INTENDED
APPOINTMENTS
ROBERT DOBSON
CONTENTS
Wednesday 27 November 1996
Intended appointments
Mr Robert Dobson
Ms Marie Hubbard
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Chair / Président: Mr Floyd Laughren (Nickel Belt ND)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Président: Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt ND)
*Mr RickBartolucci (Sudbury L)
*Mr BruceCrozier (Essex South / -Sud L)
*Mr EdDoyle (Wentworth East / -Est PC)
*Mr Douglas B. Ford (Etobicoke-Humber PC)
*Mr GaryFox (Prince Edward-Lennox-South Hastings /
Prince Edward-Lennox-Hastings-Sud PC)
*Mr MichaelGravelle (Port Arthur L)
*Mr BertJohnson (Perth PC)
*Mr PeterKormos (Welland-Thorold ND)
*Mr FloydLaughren (Nickel Belt ND)
Mr Gary L. Leadston (Kitchener-Wilmot PC)
*Mr DanNewman (Scarborough Centre / -Centre PC)
*Mr Peter L. Preston (Brant-Haldimand PC)
Mr TonySilipo (Dovercourt ND)
*Mr BobWood (London South / -Sud PC)
*In attendance /présents
Substitutions present /Membres remplaçants présents:
Mr FrankSheehan (Lincoln PC) for Mr Leadston
Clerk /Greffière: Ms Donna Bryce
Staff / Personnel: Mr David Pond, research officer, Legislative Research Service
The committee met at 1004 in room 228.
INTENDED APPOINTMENTS
ROBERT DOBSON
Review of intended appointment, selected by third party: Robert Dobson, intended appointee as member, City of Etobicoke Health Unit Board.
The Chair (Mr Floyd Laughren): The standing committee will come to order. We have two intended appointments this morning. We have no subcommittee report this morning because we dealt with two of them last week. Before we start, Dr Pond has a word to say.
Mr David Pond: With regard to the first witness, Mr Dobson, the secretary has asked me to correct something on the record. On page 3 of my briefing paper I list the witness as a certified management accountant. When I wrote that I was relying on the information in the certificate the subcommittee gets, but apparently the witness is working towards that degree. That's the end of the correction.
The Chair: Mr Dobson, we welcome you to the committee. Would you have a seat. It's tradition that you be given an opportunity to say a few words to the committee, if you so choose, and then the committee members can ask questions of you.
Mr Robert Dobson: Thank you, Chair. Yes, I will take two or three minutes. Good morning.
I grew up in Dundas, came to Toronto and went to the Ryerson Institute of Technology as a co-op student with Avro aircraft. We were there one day a week at school and four days a week in the shop. I subsequently terminated my 11 years with Avro when the Arrow was cancelled. I ended up as a cost clerk with Massey-Ferguson, at which time I took the first three years of the RIA, which has subsequently evolved to the CMA.
Rather than move to Des Moines, Iowa, when the North American operations were moved there by Massey-Ferguson, I stayed in Toronto and went with the Toronto-Dominion Bank to install an integrated planning system. I stayed with them till I retired four years ago. I was with them 27 years. When I retired as vice-president of planning, my main function was planning expense management, capital expenditure planning and working with the human resource management team.
Since my retirement I've worked with the Business Development Bank as a case counsellor, assisting small business in preparing business plans, most of which were related to financing. I now administer some venture loans that they have with small business. During that time I've worked in eastern Europe in the Czech Republic as a volunteer. My wife and I spent two five-week periods there assisting the banking industry, which is just evolving from the state banking system, to install planning systems in one of the banks there.
During my retirement, and prior, I've been a director of the Etobicoke Chamber of Commerce, I've been a part of the Etobicoke Federation of Ratepayers -- I was a director -- and a director of the Markland homes. I ran for election at the last election for trustee. I'm a trustee in ward 4 of the Etobicoke board. So my activities these days are with the Business Development Bank, the Etobicoke Chamber of Commerce and the Etobicoke Board of Education.
I've lived in Etobicoke since 1957. My sons grew up there. We're still living there. One is with Metro Ambulance, working on his paramedic 2, and another is a technologist in Georgetown. I play a little golf in the summer, I ski a little bit in the winter. I have an aerobatics endorsement on my pilot's licence and I spend a little time when I can afford it doing that sort of activity.
I'm very much involved in Etobicoke. I've lived there, I know the city well. I have gone before the city council for various delegations at times, mainly supporting the chamber of commerce. As an opening statement, I hope that gives some kind of background without going unduly long.
The Chair: Are there any questions from government members?
Mr Bob Wood (London South): We'll reserve our time, Mr Chairman.
The Chair: From the official opposition, Mr Bartolucci.
Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): Good morning, Mr Dobson. Just a few questions with regard to the role, because I see a member of a board of health to be a very significant role in the community. How would you define your role in relationship to your responsibility to the community?
Mr Dobson: Maybe I can answer it in two parts. I think as a citizen of Etobicoke I have a responsibility to do what I can, particularly in my current situation where I have time and a fair amount of experience. I have talked to the chair of the board, Irene Jones, who's a councillor, and I've talked to Dr Egbert, who is the medical officer, and his secretary, who gave me a considerable amount of information.
Where I see my role is, I believe I have some experience through my work in planning and control, organization structure, and having discussed the current issues with both Irene Jones and with Dr Egbert -- for instance, they've downsized that board by 22 nurses and they're going through an organizational change to try to use what they've got and do as much of what they have been doing. I think I can meet my responsibility as a citizen in participating if it's possible, once I familiarize myself with the organization, to work to meet those key objectives that they outlined to me in the last day or two.
1010
Mr Bartolucci: I concur with you that your personal opinions are going to shape the policy as an individual member of a board and so that personal opinion is very important. Let's talk about a few of the areas with regard to nutrition, because you know as a board member you are going to be responsible for setting the nutrition education patterns in Etobicoke. Are you in agreement with me that this type of education funding should be increased, as opposed to being decreased?
Mr Dobson: There's no question, from my own experience as a trustee with breakfast programs, particularly in north Etobicoke, there's definitely a need. I won't go into the cultural situation, but there is definitely a need. It's being met to a considerable degree. I realize that at the last meeting of the police liaison committee, on which I represent the chamber, it was brought to our attention that the program had been cut back. That was just a month ago. Until I am involved with the organization and see what the priorities are of the majority, as well as myself, I really can't answer how you would distribute what funding is available.
Now I gather from my discussions with Irene Jones and with the doctor that they've done quite a good job of trying to set priorities in that board, going through all of the issues. There are numerous issues, but nutrition is one of them, there's no question. That's on their list. If you were to ask me the kinds of things they deal with -- AIDS program, nutrition --
Mr Bartolucci: I know the kinds of things they deal with, so thank you very much for your answer. I am glad to hear from you that you believe there should be more funding for education with regard to nutrition, because it is obviously preventive medicine, as I'm sure you are aware and I think you've said.
Mr Dobson: Oh, yes.
Mr Bartolucci: Let's go back to another issue, that of family health and counselling etc. Do you believe there should be privileged information between patient and doctor for those under the age of 16?
Mr Dobson: I am awfully sorry. I just don't know enough about the legal implications or the rights implications. I really can't answer that. I'd have to research that.
Mr Bartolucci: Okay.
Mr Dobson: I'm sorry. I just don't know enough about it.
Mr Bartolucci: Let's deal with one final area that you'll be concerned with, and that's with regard to public health education. Whom do you think public health educators should be accountable to? Should they be accountable to the province of Ontario or should they be accountable to the Etobicoke city council?
Mr Dobson: This is an opinion based on limited information, but I think it would have to be shared. It would also have to be shared with the public, the community. The one good thing I noticed about the committee structure here: There are four councillors on it, there are three provincial appointees and then there are five I believe from the general public. I know Irene Jones, when I talked to her last night, felt that was a very key issue. But to answer your question, I think it would have to be shared, probably with the medical profession as well as the politicians.
Mr Bartolucci: Who should be responsible for the funding of that?
Mr Dobson: It's funded 60-40 at the present time. I guess if the argument is that the province is responsible for health, if that argument says it is, one would have to say the province is responsible.
Mr Bartolucci: Thank you, Mr Dobson.
Mr Dobson: It's a pleasure.
Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex South): Good morning, Mr Dobson. I think by reviewing the information we have on you and your answers to questions, there's no doubt we'll be supporting your appointment. I see by your background that you're a person of many accomplishments, not the least of which is being a private pilot. This is more a personal question, because I happen to be one too: Do you have your own aircraft?
Mr Dobson: No, I don't, never have.
Mr Crozier: Oh, gee, you share my wish as well. I just wanted to emphasize what his accomplishments were and how difficult it is to maintain those high standards of a private pilot. Right?
Mr Dobson: That's true. I know every year when I take my aviation medical, which was two years ago, I always have that fear that they'll take my licence or not give it back.
Mr Crozier: Yes. Do I have just a little bit of time? There is a question that I'd like to pose to you that's a concern that has arisen in my riding. You either may know or will find out that with the anti-smoking laws that we have in the province, a doughnut shop can be a smoking environment. The doughnuts are all up on the wall, they prepare them there, and yet it can have a smoking environment with no partitions and so forth.
We have in my home town, as a matter of fact, a number of small, mixed-retail and coffee-shop establishments, where you can go in and get a coffee and a fried egg sandwich or a hamburger or something at one end of the store and they also sell lottery tickets, they sell a small number of groceries, they sell milk, they have videos, they have newspapers.
The local health unit has warned these establishments that if they don't partition off the area in which there's smoking, they're going to be charged and subsequently taken to court, in which case I guess we'll really find out if the law is fair or not, because there's a bulletin out from the Ministry of Health that is rather ambiguous. It says that it depends on where they get most of their revenue from, as opposed to whether they're a place where food is prepared or a retail. If their retail is the greater amount, then they can't have smoking there.
Any thoughts on that kind of thing, where we have small businesses that are of mixed type of business and our smoking bylaws are applied, it would appear, unfairly in one case as opposed to another?
Mr Dobson: There's no doubt, the work I've done with small business in the last four years, it doesn't take very much to put them into financial distress. Additional costs or loss of revenue, that's a consideration. But I think we all know now and it's well known that smoking, secondhand smoke in particular, is dangerous to your health.
Of course, in any group that I'm in it would be a majority that would decide, but my opinion personally is that in time we must have all public places free of smoke -- cigarette smoke, pipe smoke, cigar smoke. If it requires partitioning a small area off to provide a place for the smokers, it's sort of a concession because employees still have to go in. They're the missing people in this issue, because employees have to work in those smoke areas. I worry about that, because I don't think employees have been given a great deal of consideration.
But I would certainly personally -- it would be my opinion -- as quickly as possible virtually make a smoke-free environment in every public place. If you have an option to go into a smoke area, well, that's your option. I still can't deal properly, though, with the employees who have to work in that.
This is very personal. I have four brothers, and there's muscular dystrophy in our family, which I've traced back to Ireland. Only one of my brothers contracted it. His three sons have it. They've all been disabled from a young age, but unfortunately the youngest and his mother live together and they both smoke. Now, he's only 35 years of age, but he has cancer of the lungs because he's lived in a smoke environment almost his entire life; it's a mobile home in Nova Scotia. That's personal, and so that might bias my own feelings. But it's telling me that you should really cordon it off and have a smoke-free environment.
1020
Mr Crozier: That's interesting, because I suspect you're going to run into this situation in your local health unit. The way I've tried to deal with our local health unit is, however the ministry bulletin is interpreted, if it's interpreted evenly, not only in one or two or three venues but all across the province, then it's easier to accept and certainly easier to abide by. I just bring that up. I suggest you may run into it like I have in the near future.
Mr Peter Kormos (Welland-Thorold): I remember the heat the last government took when it amended the legislation controlling the sale of tobacco -- and mind you, not unsympathetic; I think one of the biggest lobbies was the coin-op vending machine dealers. The federal government just crapped out on its legislation, or at least deferred it. One has to wonder why.
But to have something to the effect of a 10-year program with joint effort between the feds and the provincial governments with, literally, the goal of destroying the tobacco industry in Canada -- I think they're one of the most evil, insidious; they're merchants of death. They're extremely profitable. We wouldn't tolerate a crack cocaine dealer using glitzy ads or sponsoring the ballet or things like that to peddle its product. But the crazy thing is that it's young people now who are smoking more than their parents.
I agree with this gentleman, his attitude towards the tobacco industry. I say that as a person who's been a smoker and a non-smoker and a smoker and a non-smoker. I know how addictive the substance is.
You were at Avro, obviously, at that infamous time with the cancellation of the Arrow. Lately there have been some documentaries. I'm told not a single Arrow or prototype exists any more.
Mr Dobson: That's correct.
Mr Kormos: How did the orders come down? How much production had there been?
Mr Dobson: I was a production planner on the fuel system on the Arrow. There had been five Mark 1s produced with the American General Electric J-75 engine. They were all flying. The third aircraft had done 1,250 miles an hour over the Edgar radar station. The first Mark 2 had been completed, out of total production tooling. The interesting thing about Avro is that they did not build prototypes for the Arrow. The first aircraft came out of production tooling.
When it was cancelled, no one to this day, and I have a number of books on it, knows exactly who gave the order. But what was devastating was not so much that they cancelled it but that within two weeks all those aircraft and fixtures and jigs were destroyed. I was called back because I had 10 years' seniority. Six weeks later there was nothing left. All the aircraft had been cut up, the fixtures, the jigs, the bays were empty. It was gone forever.
I don't want to get into that. I could talk about that --
Mr Kormos: I'm sure you could.
Mr Dobson: In fact, a week last Friday I signed up on the Internet and when I put down my password, "Avro Arrow," I spent two hours discussing with a young man the whole process with the aircraft and what we lost. We lost a great engineering team, that's what we lost. However, I won't take your time and go on with that. But for 12,000 people it was devastating. We had one hour's notice. I picked up my drafting tools and went home and went door to door. I ended up walking along King Street at Strachan, went into the Massey office and said, "I'm looking for a job." The next thing I knew, I was a cost clerk.
Mr Kormos: Talk about bad luck, you move from Avro to Massey-Ferguson. The gods weren't kind to you at the time.
Mr Dobson: No, they weren't. However, I've got no complaints.
Mr Kormos: All hell broke loose down in Niagara over the recent appointment to the district health council by this government because the appointment was of a person who had not gone through the protocols that are laid out for proposing potential appointees. That is to say that the requirement is -- and the government's been avoiding this requirement for the last 14 or 15 months -- that the district health council refer people to the government as potential appointees. You indicated you spoke with the chair and with at least one other member.
Mr Dobson: Yes.
Mr Kormos: What was the process that you've gone through in terms of ending up here today as a potential appointee?
Mr Dobson: First of all, I spoke with the chair, and the chair had put forward, I believe, through some system one or two names for provincial appointments. But the way I arrived here is, I had a call from John Hastings, one of his assistants, I guess about two months ago asking if I would like to work on a committee. I had no idea what that meant. I said, "Well, if it's a committee of government, certainly." Then I had a call and we went over a list of committees; there seemed to be hundreds of them. I suggested that the one I thought I could feel most comfortable in and be most successful in was with the City of Etobicoke Health Unit.
I'm not really sure exactly why Mr Hastings's assistant, or whatever her position was, called me, other than that in Etobicoke as a school board trustee I have been -- I wouldn't say outspoken, but I have tried to change the education system, the budgetary process, the costs of education. I think possibly it was just that profile, but that's an assumption on my part, because I've never belonged to a political party, and I've never really associated, and it's a bit late in life for me to begin now, with provincial or even federal politicians.
Mr Kormos: Trust me, there's nothing attractive about that prospect at all. I know too many of them, have known too many of them. You're doing fine.
Mr Dobson: If I could say something, I mentioned earlier that my wife and I worked in the Czech Republic for two five-week periods. That's another story. I saw a wonderful country after 45 years of Communism. I saw the human spirit -- no free enterprise, most buildings were unkept. People my age couldn't make decisions because they'd never been permitted to. I learned so much about democracy, its benefits and the free enterprise system. I have to say that when I came back to Canada, particularly after the second trip because I was working with CESO as a volunteer, I just had a whole new awareness of the free enterprise system and the democratic system which I'd never had before.
Mr Kormos: On that one, I've got to beg to differ -- give me a minute, Chair -- because I've got family in Slovakia, not in the Czech Republic, in Slovakia.
Mr Dobson: Slovakia?
Mr Kormos: My old great-aunt, she's 85 years old and a typical, you know, she looks --
Mr Dobson: Slovak.
Mr Kormos: -- like an 85-year-old Slovak granny. But Saturday morning she still takes her cut-up meat, because she still thinks she's cheating the system by going out to the market and selling it on the grey market. There's been free enterprise there. These people are incredible. They've stolen from the state, they've cheated it at every opportunity. Free enterprise, I'm convinced, has been alive and well in places like that, notwithstanding governments that were corrupt and bureaucratic.
I'm not faulting you for the manner in which you got here. That's certainly no fault of your own. But I am expressing concern about how district health councils are supposed to respond to this government when this government circumvents the procedure that's laid out for district health councils.
I suspect everybody here is going to support your appointment, there's no reason not to, other than the fact that the government circumvented the process. That, as I say, has gotten district health councils up in arms and feeling betrayed by the government, saying: "What are you telling us? You're telling us we're supposed to be here as an independent body, independent of political pressure, to give the government advice," but the impression some of them are getting is that if the government doesn't like the advice they're getting, then they'll put their people on without going through the process.
1030
Before, I have opposed appointees because they didn't go through that process, but I'm not going to oppose your appointment, because I'm hoping that you, once you're on the health council, will ensure that the health council is accorded its right to refer appointees to the government rather than the government imposing them on the health council. I'm entrusting you with that, sir, and I hope I can count on you.
Mr Ed Doyle (Wentworth East): You have your aerobatics endorsement, you say?
Mr Dobson: Yes, I do.
Mr Doyle: Do you know Gerry Younger, by any chance?
Mr Dobson: I know of him, yes.
Mr Doyle: Do you fly a Decathlon or a Pitts?
Mr Dobson: I got my endorsement on a Citabria and then I went to a Decathlon, and that's the most advanced aerobatic airplane that I flew. The Brampton Flying Club, which I fly from, got rid of it because of low usage, and now we try to do aerobatics in an aerobat, which is a little testy, but the Decathlon was really the fine machine that I like.
Mr Doyle: One more question: Have you forgiven John Diefenbaker yet?
Mr Dobson: Not really. You know why I haven't? It's because what he destroyed was probably the finest engineering and scientific research team in North America.
Mr Doyle: I think they helped put the men on the moon, didn't they?
Mr Dobson: Yes, they did. They all went south. I didn't go south; a lot of my friends went south. What he really destroyed was an unbelievable scientific organization. Anyway, that's a long time ago.
The Chair: I'm pleased that the committee was able to facilitate this meeting of so many like-minded people this morning. Mr Dobson, thank you for coming before the committee. We appreciate your presence here.
Mr Dobson: Thank you very much, Chair. It's been a pleasure.
MARIE HUBBARD
Review of intended appointment, selected by third party: Marie Hubbard, intended appointee as member, Licence Suspension Appeal Board.
The Chair: Ms Hubbard, welcome to the committee. You've witnessed the process at work. We invite you to make any remarks you'd like to make.
Ms Marie Hubbard: I'm a retired lady and I decided I would like to try to serve on a provincial committee of some sort. To that end and of my own volition I went to the library and looked at the guidebook for various committees that were available. I have had a long-term interest in transportation and as a nurse I saw the carnage that happens on our major transportation networks with people who disobey the law and drive inappropriately.
To that end, that experience shaped my interests a little. In the guidebook on page 519 I discovered this particular committee. I submitted an application with my résumé and selected a number of other committees that I thought I may attempt to get, but this was my priority. On that basis I've put my qualifications before this committee. I particularly support this process. I'm impressed with what I see here this morning. That's as much as I have to say at this moment, sir.
The Chair: Are there any questions from government members at this point?
Mr Dan Newman (Scarborough Centre): We'll reserve our time.
The Chair: Official opposition?
Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur): Good morning, Ms Hubbard. It's interesting to hear you say that you did truly search this out as one of the government boards you'd prefer to sit on. You've done some research on this board too. Have you got any ideas you want to offer the committee in terms of some of the things you'll be looking for, the kind of attitude you'll be bringing. I'm sure you checked out the responsibilities.
Ms Hubbard: I hope I bring to this a very balanced attitude. One of the things I am hearing in the public and with my friends particularly is that they're impressed with what MTO is doing with its inspection division. We're pleased with the interventions from the OPP. Notwithstanding that people break the law and can do things that are inappropriate, I hope I can bring a balanced view to that committee. I have not seen the board in action and I wouldn't dare presume to comment on how it works, but I'll be very interested to see how it works. I would put a high priority on what the staff or the registrar of MTO would have to say about the various appeals. I think I could look at that with fairness and understand that the public -- I support the legislation. I believe we have to do something to monitor people and I think I could bring fairness. I certainly would intend to do my homework, considerably.
Mr Gravelle: One of the rules that has changed is for those drivers who are over 80, that rather than mandatory tests every two years there are different rules in terms of how they can maintain their licences. I must admit that even in my constituency office I have constituents who are calling me. In fact, one last week has had her licence removed and feels this is very unfair. Of course, this is not a political thing. It never is and never can be.
The question this leads to is that there is that dilemma of an individual's right to drive as opposed to the safety of the public in general, and their own safety as well. I'm not sure how one draws a conclusion. The impression I have is that you will probably rely very much upon the officials and the MTO people, who are responding perhaps even more so, than on the individuals themselves.
I know it's a difficult situation, because you don't want to deny people that opportunity. How can you measure it in terms of -- I shouldn't say "especially an older person," because I think it doesn't matter what their age is. Will you be simply in essence having your bias leaning very much towards what the ministry officials tell you, regardless of what the individuals themselves are trying to say?
Ms Hubbard: I think I would have an open mind to listen to the applicant. For instance, if it were a medical issue I bring considerable expertise to that particular area. Sometimes there's a transient problem a senior might have that could be corrected with medication or whatever, so I feel I could be very balanced in that. I would take each individual case, listen to both sides and I hope apply some common sense. I'm also aware that there are people whose livelihood depends upon their having a licence. People learn from experience and they must move on. I suppose, provided there were some assurances from that individual to the committee, I may reconsider.
I would see this as a tough position but one that I would enjoy, and I would certainly be forthright and forthcoming in all I would do and say on that particular board.
Mr Gravelle: Actually, your background will be very useful, because very often it is a medical issue. I had another example of a constituent who told his doctor he was having dizzy spells and his doctor phoned MTO. He denies it. Indeed, this may have been the right thing to do. The person feels this was excessive. He was just indicating this to the doctor and didn't realize it was a possibility in terms of what can happen. I know it's a very delicate matter, and obviously public safety and the safety of the individual are what have to be the basis on which you make a decision. It's a difficult position, and certainly your background could be very useful.
Mr Crozier: Good morning, Ms Hubbard. Just to pursue this a bit more: Within a few short days there will be automatic suspension of a driver's licence for 90 days for anyone who blows over 0.08, I believe it is, or whatever minimum is set, and this is appealable. You've raised the point that people have to make a living. I'm not a lawyer, but we live in a country where you're presumed innocent until proven guilty.
1040
There's a case that's given to us in the research material we have here where "the judge argued that when the board made decisions about whether to uphold ministry suspension of a driver's licence, it had to engage in `a delicate balancing of the private rights of the individual and the public's interest in not being exposed to the unreasonable risk of powerful and potentially dangerous vehicles in the hands of a driver who poses an unreasonable danger.' The judge concluded that in hearings before the board, the onus should be on the registrar of motor vehicles `to show cause why the licence should be suspended and that this onus should be on a balance of probabilities.'"
Having read all that, I, along with most other reasonable-thinking people, would understand why we should get anyone who has reached a level of intoxication that we consider dangerous to be taken off the road and I see no reason why a person shouldn't be removed immediately. But a 90-day suspension automatically, albeit appealable, because I presume you're going to have to hear these appeals -- I hope there won't be a lot of them -- and that it may take some time, how do you feel then? Someone who may support a family, may have a job that depends on their driver's licence, how do you think they're going to cope with that situation and how do you think it's going to solve a problem that we have out there?
Ms Hubbard: First of all, people take responsibility for their own lives. If you're going to drink and drive and put other people in jeopardy as well as yourself, one has to consider that. On the other hand, individuals who commit this drunk driving offence have got to know that there is a suspension of their licence and that there will be a fallout. There will be a hardship to a family. I worked as a nurse clinician in a public office and I know what these kinds of things can do to families. They're devastating.
I believe that the legislation is a good piece of legislation. We have to protect the broad public. If that person can change, can do something about drinking and driving, then that probably is information we could sort out at the table at appeal time.
Mr Crozier: Do you feel the same about reckless drivers?
Ms Hubbard: I passed many this morning.
Mr Crozier: You passed them? Wow.
Ms Hubbard: They passed me on the wrong side of roads on my way in here. It's quite an experience to drive to downtown Toronto, let me tell you, from my area. I still feel I could be sympathetic. On the other hand, I have to balance that with public safety.
Mr Crozier: I'm saying that if this same judge applied this theory to a reckless driver, they have to balance "the private rights of the individual and the public's interest in not being exposed to the unreasonable risk of powerful and potentially dangerous vehicles in the hands of a driver who poses an unreasonable danger."
Some may argue -- as I said, I'm not a lawyer -- that someone who's going on the Gardiner at 180 kilometres an hour is in fact posing an unreasonable danger. Do you think that person's licence should be automatically suspended for 90 days upon appeal?
Ms Hubbard: Yes, I do. What I saw this morning, for instance, was that people pull out of the lines of traffic, go up on curbs, pass you and they can barely get in. I think the OPP have done a good job. I saw them at work this morning. They're making all kinds of interventions and earning their money, and I love to see that. I think some of these drivers need to be dealt with very seriously because they put others in jeopardy.
The Chair: This is the last question, Mr Crozier.
Mr Crozier: Do you drive the 400 series highways and/or the QEW in the area?
Ms Hubbard: Yes.
Mr Crozier: Have you found, like I, that the speed limit since photo-radar was removed has increased from 110 to about 130 kilometres an hour?
Ms Hubbard: I have. I find that it's almost like anarchy out there. People just leave you in the dust, you know. It's very interesting.
Mr Crozier: Well, don't pass any more of those drivers.
Ms Hubbard: No, I won't.
Mr Kormos: I appreciate your mentioning that you would feel some reliance on Ministry of Transportation staff. The problem is that, in short order, there's not going to be any Ministry of Transportation staff. The government announced yesterday the layoff of 705 of them in the few weeks before Christmas. My God. The ministries are being gutted; the office in St Catharines. What they're doing to Niagara region by gutting that office is just phenomenal economically, but again that's not at issue here.
I appreciate it, because that's been my experience too. I just drive an old pickup truck so I sort of put it on cruise control. I do around 105 and put it on cruise. Although I had concerns about the way that photo-radar could be used to punish the owner of a vehicle for insurance purposes, notwithstanding that they promised they wouldn't, when photo-radar was there, driving the 401 or what have you became a little more civilized; it really did.
Again, it's only anecdotal on my part, but the same experience as Mr Crozier and as you had: Within hours of it being repealed, if you will, the speed limit went up again to, what, 130 or 140 kilometres an hour, where if you're doing 105 in your old pickup truck on cruise you feel that you're somehow -- as a matter of fact, there's the fellow who got convicted because he tried to make a point of driving the speed limit up near Ottawa. He actually got convicted of a Criminal Code offence of obstruction, public mischief. I'm surprised. Who would have thought that in a case like that the Ministry of the Attorney General wouldn't have asked that that sort of charge be stayed?
You went to the library on your own.
Ms Hubbard: Yes, I did.
Mr Kormos: You're not working now.
Ms Hubbard: No, I'm retired.
Mr Kormos: How long ago did you make your application?
Ms Hubbard: I made my application a long time ago; in the fall of 1995, I would say, somewhere in there.
Mr Kormos: Did anybody respond to your application?
Ms Hubbard: Yes.
Mr Kormos: What was the nature of that response?
Ms Hubbard: My response was that I had an interest in this particular committee and that I would like to pursue it and -- you know.
Mr Kormos: But you made an application. You wrote a letter at the very least and mailed it to somewhere in the government and somebody responded to that.
Ms Hubbard: Yes.
Mr Kormos: Okay. As I said, what was that response on the government's part?
Ms Hubbard: The response was that this would go in through the process and that I had to follow the process.
Mr Kormos: Did anything else happen between then, which was some time ago, and most recently, obviously, when you were advised that you were being recommended to the committee?
Ms Hubbard: Yes. I had some notification that I was being considered, and I was delighted with that and wanted to proceed.
Mr Kormos: But did anybody interview you?
Ms Hubbard: I had an interview over the telephone. I didn't drive in for one.
Mr Kormos: No, no, fair enough. I'm just curious because again, as you heard me when I was speaking with Mr Dobson earlier, this government has been all over the place on the types of process it uses. I'm optimistic because I'm trying to think, trying to believe, hoping that what we in the opposition are doing on this committee is sort of compelling the government to do things in a little more orderly manner.
Ms Hubbard: I have to assure you that I'm quite impressed with what's happened so far. I feel that the process is an excellent process and I'm happy to come before the committee and lay out who I am, what I am, and have you evaluate my qualifications.
1050
Mr Kormos: We're happy to have you here. Again, I think I can anticipate that everybody on the committee is going to support your nomination, your appointment to this board. But the telephone interview -- because again you should have seen the lack of process until we started raising these issues in the committee. I mean, people were just sort of picked -- you know, like picking applications out of a hat.
Interjection.
Mr Kormos: Well, it's true -- to the point where the government actually withdrew some of their appointees. Do you remember that, Chair? People would come here and it would be exposed --
Interjection.
Mr Kormos: Hold on.
The Chair: Order, please. Let Mr Kormos continue, please.
Mr Kormos: I mean, we went after these people like rabid dogs, no two ways about it. But the government actually withdrew some of them from the process and a couple withdrew themselves. Are you satisfied that the type of interview process that you went through -- again, your appointment's going to be approved, but in terms of other appointments to other boards, agencies and commissions, are you pleased with the type of interview process?
Ms Hubbard: Yes. I can say unequivocally to this committee that I am very impressed with the process. I think it should be continued. I would like to think that the decisions here are based on my qualifications and I feel that I've had a good hearing. Mr Chairman, I'd like to point that out to you specifically because I think the process is the way it should be.
Mr Peter L. Preston (Brant-Haldimand): He doesn't listen to anybody but himself. That's the third time you've had to tell him it was a good deal.
Mr Kormos: Chair, did I forfeit some of my time to Mr Preston?
The Chair: No.
Mr Kormos: Oh, okay. I didn't think I had.
The Chair: I don't think Mr Kormos is being terribly provocative, so I think you should leave him alone, Mr Preston.
Mr Preston: He doesn't have to be.
Mr Kormos: Count your blessings, Mr Preston.
Interjection.
Mr Kormos: Mr Preston, shhhh.
Thank you very much for coming down today. My apologies for any rudeness you might have encountered. Have a safe trip back home and good luck on the board.
The Chair: Any government members have any questions? Mr Preston?
Mr Preston: No.
The Chair: I didn't think so.
Mr Preston: I think the process the lady went through was excellent, as she has told us three or four times.
The Chair: Mr Doyle.
Mr Bert Johnson (Perth): It is good to know that the chaos over the last five years has ended and now we have some --
The Chair: Sorry. You're not Mr Doyle.
Mr Doyle: I wasn't sure there for a minute.
I don't have a question so much as I have a comment, and that is you must have been on the same highway driving in as I was this morning, because I saw a woman combing her hair, reading a catalogue and brushing her teeth, all the same woman, and she was directly in front of me. I wasn't sure whether I should pass her or not. I didn't know whether I wanted her in front of me or behind me. That's my only comment.
The Chair: Any other comments, questions? Thank you, Ms Hubbard, for coming before the committee.
Ms Hubbard: Thank you very much.
The Chair: Are we ready for the concurrences part of the meeting?
Mr Newman: I move concurrence in the intended appointment of Mr Robert Dobson.
The Chair: Do you wish to speak to it or do you wish to wait?
Mr Newman: That's fine.
The Chair: Mr Kormos?
Mr Kormos: I do want to speak to it. Once again, as I indicated while we were speaking with Mr Dobson, I am going to support his appointment because it seems he's again extremely qualified in terms of his skills, in his professional and work background. No two ways about it.
But I am, I tell you, concerned about what the government has done once again in terms of circumventing, which is probably a mild and generous interpretation of what they've done, the role and prerogative of the health council itself. It's been stated over and over and over again --
Mr Newman: It's a health unit.
Mr Kormos: Health unit. It's been stated over and over and over again the type of process that's desirable, and that is that bodies like this are designed to generate their own membership. The government, I believe, here has once again risked politicizing, or the appearance of politicizing, an appointment, and I think that's unfortunate. It's unfortunate for Mr Dobson, but to give him great credit, clearly he spoke with members of the board of the unit and I give him credit for that. But I'm concerned about the manner in which this government has gone about this process. But I have every intention of supporting Mr Dobson's appointment.
The Chair: Any other comments? You've heard the motion. Are you ready for the question? All those in favour of the appointment? It's carried unanimously. Thank you for that.
Mr Newman: I move concurrence in the intended appointment of Ms Marie Hubbard.
The Chair: Any debate on Ms Hubbard's appointment? If not, are you ready for the question? All those in favour? It's carried unanimously. Thank you for that.
There are two items before we adjourn. You may recall that last week Mr John Krauter was here as a prospective appointee to the Halton Housing Authority and he made a comment which raised my antenna about the number of appointments in early 1995 by the former government. I wondered about it and I checked the book and it didn't seem to be in there. Mr Pond did some work, and indeed he referred to the annual report, and there is no annual report of the Halton Housing Authority. What he was referring to was the Halton Non-Profit Housing Corp. I hope that by now he's sorted out what he's being appointed to, because he was referring to something totally different from what he was being appointed to, the Halton Housing Authority. I wanted to clear that up for the committee.
Second, we have a note from the Office of the Premier, the public appointments secretariat, indicating that the potential appointment of Laurie Scott to the Haliburton, Kawartha and Pine Ridge District Health Council has been withdrawn. You may remember that she was the intended appointee who didn't make it last week. So they've withdrawn that intended appointment.
I think we're up to speed on everything, and I thank you very much. We're adjourned.
The committee adjourned at 1057.