and government have taken in that regard is a very interesting one. Trying to make up the revenues from within rather than without looks like an interesting idea. I look forward to hearing more about it.
Mr Wiseman: I have two questions. Do you have any idea how many residents from your local area would make it to Ontario Place or any of the cultural events in Toronto?
Mr Eakins: I think the area where I live would be symbolic of many areas of the province. When they have an opportunity, they like to visit Ontario Place. Many people attend when there is a special program of interest to them. I know that in my former life I had lots of calls for tickets for people to be able to attend certain concerts. There is no doubt that the majority of the people are from the larger Metro area, but being the focus it is for the province, I think it should be available for everyone. I feel it is being accessed by a wider area than we really think.
Mr Wiseman: To continue, in our background notes, I am going to quote, "Ontario Place has never attained self-sufficiency in its operating budget: It regularly finances about 80% of this budget out of its own revenues, but the remaining 20% comes from the province in the form of an annual operating grant." Do you think it should be a goal that Ontario Place should achieve self-sufficiency in its revenue?
Mr Eakins: I think it is a good objective and I really feel that Ontario Place must be administered well. I do not think it should be a sink-hole for a lot of provincial funds to be put in there. On the other hand, I think we have to look at what is the purpose of Ontario Place. I see it personally, through my earlier responsibilities, as a focus for the province for visitors, and especially for the tourism industry, which is badly in need of support at this time and is one of the great industries of the province, to which we sometimes do not give the profile we should. I see Ontario Place as serving that interest.
We have to look at what the objectives are and to what extent the investment put into Ontario Place serves that purpose. Having said that, I think we should aim to operate in the black if it is at all possible. That is maybe why one of the initiatives this year was to have free admission but pay for the concerts. It is an interesting concept and perhaps there are other areas Ontario Place might develop to bring us closer to breaking even.
Mr Wiseman: That was actually my next question. Do you have any ideas or plans you would like to implement to promote Ontario Place?
Mr Eakins: I do not have any preconceived ideas of what should be done, because I am not sure what is being done at the present time. The present initiative is a good one. I feel there are a number of areas we might give more focus to, so it is more attractive than even it is today to visitors from outside.
I think it is a very unique facility. We have something many jurisdictions do not have, and with a little work we can give it a much higher profile. If it is going to be successful, then it has to have that profile. If it is going to be there, we should do a good job on it or not have it at all. I think our tourism hospitality industry is one of the greatest industries in this country, and in my view we have not done enough to give it the importance it deserves. Having said that, I think Ontario Place ties in really well with it.
The Chair: Anything else from government members? You have a couple of minutes. Do you want to utilize it?
Mr Wiseman: Not at the moment.
Mr McGuinty: Mr Eakins, my House leader Jim Bradley was concerned about your presence here and he asked me specifically to ask you if you had ever been a member of the New Democratic Party.
Mr Eakins: I read Mr Bradley fairly well.
Mr Marchese: You were not expecting an answer, were you?
Mr McGuinty: Actually I just have a general question. Mr Eakins, when times are tough, and these are tough times, some of the things that we have taken for granted or that we have allowed to go on become subject to question. If I were living in Kenora, for instance, and learned that Ontario Place was using up some tax revenues and not even breaking even, what argument would you make that would encourage me to continue supporting Ontario Place? I would not be able to visit it. Friends who come to see me would not be going to Ontario Place.
Mr Eakins: That is a good question. I see Ontario Place as a focus for the total province, the Metropolitan Toronto area being the centre of government and many other areas. People come from all countries of the world and most come to the Metro area. I see it as a place to sell the province to people from afar.
The people of Kenora or far northern Ontario might not be able to access it to the degree that others can. I think what we should be doing is making sure there are those facilities, and perhaps I am speaking out of line, but I feel the tourism industry should be in a state where we provide attractions in various parts of the province. We should not say, "Because they can't access it, we shouldn't have it."
I think we should look at ways of promoting the north down here as well as providing facilities in northern Ontario. I think a number of steps were taken a while back to do that, because northern Ontario is a beautiful area of the world and we should be doing things to help the north rather than be divisive. I think that can be done. Certainly my view of Ontario Place is that it should be used as a focus, a focal point to promote the entire province through the people we can bring here.
The Chair: Mr Eakins, Mr McLean asked me to convey to you his best wishes and his full support for your nomination. He had to go back to his riding. I want to echo that as well and wish you well with your new responsibilities.
The final matter on our agenda is the determination of whether or not the committee concurs in the appointments that were reviewed. This is a new element of the new standing order. We used to do this at the subsequent meeting. I would like to initiate another procedure, unless there is a dissenting voice heard, that we deal with all the intended appointees in one motion. What I am looking for from some member of the committee is a motion to concur with the intended appointments reviewed today. It is moved by Mr Wiseman. Is there any discussion on any of the appointees who appeared before us?
Mr McGuinty: Just a point of clarification: Are we voting sort of en bloc here? Is that what we are doing?
The Chair: Yes. There will be occasions when a member or members will want to express concern about a specific appointee and then we will have to deal with them on an individual basis, but we do not appear to have that sort of thing today. All in favour of the motion? Opposed?
Motion agreed to.
The Chair: That is it. Thank you very much. The meeting is adjourned.
The committee adjourned at 1131.