STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
COMITÉ PERMANENT DES ORGANISMES GOUVERNEMENTAUX
Tuesday 27 March 2012 Mardi 27 mars 2012
MR. TED CALLAGHAN
The committee met at 0900 in committee room 1.
MR. TED CALLAGHAN
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Ted Callaghan, intended appointee as member, Council of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Good morning, everybody. Welcome to the Standing Committee on Government Agencies. We have two intended appointments this morning, the first being Mr. Ted Callaghan, member, Council of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario. Is Mr. Callaghan here? Mr. Callaghan, please come forward.
Mr. Callaghan is nominated as a member, Council of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario. He’ll begin with a brief statement, if he wishes.
Any time used for your statement, Mr. Callaghan, will be deducted from the government’s time for questions. Each party will then have 10 minutes to ask you questions. Questioning will start with the official opposition. We’ll open the floor and ask you to make your presentation. Thank you very much for being here this morning.
Mr. Ted Callaghan: Mr. Chair, thank you very much and to the committee members. I want to thank you for this opportunity to come here today to get consent for this possible appointment to the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario.
Just a brief introduction of myself—I’ll probably speak for about four or five minutes today. First off, what brought me here to this chair today is, back in 1969, I became a Maritimes boy that moved to Sudbury and got hired on at what at that time was International Nickel. I became employed with them. I finished a career with them in 2009; I worked 40 years at Inco. During that time, I also became very involved with the community, especially in my 30s. At 33 or 34 I started to become really involved in the community; I belonged to the Lions Club for over 10 years. I used to write letters to the editor. So I became very involved in the community.
I was approached in 1991 to run for council. I ran for city council in 1991 and I lost that particular race by 69 votes. I didn’t make the same mistakes in the next campaign in 1994, and I got elected and served five consecutive terms for 16 years on city council, which resulted from four elections and one acclamation. Just bringing that to this particular committee that I’m looking for this morning, when you serve on council you generate a lot of knowledge related to how to deal with people, how to arrive at consensus. You learn how to really get along with people and be recognized in the community. I became a very recognized person in the community. As you all know as politicians here today, the longer you serve on council, or in this position here, it’s not a part-time job anymore; it’s a full-time job, because you’re well known in the community and all across the wards people call you and talk to you and all the rest of it. So I have that vast experience related to that.
Today, I know that you were given, I’m sure, a copy of my resumé. You’ll notice in my resumé that I served in various committees at various levels for the 16 years I was on council. For eight years I served as budget chair, for example, which requires all kinds of stickhandling, consensus, talking to people, lowering expectations and all the stuff that’s associated. But also, when you look at my resumé you’ll see that I chaired many committees, vice-chaired many committees and have been active in many committees when you consider that I was elected as a part-time councillor.
Also, I’d like you to notice in my resumé that I’ve served on outside boards. I served the Sudbury and District Health Unit for four years. I was involved with a children’s aid society for over 10 years—actually, from 1997 to 2010. I served as chair and vice-chair of the property committee. I was the chair of the property committee when we had to go out and get a new location on Manitoulin Island, get another building; I was involved in that process. I was also involved with NORCAT, which is the Northern Centre for Advanced Technology—I was on that particular board from 2001 to 2010.
Once again, these sorts of experiences really prepare me to come here today and now to just take a few minutes and just talk about this particular position that I’m applying for.
I understand that what I’m here for today is to be a public member of this committee, and in reviewing some of the college materials, I know that public members—of course, as you all know, I know I don’t have to tell you I’m not a dentist, and as a public member of this committee I won’t pretend to be a dentist. But when you read one of the clauses related to public appointees, it talks about how their responsibility is to speak for the public. They play a vital part in the college’s work at the council and on committees. The full involvement of public members is central to the college’s desire for inclusiveness and accountability. Of course, they want both because the dental college is a self-regulatory agency, so they need this outside influence, this outside direction. My experience on council has provided me with that.
Also in my review of some of the material that I read regarding the council was the committees. Some of the committees, I believe, are a good fit for me. I’ll fit into these committees. They have audit committees. They have the finance property and finance committee. They have a quality assurance committee. They have a fitness-for-practice patient relations committee. So these are committees where I feel I can bring my knowledge as an elected official in working with people, arriving to consensus related to any issues that I may have to deal with as I do my duties in this particular committee.
Mr. Chair, with that, I just want to sum up and hope that you’ll have the opportunity today to really take a serious look at me as a candidate for this. I appreciate all the support I’m sure I will get here today. With that, Mr. Chair, I’ll turn it over to you.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Mr. Callaghan, thank you very much. We’ll begin with the official opposition: Mr. McDonell.
Mr. Jim McDonell: Welcome to the meeting today. I was just looking through your work-related and council-related background and how you see it relating to this committee and the dental surgeons. As well, you talked about your finance committee and being a good fit there. Just how or what experience do you have in that and how do you see that fitting with this group?
Mr. Ted Callaghan: Well, as I mentioned in my presentation, when you talk about a committee like this, what’s most important in a committee like this is to be able work with people and to understand the issues. I know that I certainly don’t understand all the issues associated with this particular council, but I do know that there’s orientation training. There is ongoing training related to this particular assignment, so I will of course partake in all of that. And I believe that one of the most important things is to be able to talk to people, to work with people and to resolve issues, understand issues, and to understand, once again, that I’m not a dentist, but that a majority of the committees related to this appointment are really dealing with patient issues, dealing with a doctor’s issue if one of them gets into jackpot, I guess you’ve got to deal with that, unfortunately. But this is the sort of area where I feel I have the knowledge, the skill and the ability to work with my council members to resolve issues.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Mr. Pettapiece?
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: Yes, thank you. Good morning. By the way, you’re looking at a Lions member here, so that was a good club you were into.
Mr. Ted Callaghan: Garson Lions Club. I just loved it. Great place.
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: Anyway, I see you were on council for 16 years in the city of Sudbury and you were chair of the budget committee. As you are aware, this province is facing a very terrible debt load and deficit right now. What would you consider your greatest achievement in those positions on the budget committee?
Mr. Ted Callaghan: When I first got elected to Sudbury council, of course, it was a two-tier government. I was budget chair for the city of Sudbury, and then I sat on regional council. Then in 2000, it became a single-tier municipality, and the majority of my budget stuff was during that.
We had many challenges. After amalgamation, of course, we went through a process that was essentially tipsy-turvy for the community, and there was never enough money to do anything. After the transition board made some decisions, of course, and after you got going in reality, a lot of it didn’t work and a lot of it was related to finance issues and an understanding of moving money around.
So my ability, I feel, and some of the most important things I did related to that, was getting through this process of amalgamation and explaining to not only the public but my council colleagues the need to rein in expectations. Of course, in Sudbury, we’re always facing financial issues, as a northern community.
So working with my colleagues—and I believe that every colleague I’ve dealt with, they’ll all say that I worked hard on that particular job and I made sure that when stuff came to council related to the finance committee, that it was well-vetted, that all the councillors walked away with an understanding. But, most importantly, when the vote came—I can only think of one vote in my eight years where there was not a full consensus on the passing of the budget.
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Ms. Thompson.
Ms. Lisa M. Thompson: Thank you for being here, Mr. Callaghan.
Mr. Ted Callaghan: Thank you.
Ms. Lisa M. Thompson: The council that you’ll be appointed to has jurisdiction over safety and standards. In doing our due diligence, it came to light that in 2002 your company, unfortunately, experienced a tragedy. I’m curious to know, what have you learned from that experience and what from that experience can you bring to the council?
Mr. Ted Callaghan: Well, you know, that was a tragic experience. Of course, I want the committee members to know that this was a long and drawn-out process. It was almost two to three years.
The court time was 19 days of fishing—what Judge Fitzgerald called a fishing expedition—trying to lay blame. I think the committee should know that there were five charges; two of them were against me, which, of course, were dismissed outright. The other three were appealed. The ministry appealed them, but they never got to court; it never went anywhere.
But what I learned from this, of course, was—first off, I lost a real good friend. Brian Laughlin was a friend of mine. He had more knowledge of the job he was doing that day than I did because he had been there longer. I had only been at the plant for four or five years. So he had more knowledge.
This was an unfortunate workplace accident. It just goes to show you what the old saying is: Accidents can happen. Or a better saying is, shit happens.
In this case, that’s exactly what happened here. It was an unfortunate accident. I lost a good friend.
But of course, in the community, on Facebook, anytime you’re a member of council or anything like that, you’re going to get people saying that I should have done this and I should have done that.
But I feel perfectly clear in my conscience about that particular day, and so did the court of law. I believe that it was an unfortunate accident. It’s something that I wish I hadn’t been involved in, but I was. I came out of the other end of it just as strong. I kept my job. I kept working for another eight years after that. But accidents do happen, and it’s unfortunate.
Ms. Lisa M. Thompson: Absolutely.
Then, from that experience, what kind of conviction—what can you offer the council in terms of safety and standards?
Mr. Ted Callaghan: I think that on safety and standards—I believe what’s most important is that you have to follow the rules. There are rules for everything. Rules are not made to be broken; they’re made to be followed. I believe that if people want to stay out of trouble, then you really need to follow professional rules.
I know that the college, from reading their material, has high expectations related to standards for the profession and that they seem to be constantly at work ensuring that these are followed, that they’re updated and that they in fact work for the profession. So I will, of course, support those efforts with my colleagues and ensure that people don’t go off the rails or go off track related to enforcing the rules and regulations associated with this council.
Ms. Lisa M. Thompson: Okay, thank you very much. I appreciate your response.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Are there any other questions from the official opposition? Okay. We’ll move over to the NDP, Mr. Tabuns.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Callaghan, good morning. Thank you for being here.
Mr. Ted Callaghan: Good morning.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: The college and the community of dental surgeons: What do you see are the biggest challenges facing them in the next few years?
Mr. Ted Callaghan: Well, from reading material and from the knowledge that I’ve gathered from reading materials, I’m not in a position today to say what needs to be changed. I have no plans on walking in there and telling them that they’ve got to do this and they’ve got to do that. I’m willing to go there and to learn, during the orientation and during the training, what’s going on there and to understand all the rules and regs and all the various aspects of this particular position, and then to work with my committee members to ensure that, like I said, the rules are followed and to do the best job I can to ensure that this council does the best for the citizens of Ontario.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: I understand that you’re not going to go in there and tell people what they should or shouldn’t be doing right off the bat, but are there any goals or priorities that you have that you want to bring into this particular college?
Mr. Ted Callaghan: I have to be honest: at the present time, no. I have no understanding that there are shortfalls or that things need to be done there or that there’s something that’s got to be changed. I’m certainly not immune to speaking up if I see there’s an issue. I’m recognized in the community as someone that speaks up if I see something that should be changed.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: No one is ever going to get wealthy from one of these appointments, so what is it that you’re—let’s face facts. What is it that you’re looking to get from participation in this college?
Mr. Ted Callaghan: After you serve 16 years on a council, it’s the old adage of: You like to keep the oar in the water.
A good friend of mine—some of you may know him—Jim Gordon, who was a former mayor of Sudbury, whom I worked under, suggested that I should try to get an appointment at this level, so I started searching around and looking. This is not the first appointment that I’ve tried for. I tried for one other appointment before this. I did an interview in April for a LHIN position. I did a long, extensive interview—over an hour—for the LHIN position. Of course, I didn’t get the position, but I did a post-interview and I talked with a very nice gentleman at the Ministry of Health who called me up and encouraged me to continue on.
I did a project for a friend after that April meeting for about five months—a business friend of mine—that he asked me to help him with. Then I started looking online again and I spotted this particular committee and I thought it would fit into my area of expertise because I’ll tell you that the area that really I enjoyed the most on council was the health and social services committee. Pioneer Manor, which is a long-term care facility in Sudbury—I was involved with that. Back in the former region of Sudbury when we had two-tier government, I was on the health and social services committee for all the time that I was there until the amalgamation and those committees were dissolved. So that’s why I’m here today applying for this position.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: And is there a particular committee at the college that you want to be part of?
Mr. Ted Callaghan: The audit, the finance, patient relations—I would like to be involved in the financial ones. Also, anything to do with the public. I enjoy the public. I enjoy doing things, talking to people and listening to people. So those are the areas, really, that I hope to get involved in.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: Have you had an opportunity to look at the financial statements of the college?
Mr. Peter Tabuns: I don’t have any further questions. I appreciate your answering my questions as generously as you have.
Mr. Ted Callaghan: Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Okay, thank you very much. The government has four minutes, if they’re interested.
Ms. Helena Jaczek: Thank you, Mr. Callaghan, for coming and giving us a very comprehensive overview of your experience. Your candour is refreshing and in fact we have no questions.
Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield: I do.
Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield: I’m sorry; I do have a question. First of all, I want to say thank you, as well, for coming in. I do appreciate your candour. I think that it’s refreshing. It shows that there are going to be some fresh eyes to look at things from a different perspective, and that’s particularly important when you’re dealing with a regulated profession. So I thank you for that.
I appreciate your issue around the budget because that’s your particular expertise. I wondered if you couldn’t do—you know, that was a part of it. There’s a very interesting committee on here, which is the professional liabilities committee. If you look at it, it’s had a significant increase in the issue of professional liability or malpractice claims that have gone up—in 2010, more than 1,500 potential claims as reported from 875 in 2001.
I was just curious as to whether or not you felt your expertise in dealing not only with people but looking at conflict resolution and the challenges you’ve had as a member of the Sudbury council would be of some support in that particular committee.
Mr. Ted Callaghan: That looks like an interesting committee, and I don’t see any public appointees on there. Maybe there are, but I don’t recognize any of the people there as public appointees. That sounds like an interesting committee. Actually, I didn’t recognize that committee for what it is. It certainly looks interesting, and it also sounds interesting. The numbers actually are a little bit startling. I’m surprised by the numbers there.
Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield: They are.
The last question or comment I have for you is just to say again thank you for picking this particular one. I suspect every time you go to a cocktail party, somebody’s going to be very interested in the fact that you actually chose dentistry, since most people are afraid of their dentist. So thank you again for coming.
Mr. Ted Callaghan: You’re welcome. Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Mr. Callaghan, thank you very much for your presentation. We appreciate it.
Mr. Ted Callaghan: Once again, thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and to the committee members, thank you.
MS. MARIE MOLINER
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Marie Moliner, intended appointee as member, Toronto Police Services Board.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Okay, committee, we now have Marie Moliner, nominated as a member of the Toronto Police Services Board.
Ms. Moliner, please come forward.
Ms. Marie Moliner: Good morning. Do you mind if I get a glass of water?
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Please.
Ms. Moliner, you may begin with a brief statement, if you wish. Any time used for your statement will be deducted from the government’s time for questions. Following that, each party will then have 10 minutes to ask you questions, and questioning will begin with the third party. We’ll open the floor and ask you to make your presentation, and thank you very much for being here this morning.
Ms. Marie Moliner: Thank you very much. Bonjour, tout le monde. Good morning, everybody. It’s really an honour to be before you today.
I have applied to be a member of the Toronto Police Services Board because I really care deeply about this city and I believe that serving on the board would be a privilege, a unique opportunity and a significant responsibility.
I’m going to share a little bit of information about myself with you this morning that I hope establishes my credentials for this position. I’ve organized the information into three areas: personal, professional and community involvement.
Turning to the personal, I’m the daughter of immigrants. My father was born in Spain. My mother was born in Ireland. They met in Montreal and settled in the eastern townships in Quebec, and I’m the eldest of four children. But perhaps what’s most significant about my parents’ background is their very divergent views on policing.
My father fled Spain, fled Franco’s fascist regime, and raised us to never make eye contact with the police when we were travelling in Spain. My mother, on the other hand, grew up in Ireland and she raised us to turn to the bobbies at every occasion, should we ever need them. I like to think that that has given me a unique perspective on policing.
I’m happily married to Kevin Whitaker, my partner of 30 years. Together, we’ve lived at Jane and Finch, Parkdale and now reside in High Park. We have two children, teenagers. We’ve worked hard to make them conscious of their privilege and to give back to their communities.
As a resident of Toronto and as a parent of a teenaged son, I have had encounters with police officers, and I have to say that on every single one of those encounters, I have found them to be exceptionally professional and service-oriented.
Turning now to the professional, I’m a lawyer by training. I am a proud career civil servant, and I’ll talk to you a little bit about my job at the government of Canada shortly. Perhaps it is because of my parents’ mixed views on the administration of justice that I have chosen a career in government.
Before I joined the government of Canada I was counsel to the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. I then worked for the police complaints commission and was counsel to the Clare Lewis task force on race relations and policing. I also worked for the government of Ontario in the Ministry of the Attorney General in the policy development division, focusing mostly on access to justice initiatives. I was elected as a bencher to the Law Society of Upper Canada, which is the governing body that oversees the now 40,000 lawyers in the province. As a bencher, I was the chair of the treasurer’s equity advisory committee.
I now work for the government of Canada. For a few years I worked for the Department of Justice, and now I am the regional executive director for a department called Canadian heritage. That department has what some would consider a dog’s breakfast of a mandate; we do everything from arts and culture to official languages to sports to youth engagement. I also work with off-reserve aboriginal populations and focus on what the government of Canada calls the area of Canadian identity. In that capacity, I administer an office of about 70 employees—we’re getting smaller everyday—and oversee a funding budget of about $25 million. I’m also the past chair of the Ontario federal council, which is an informal governing body for senior federal officials in the region, in the GTA.
In terms of how I like to work, I’m seen, I hope, as collaborative and creative. I’m especially proud of the work that my team has accomplished in two particular areas: streamlining our funding processes and policy work that I have led locally in engaging youth through culture to focus on youth engagement as a crime prevention strategy.
In this role, I’ve worked across all levels of government on a range of issues. Municipally, I’ve worked with other funding colleagues to focus on ways to make funding streams more navigable to applicants. I’ve championed investments to engage youth in the arts and have spoken internationally on the role of arts and culture in engaging youth. In the past, I’ve been the representative on the mayor’s community safety panel, which was chaired by former Chief Justice Roy McMurtry.
Throughout all of my work, I’ve tried to apply an inclusive lens to the decision-making processes and the way that decisions are brought forward. I’ve always sought to involve communities and community groups in this work.
Turning now to my community involvement, I’m actively involved in the city of Toronto, a city I’m proud to call home although I was born in Montreal—which no one would argue has better bagels, and we won’t discuss the hockey team. As a volunteer, I have participated in several city-building initiatives. I’m a member of the steering committee of civic action, which is formally the Toronto City Summit Alliance, which is currently chaired by John Tory. I’m also involved actively in the DiverseCity Fellows, which is a kind of sister organization co-chaired by Ratna Omidvar and John Tory.
Last December, I was invited to join the Centre for Social Innovation’s board. CSI is a not-for-profit group which focuses on incubators for small start-up organizations, really focusing on entrepreneurship for organizations that have a social mission.
For almost 10 years, I was on the board of the United Way of Toronto, and was on the campaign cabinet as well as the board of trustees. I’ve participated in TRIEC, the Toronto Region Immigrant Employment Council and I’ve been past chair of several other community boards, including Parkdale Community Information Centre and the various daycares that my children were involved in.
For the last five years I’ve been the Ontario federal representative on the Ontario Financial Management Institute.
So as I wrap up, I’ll let you know that because we grew up in Quebec, my parents insisted that we learned to speak French. Since I work for the government of Canada, I have an opportunity to speak French every day. Donc, je suis complètement bilingue dans les deux langues officielles. I’m completely bilingual in both English and French, and I also like to speak Spanish, my father’s original language, whenever I can.
Almost done: Lastly, I’ll say that my personal and professional experience with policing and police officers is that leadership truly matters. I’m a long-time public servant, and I have deep respect and admiration for all of us who choose to serve. I know that police officers, like all public servants, take great pride in doing their jobs well.
Being considered for this appointment is a privilege, and it’s a challenge that I feel I’m truly prepared for. Merci beaucoup.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Thank you, Ms. Moliner. There are two minutes left for the government, should you decide to use it. We’ll begin with the third party.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: Thank you very much for coming this morning and for applying for this position. Can you tell me what you see your role as being on the police services board?
Ms. Marie Moliner: As a civil servant—and I’m here because my government department has agreed that I participate—I would really be there for the purpose of learning how policing works in Toronto from the inside. I appreciate that the board does not oversee the day-to-day operations, so it’s very much about participating in the overall management and setting of priorities for the board.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: Do you have any goals that you want to see fulfilled in your term on this board?
Ms. Marie Moliner: I think that there are a number of key issues that the police services board faces, so participating in making sure that all the information is before the board and that the decisions are fully informed would be my main objective. As this point, I don’t have any specific agenda items that are of primary importance to me, because I don’t really know what the board is focusing on, other than what’s in the papers.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: What do you think those key issues are that you just cited?
Ms. Marie Moliner: Today is budget day for Ontario, and I think it’s budget day pretty well for every organization in the country—it will be budget day on Thursday for the government of Canada—so I think budgeting issues are going to be key for all public sector organizations. I think that the key policy issue challenges will be increased public scrutiny for all public sector organizations, including the police. Obviously, the police have faced some recent challenges in terms of issues of racial profiling.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: Let’s expand on that. What do you see as the problems around racial profiling? Do you see that there has been an inappropriate use of profiling to determine who is a problem? Do you come at it from another lens?
Ms. Marie Moliner: I’m not in a position to say whether there has been inappropriate use of racial profiling. I’m not on the board; this is an intended appointment. I think that the courts have found that systemic racism exists across the justice system. In that sense, all the institutions that have interactions with the public have a number of challenges, including how representative they are and how much that representation affects their view of the people they serve. I think the police services face those challenges as well: representation and fully informed decisions.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: When we talk about the police services budget, one of the issues that comes up when I talk to colleagues on Toronto city council is the whole question of overtime. Have you thought about that issue and how it needs to be addressed by the police services board?
Ms. Marie Moliner: I haven’t thought about it in the context of the police services board. I do appreciate that it’s a significant cost and that, as with all public sector institutions, salaries are the most significant cost, so looking at ways that one can pay less for services rendered is going to be probably the key focus for the board going forward.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: Do you have any questions, colleague? No.
I have no further questions. Thank you. I appreciate it.
Ms. Marie Moliner: Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Thank you very much. Government side?
Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield: Thank you. I would like to thank you as well for putting forth your name for this appointment. Being on a police board is a very public profile. When I look at your resumé and what you have to offer, it’s fairly significant, and I just want to say thank you. It’s not an easy appointment to place yourself into, so obviously your love of this city and your willingness to give back in terms of the expertise that you have accumulated over a significant period of time, I believe, if this committee agrees, will be a significant support to the police services board. So thank you for being so willing to put your name out so publicly.
Ms. Marie Moliner: Thank you very much for your support.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Thank you, Ms. Cansfield. We now move to the official opposition. Mr. McDonell?
Mr. Jim McDonell: Thank you for coming out today. I see we share a similar Queen’s history back in the 1970s.
A lot to do with the police services, I believe, is an attitude of the force, with the way they handle people—and I guess we’ve seen some of the things that happened in the G20. My family has some police officers, and I see it from their perspective. What do you think you can bring to the board as far as attitude, just in general?
Ms. Marie Moliner: A possible significant perspective I bring is as a public servant. I know what it’s like to be in the public eye and to be accountable for the taxpayers’ dollars that I administer, for the work that my team does, and I’m very conscious that one never wants to be seen as not meeting the public expectations. So for me, policing in Toronto is very much about the board working with the chief to make sure that Toronto’s police reputation is not only strengthened and preserved—but can be seen as the police force of the future.
This is an incredible city. The diversity in this city poses challenges, but huge opportunities. So I think it’s really about strengthening the reputation of the police force through the board’s role.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Mr. Pettapiece.
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: Good morning. Are you still involved in the civil liberties movement, and if so, how will that experience play a constructive role on the police services board?
Ms. Marie Moliner: I’m not a member of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. That was many years ago. What was instructive then was the need to really understand the checks and balances in democracy. So I would say that that was a grounding experience for me. After my call to the bar, that was my first job, and I really learned the different roles that the public sector, the private sector and the not-for-profit sector play.
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: My son and my daughter-in-law are both police officers. They’ve been there since 2000—not in this city. They both said to me that all they ask for is the tools to do their work and, if they’re given the tools, not to be criticized for using them unless there’s an abuse involved or they go overboard. That’s really all they ask for.
How do you strike a balance between civil liberties, public scrutiny and diminishing resources and the need to help keep Torontonians safe?
Ms. Marie Moliner: Well, I think your children have given you the answer. It’s all about training, tools and making sure that, in this case, the police force and the officers know what’s expected of them, are trained and know what management’s response will be, should they need direction. At the end of the day, it’s more complicated because of the complexity of policing. It’s all about management making sure that employees have the tools to do the job.
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: Of course, they watched the G20 event that happened down here. They didn’t participate in it. What they were upset with is—that’s a very stressful situation to be in, and some things probably were done that shouldn’t have been done, and I think that has come out. It gets increasingly hard to get police officers to take part in something like that on a volunteer basis, and one of the reasons why is because if something happens, it’s difficult for them to try to do their job with the tools they have and then face the public afterwards.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Ms. Thompson, anything?
Ms. Lisa M. Thompson: Yes, I do have a question. Marie, thanks so much for being here and offering your support of police constables and police services. I appreciate it very much.
I, too, have family members. My brother is a DC, a detective constable, with the OPP, and his son is an OPP officer as well.
Just a little side note, in light of what’s going on this week in London: My brother was with Vu Pham the fateful morning, March 5—and his fate, should he have headed in an opposite direction than Vu later that morning.
Police officers deserve pride, respect and support, and part of that support is strong communications.
As you mentioned before, increased public scrutiny is happening all the time around our officers. You mentioned the point of racial profiling. That said, you yourself have experienced some tough media with regard to your experience on heritage Canada, when they sponsored a particular play that profiled the life of a homegrown terrorist.
As you said, any police service needs to be strengthened and preserved. So with your experience from heritage Canada and being pressed from a media perspective in terms of your position on that one particular play, what can you bring to the police services board in terms of communication experience and an action plan, in terms of learning what you might have done differently addressing the play that you were pressed on—to supporting police services in Toronto?
Ms. Marie Moliner: You’re right. In my 25-year career—at the end of 2010-11, there was media scrutiny around the one decision that my office was involved in. Luckily, we investigated, and as happens with media, we had done everything by the book. Nonetheless, we were in the media, and that happens, and that happens in policing.
What I’ve learned is, there are always two sides to every story; that public scrutiny is very difficult to swallow; and that you learn, regardless of whether you were at fault, how you could have managed the situation better. In that particular case, revisiting training protocols and making sure that everyone understood what they needed to do was the right response. The play itself was almost a peripheral issue to what the learnings were, which is very much about making sure that the proper procedures were followed.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Ms. Moliner, thank you very much. We’d just ask that you would take a seat in the audience and we’ll consider the appointments.
We’ll now consider the concurrence of the intended appointment of Ted Callaghan, nominated as member of the Council of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario. Ms. Jaczek?
Ms. Helena Jaczek: I move concurrence in the intended appointment of Ted Callaghan, nominated as member of the Council of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Any discussion? All in favour? Opposed? That’s carried.
Congratulations, Mr. Callaghan.
We’ll now consider the concurrence of the intended appointment of Marie Moliner, nominated as member of the Toronto Police Services Board. Ms. Jaczek?
Ms. Helena Jaczek: I move concurrence in the intended appointment of Marie Moliner, nominated as member of the Toronto Police Services Board.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Any discussion? All in favour? Opposed? That’s carried.
Any other items for discussion? Mr. Tabuns.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: Mr. Chair, as I mentioned to you before the meeting convened, we have the ability in this committee to review agencies, corporate bodies of the government, and I would like to suggest that three be reviewed. I’m happy to take your advice on the precise route that we will have to follow to get to a decision, but I’d like to put that on the table now. The three bodies that I’d like to review are OPG, WSIB—and I’d like to look at the structure of the LHINs in Ontario.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Thank you, Mr. Tabuns. Just for the committee’s knowledge, Mr. Tabuns informed me just before the meeting began that he was going to bring the item forward. I’ve had the opportunity to have a short discussion with the clerk. It’s entirely within the purview of the committee to consider agencies for review. The suggestion might be that we refer it to a discussion at subcommittee, perhaps, if you’re amenable to that, Mr. Tabuns.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: I am amenable.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Okay, that sounds great. If there’s any other discussion on the item before we adjourn—otherwise, we would just refer the item to the subcommittee. Is that fair?
Mr. Peter Tabuns: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Chair (Mr. Bill Mauro): Thank you all very much. Any other items? Adjourned.
The committee adjourned at 0944.
Tuesday 27 March 2012
Intended appointments A-13
Mr. Ted Callaghan A-13
Ms. Marie Moliner A-16
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Chair / Président
Mr. Bill Mauro (Thunder Bay–Atikokan L)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Président
Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa–Orléans L)
Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield (Etobicoke Centre / Etobicoke-Centre L)
Ms. Helena Jaczek (Oak Ridges–Markham L)
Mr. Bill Mauro (Thunder Bay–Atikokan L)
Mr. Jim McDonell (Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry PC)
Mr. Phil McNeely (Ottawa–Orléans L)
Mr. Randy Pettapiece (Perth–Wellington PC)
Mr. Peter Tabuns (Toronto–Danforth ND)
Miss Monique Taylor (Hamilton Mountain ND)
Ms. Lisa Thompson (Huron–Bruce PC)
Clerk / Greffier
Mr. Trevor Day
Staff / Personnel
Mr. Larry Johnston, research officer,
Legislative Research Service