INTENDED
APPOINTMENTS
JOHN ROSSETTI
CONTENTS
Wednesday 24 April 1996
Intended appointments
John Rossetti
Ray Poratto
Subcommittee report
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Chair / Président: Laughren, Floyd (Nickel Belt ND)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Président: Martin, Tony (Sault Ste Marie ND)
*Bartolucci, Rick (Sudbury L)
*Crozier, Bruce (Essex South / -Sud L)
*Ford, Douglas B. (Etobicoke-Humber PC)
*Fox, Gary (Prince Edward-Lennox-South Hastings / Prince Edward-Lennox-Hastings-Sud PC)
Gravelle, Michael (Port Arthur L)
*Johnson, Bert (Perth PC)
*Kormos, Peter (Welland-Thorold ND)
*Laughren, Floyd (Nickel Belt ND)
*Leadston, Gary L. (Kitchener-Wilmot PC)
*Martin, Tony (Sault Ste Marie ND)
Newman, Dan (Scarborough Centre / -Centre PC)
*Preston, Peter L. (Brant-Haldimand PC)
Ross, Lillian (Hamilton West / -Ouest PC)
*Wood, Bob (London South / -Sud PC)
*In attendance / présents
Substitutions present / Membres remplaçants présents:
Vankoughnet, Bill (Frontenac-Addington PC) for Mrs Ross
Clerk / Greffière: Tannis Manikel
Staff / Personnel: David Pond, research officer, Legislative Research Service
The committee met at 1003 in room 228.
The Chair (Mr Floyd Laughren): The committee on government agencies will come to order. We're ready to proceed. Members who have seen the agenda will know that we have two intended appointments to consider this morning, Mr Rossetti and Mr Poratto, and then we'll proceed in the normal fashion with the motion for concurrence and the report of the subcommittee which met yesterday.
INTENDED APPOINTMENTS
JOHN ROSSETTI
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: John Rossetti, intended appointee as member, Gaming Control Commission.
The Chair: The first intended appointment is Mr John Rossetti. Mr Rossetti, if you would take a seat, we can proceed. We have a half-hour for each person. If you want to make an opening statement, you're welcome to do so, then whatever time is left over is split evenly among the three parties.
Mr Peter Kormos (Welland-Thorold): Mr Chair, if I may, Mr Rossetti was here some weeks past. I, in fact, spoke to his nomination indirectly while speaking to another important matter. I'm moving that we waive any examination of Mr Rossetti and I would then be prepared to make a motion for concurrence. For the life of me, I don't understand why he was brought back here again, with his CV, and that's consistent with the comments I made the last time he was here. So that motion is on the floor.
The Chair: Mr Kormos wishes to waive the consideration and the discussion on Mr Rossetti's appointment. Whether you like it or not, that's a vote of confidence in you, Mr Rossetti.
Mr Bob Wood (London South): I think, Mr Chair, such a motion's not in order. This has been designated by the official opposition. Unless they withdraw it, we should proceed.
The Chair: But the committee can do it.
Mr Bob Wood: No, Mr Chair, I don't think they can. I think it's out of order. Unless the Liberals withdraw it, we have to proceed.
The Chair: That's right. I'm saying there has to be unanimous consent.
Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex South): Mr Rossetti was our choice, and he is here; he has taken the time. It seems to me that on a number of occasions Mr Kormos can't seem to understand why we bring people before the committee. I can tell you, sir, we bring them before the committee so we can learn something. I don't object to his appointment either, but I have some questions I'd like to ask him that will be helpful to me, so I'd like to continue with it.
Mr Kormos: Perhaps the nominees could put their phone numbers on their CV and we could phone them if we want to see them.
The Chair: Unless there was general agreement among all three parties, we wouldn't consider that anyway. Seeing no unanimous consent, Mr Kormos, do you want your motion voted on since it won't go through?
Mr Kormos: No, but I do now move concurrence with Mr Rossetti's appointment.
The Chair: No. If we're not going to have general agreement on having a discussion of Mr Rossetti, I don't think it's appropriate to move concurrence on it now.
Mr Kormos: It's out of order?
The Chair: Yes. Let's proceed with Mr Rossetti.
Mr John Rossetti: Good morning, Mr Chair and members of the committee. I would like to thank the members of the standing committee for giving me the opportunity to sit before you on my intended appointment to the Gaming Control Commission.
I'm a 36-year-old chartered accountant and a partner with the firm of Collins Barrow in Toronto. My area of practice includes audit, corporate finance, restructuring and management consultant. I'm married to Anna, a banker by profession, and have two children, Matthew, 7 and Sarah, 4.
My community involvement includes working with local charities such as my local church group, and I have served as a member of the board of the Metropolitan Toronto Housing Authority, appointed by the then Minister of Housing Evelyn Gigantes and chaired by Madam Jean Augustine.
I have accepted the invitation to sit as a commissioner of the Gaming Control Commission because I have extensive financial training and experience to serve on a commission that has such large financial impact on our society and that is becoming an even more important source of revenue for many charity groups.
In light of the high level of honesty and integrity that is fundamentally important to the ever-growing industry of gaming, I have accepted openly and freely an invitation for the Ontario Provincial Police to do a thorough investigation on myself and on my family in order to be considered for the position. I believe those prepared to serve in a position of authority must undergo the same scrutiny and investigation that they themselves have been appointed to uphold and regulate.
I understand that the mandate of the commission is to safeguard the public interest in legalized gaming. The commission must ensure that gaming is conducted with honesty and integrity and conducted in the public interest. Should you approve my appointment, I intend to ensure that the legislation set out in the Gaming Control Act is properly and fully respected and upheld.
I thank you again for giving me the opportunity to sit before you.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr Rossetti. We'll go to the government members first.
1010
Mr Peter L. Preston (Brant-Haldimand): Mr Rossetti, I was going to ask you what particular skills you were bringing to the commission, but it's obvious what skills you have. I have one question: Will you have the time to devote to this situation?
Mr Rossetti: When I was asked to sit on the commission, I was told that the position would entail of course some research. I was given the profile of the members on the commission and I was impressed by the roster. I was also told it would be a meeting maybe once a month, and that I'd have to go through a thorough OPP investigation.
At that point I sat down and I looked at my agenda in my practice. I have considered it quite seriously and have come to the determination that I must serve not only in sort of self-interest within my practice but should also serve in the community, and this is part of community involvement, in my view. Yes, I have the time and I will make the time and the effort to be up to speed on the legislation that we have to regulate.
Mr Douglas B. Ford (Etobicoke-Humber): Thank you for coming again today, Mr Rossetti. You were here before, but thank you for coming back. I have a couple of questions. Why have you agreed to serve on the commission, and what do you hope to accomplish during your tenure on the commission?
Mr Rossetti: I was given the opportunity to serve on the commission and I have an interest in making sure that if there's an industry in Ontario that's growing, as gaming is, and it's becoming very important to such groups as charity --
Interjection.
Mr Preston: Mr Kormos, you're ignorant. I'm sorry for interrupting you, sir.
The Chair: Order. Don't interrupt.
Mr Ford: Anyway, what do you hope to accomplish during your tenure? You tentatively answered some of that.
Mr Rossetti: I would like to make sure the legislation that has been enacted is properly regulated and enforced. I think gaming is a very important industry in Ontario, but I also have an interest in ensuring that it's done in a just and an upright manner.
Mr Preston: I'm sorry, Mr Rossetti. I spoke out of turn.
The Chair: Anything else, Mr Ford?
Mr Ford: No other questions.
The Chair: Anything else from this side? Okay, then to the official opposition.
Mr Crozier: Good morning, Mr Rossetti. I appreciate even more the fact that you're taking time to come before us this morning considering that we're only five or six days from the end of tax season as well. I imagine you're pretty busy.
As I said at the outset, it certainly isn't my intention to challenge your appointment, because I think you're very well qualified for it, but I did want to spend some time in a specific area of gaming and wanted to get your opinion on VLTs. Video lottery terminals are one of those types of gambling that certainly the Ontario Video Gaming Corp is promoting. Do you have any thoughts for us, any opinions on VLTs specifically?
Mr Rossetti: First of all, I'd like to make it very clear that I understand a position on the commission as being one of regulation and ensuring that the act is upheld. As far as whether the VLTs have a place in gaming, that's something that has to be researched and, in my opinion, it's going to have to be a government decision whether it's included in part of the gaming.
I don't have enough information on it. I have some concerns in terms of the regulation, ensuring that the audit and the controls are in place, but as to whether I have an opinion on whether they should be included, no, not at this point. I just don't know enough.
Mr Crozier: You simply don't have an opinion or you prefer not to give an opinion?
Mr Rossetti: I prefer not to give an opinion.
Mr Crozier: That's fair. Have you attended casinos, for example, Windsor Casino, Las Vegas?
Mr Rossetti: I have not.
Mr Crozier: You haven't?
Mr Rossetti: I attended a casino in Istanbul. I am not a gambler.
Mr Crozier: That's kind of interesting as well.
Aside from the financial controls -- and we all want to see the appropriate financial controls put in place for any type of gambling in Ontario, whether it's charitable or government-run or a partnership between government and private. With VLTs, though, these will be proposed to be put in much more publicly accessible areas, ie, bars, restaurants. What are your thoughts on how we can regulate the use of VLTs when underage individuals may have access to these areas?
Mr Rossetti: If they do become part of the local bars -- let's call them the local establishments. We currently sell cigarettes, which are illegal to sell to minors. There's an infrastructure, a legal process in place that store owners are not allowed to sell to minors. If the government chooses to include VLTs as part of the gaming, as a commissioner of the gaming control I would like to ensure that there are safeguards; first of all, to make sure that people clearly understand the odds of winning, that minors are excluded, as they currently are from entering casinos, and I would like to ensure that there's some legislation in place that has something to do with addiction, maybe time considerations.
Mr Crozier: And penalties, I assume?
Mr Rossetti: I would strongly suggest penalties, yes.
Mr Crozier: With your background and certainly, as you get into this, with your interest, would you see your role as not only applying the law as the government may choose to write it, but that you may be part of suggesting what that law and what those controls should be? Do you see that as part of your role?
Mr Rossetti: The government is elected. I may suggest and I may recommend, but in my view Parliament is supreme and it ultimately makes the decision as to what is legislation.
Mr Crozier: I know that all too well, but I just wanted to get a sense that you feel you would be part of all of this, not simply taking the law as it's proposed, but that you would be part of suggesting what the law should be, how these controls can be effective.
With the sale of cigarettes to minors, the law is just a piece of paper and it's a sticker on the machine; they used to have them in vending machines, which we finally got rid of in public places because the sticker on the machine meant nothing. Since you brought up the sale of cigarettes, I compare that to vending machines you can get cigarettes from. We're now going to have vending machines you can gamble at. We can't have someone standing at each machine to regulate it. I wonder if you share my concern and to what degree that concern is shared when it comes to regulating their use by minors.
Mr Rossetti: I'm very concerned about ensuring that minors are excluded from using the VLTs; that the law is in place, first of all, and that the law is strictly enforced and that severe penalties, if the legislation permits, are imposed on those providing the VLT service. We've also got the Criminal Code in place. We should have a responsible society. I'd rather have it out in the open so it could be regulated rather than in the back rooms where it's unseen, unheard and unregulated.
1020
Mr Crozier: I appreciate your coming. I wish you well on the commission. I hope you take a proactive role, not simply wait for laws to be made and then apply them; that given your expertise and once you get involved and learn more about it, whether or not you're required to as part of your position on the commission, you'd provide advice to the government on the appropriateness of VLTs and how they're to be used and where they're to be placed. I think that kind of advice would be helpful to the government, and I hope you play that role as well.
Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): John, you've got a varied background but a background that prepares you very well for this. However, when you get on to the commission, you're going to find varied political backgrounds, because they're appointments, obviously.
I look at the appointment from the Nickel Belt area, John Fera, a very competent, qualified individual who was appointed by the New Democratic Party. Certainly, were I sitting on the other side, I would ensure that become a reappointment because he's so qualified and so competent and he's so fair and brings a very unique perspective with him. Maybe you can comment on your background. Do you feel you will be able to handle the political variety on the commission?
Mr Rossetti: First and foremost, as a member of the commission I would have to ensure the honesty and integrity and that gaming is conducted in the public interest. That's first and foremost, as it is for the legislators in our House. As far as political opinions are concerned, they would have to be secondary and would have to take a back seat to ensuring that the public interest is upheld.
Interestingly enough, you raise the point about political affiliations. I've met the current chair, Clare Lewis, and I said to him, "I can't figure out your political stripes." He says, "Neither can I, because I've been appointed by the Davis government, the Peterson government, the Rae government." I respect an individual of his calibre, because he puts politics aside and does a great job for the commission first.
Mr Kormos: You might have drawn the inference that the fact that Clare Lewis came with you when you were here last sealed any doubt I might have had about your capacity.
The gaming commission of course transcends casino gambling, but obviously there's very much a focus on that because of the currency of that particular issue. The real dilemma that that industry is going to have in this province, especially in border locations, is the fact that as soon as American jurisdictions, to wit, Michigan and now New York state, with a new governor who has a far different perspective towards New York state casino gambling than did Cuomo, the previous governor -- even though there's a whole lot of suggestion that Cuomo's resistance to casino gambling in New York state was mostly in support of Atlantic City, New Jersey, gambling, Trump's et al, but that's a different story.
As soon as casinos appear in border locations in the US jurisdictions, Michigan and New York specifically, in terms of anticipated sites here in Ontario, they're going to kick the daylights out of Canadian casinos because we still have the Criminal Code prohibition against dice games. If you read Scarne, who's one of the historical authorities on gambling -- I was in a casino once in Bratislava, so I'm like you; I have a very marginal exposure to that sort of activity. But one of the real problems Ontario casinos are going to have is the ongoing Criminal Code prohibition against dice games. Any adjoining American casino which does not have a similar prohibition is going to draw especially the big-money gamblers. The net result will be that Ontario casinos will tend to attract less the tourist, the transient gambler, and more so utilize the local population as the source of revenue and players.
Neither the previous government, nor this government, to the best of anybody's knowledge, has spoken with the federal government about amending the Criminal Code. The Criminal Code provisions against dice are archaic. They're part of the old cheating provisions and don't relate to casino gambling but more to the flim-flammery of travelling dice artists who would go from town to town and take in the locals.
I would hope that the gaming commission itself, with some interest in the future of gaming, if indeed that's going to happen -- gaming is here. You may well know that I opposed casino gambling in the first instance, but that's fine. The fact is that the jurisdiction now is one that contains casino gambling. It seems to me that the gaming commission has got to initiate this discussion, obviously in conjunction with Quebec, Manitoba and British Columbia, has got to address with the feds this issue of eliminating from the Criminal Code the prohibitions against dice. Otherwise, our casinos are simply not going to be competitive in any way, shape or form with neighbouring casinos and are going to be left to be sucking money out of the local constituencies. That doesn't seem to me to be the interest in establishing gaming.
I simply leave that with you, and I thank you very kindly.
The Chair: Are there any other comments? Seeing none, Mr Rossetti, we as a committee appreciate your patience with the committee in coming back. Thank your for your appearance. As you may know, at the end of the meeting the committee reviews the appointments of that day, so you'll be notified.
Mr Rossetti: Thank you again.
RAY PORATTO
Review of intended appointment, selected by third party: Ray Poratto, intended appointee as member, Manitoulin-Sudbury District Health Council.
The Chair: The next intended appointee is Mr Ray Poratto. Welcome to the committee. Did you wish to make any comments to begin?
Mr Ray Poratto: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I beg your indulgence this morning. I have a new electronic mechanism that I'm experimenting with, so I might not hear your questions as clearly as I would like to.
It's a pleasure to be back again, although I have to talk to Mr Palladini about those potholes I had to drive over on Highway 69 on two occasions. In any event, my name is Ray Poratto. I think there's been a résumé passed about so that some background would be available to you.
I have an interest in the district health council for a variety of reasons. I serve on the board of the seniors' advisory council of the regional municipality of Sudbury. It's the umbrella organization that deals with all the various seniors' groups throughout the region. I have a number of local interests in health care, of course, having been a resident of the Sudbury region for 100-odd years, and go back for five generations on both sides, so we have some sense of the question of the delivery of health care. I have worked with the chamber of commerce on the board for a number of years and we have dealt with those issues locally.
I have a large family, seven, with eight grandchildren, so certainly I have an interest in health care in the longer term.
1030
My community activities are extensive and they're listed in the résumé. I don't have to belabour those, I suppose.
I notice there was a question on the political level, and certainly my activity has been extensive on a local basis in local politics, as Mr Bartolucci and Mr Laughren will testify. The case for involving oneself in the community extensively has been my habit and my pleasure. I have a good deal of time available at this point in my life in that I'm retired, even though when I call myself a retiree I find myself a lot busier than I was when I was fully employed with two or three jobs.
I'm open to any questions that anyone has with respect to my qualifications or my intentions or what I bring to the district health council table.
The Chair: Anything else, Mr Poratto? Thank you for that. Do the government members have any questions?
Mr Preston: Thank you very much for coming down, sir, again. I understand you have written extensively on the district health council. How do you feel about the recommendations made last year about the restructuring of Sudbury hospitals?
Mr Poratto: I watched with some concern the fact that the restructuring recommendations were not more rapidly approached by the disparate groups involved, the various interest groups involved, and they are numerous. I watched with concern because I felt there was a disadvantage to the health care system in the region: a disadvantage to patient care, a disadvantage to the funding of the system. When you speak of the restructuring review, my position would simply be that the restructuring review should have been implemented as early as possible to avail ourselves of those advantages -- funding, patient care and those other questions.
Mr Ford: Mr Poratto, in your preliminary statement you told us a little bit of the background and some of the areas you have served. As a direct statement for this committee, why have you agreed to serve on this council and what background and skills do you have that you feel make a valuable contribution to the council? You've already mentioned some of it, but I just wanted a direct statement for this committee.
Mr Poratto: I was drawn to it because I recognized the controversy and I felt there was a need for strong leadership and coordination to bring the disparate groups together. I've had a good deal of experience in that field, in small business and with union groups and with consumer groups and with marketing groups. I felt I had a part to play and it was time to speak out on that question. As I watched the controversy continue, it seemed almost endlessly, I took the initiative and wrote to the ministry and to the district health council and expressed some of those thoughts. The responses I got from that initiative indicated, "If you've got a good deal of thought on how the DHC should operate, perhaps you should make an application," so that's exactly what I did.
Mr Ford: It sounds like you've covered both sides of the parking lot, the left side, the right side, centre and everything else. Thank you very much, sir.
Mr Gary Fox (Prince Edward-Lennox-South Hastings): Basically, you've given us a good rundown. What do you hope to achieve during your tenure in this position?
Mr Poratto: I would hope to achieve the effect of a district health council that can bring together those forces that are working against what I believe are the best interests of a good health care system commensurate with affordability. A good deal of acrimony has been developed in the health council that should be set aside in the greater interests and the principle of good health care. I believe I have exemplified that capacity in the past and I think I can bring that kind of leadership to the council, to get them to work together to do the job that has to be done.
The Chair: Anything else? Okay, we move to the official opposition.
Mr Bartolucci: Welcome, Ray. Ray tells you about his political involvement but doesn't refer to a particular party, but let me tell you, from attending all-candidates' meetings where he was supposed to be organizing them, certainly the questions were very conservative in nature.
Mr Crozier: Conveniently.
Mr Bartolucci: Conveniently. We don't have a copy of your application here. We do for Mr Rossetti and we do for Heather Nordell, but we don't have a copy of the letter expressing interest. Did you expressly ask to serve on the DHC in your letter?
Mr Poratto: Yes.
Mr Bartolucci: Who did you submit the letter to?
Mr Poratto: The district health council. I spoke to them directly, I spoke to the chair of the district health council, I wrote to the ministry. Those were the contacts I made. As a result, I received telephone calls back from both of those sources. I wrote a letter to the editor expressing my views on the question of the wrangle that was going on endlessly.
Mr Bartolucci: Did you go through the screening process of the DHC? Did you go before the DHC board that makes recommendations to the minister?
Mr Poratto: Did I go before the council?
Mr Bartolucci: Yes.
Mr Poratto: No, I have not appeared before the council.
Mr Bartolucci: Let's talk a little bit about the restructuring situation in Sudbury. I'm sure you're aware, with your involvement, that two lab services proposals have been submitted to the minister. Which one do you favour, and why?
Mr Poratto: I don't have a specific choice on those two questions. I believe the controversy indicates that there is a good deal of merit on both sides of that question, and for me to fire from the hip at one or the other is inappropriate for me at this point. The district health council and the other participants in the system certainly have strong points of view and it would be necessary for me to study and analyse and come to a conclusion that I believe is in the best interests of the community, simply that.
Mr Bartolucci: What about the northern outreach program? What can you say about that? Are you in favour of the northern outreach program, and how do you feel the DHC and the northern outreach program can meet to ensure better quality health care?
Mr Poratto: I think the DHC has to in the beginning fulfil its role planning in detail and in the long term what the needs of northeastern Ontario are, and the Sudbury region more particularly, and as that planning formulates, the will to implement the appropriate planning has to be in place. That's the thing that I see has been lacking, the will to implement what seems to be an appropriate consensus, given the circumstances and the need, the money that's available and the needs of the area. That will to proceed is in my view what's lacking. There's been too much in-fighting, for example.
Mr Bartolucci: Specifically, though, with the northern outreach program, I think that's pretty critical with health restructuring in northeastern Ontario and certainly in the region of Sudbury. Would you agree?
1040
Mr Poratto: Yes.
Mr Bartolucci: Then can you speak specifically to that particular program and how it should be intertwining with the DHC?
Mr Poratto: I play the role of a consumer, not a professional health care person, and I believe, as a consumer and as a person with considerable business background, I can determine what is the best program, to analyse the programs that would be most appropriate.
Mr Bartolucci: Do you know what the goals of the northern outreach program are? It's critical to the DHC.
Mr Poratto: The purpose of the DHC is to --
Mr Bartolucci: No, the northern outreach program.
Mr Poratto: I'm sorry, I don't get your question.
Mr Bartolucci: Do you know what the goals of the northern outreach program are?
Mr Poratto: Yes.
Mr Bartolucci: Okay. Knowing their goals, how can the DHC help foster realization of those goals?
Mr Poratto: In the beginning, I suppose the DHC and other groups have made a good deal of effort to have Sudbury designated as a centre that is underserviced, from the medical standpoint, and therefore develop systems and plans to encourage young doctors to come to Sudbury -- and I think that's only been realized just a very short time ago -- so they can then begin the outreach that you refer to. I don't think the DHC has been as successful as it would like to be in outreach, simply because there's been a tremendous shortage of MDs. Some of this designation will, I presume, I would hope, help to improve that outreach effort, for example.
Mr Bartolucci: I would suggest, if this appointment becomes a reality, that you quickly get hold of Jackie Thoms -- you are familiar with Jackie Thoms -- and have her fill you in on how many years the program has been in existence and how they've tried to foster the goals of health care improvement in Sudbury.
Let's talk about another area that I think is critical to the DHC and I'm sure you do too, and that's the Northern Health Human Resource Research Unit. Are you familiar with that unit?
Mr Poratto: I'm sorry, I don't get your question, Rick.
Mr Bartolucci: The Northern Health Human Resource Research Unit operates out of Laurentian University, Science North etc. Are you familiar with that unit?
Mr Poratto: No, I'm not.
Mr Bartolucci: I think it's critical, as well, that you find out some information about that. I think Dr Pong would be able to give you information that's vital to the situation.
Let me talk about the Sudbury Memorial Hospital for a second. You're in favour of its closure, then?
Mr Poratto: It's apparent to everyone in the Sudbury region that the Sudbury Memorial Hospital has done an exceptional job in the field in which it functions, which is cardiovascular. There's no doubt that service is essential to the total health care system. Therefore, whether the Sudbury Memorial Hospital remains open for whatever length of time, it's very necessary that that program, that's recognized, as I said, all over northeastern Ontario, be continued by moving it in the restructuring review that has been done and to ensure that it continues in its excellent role. The Sudbury Memorial Hospital has been scheduled for closure over a period of time; the review indicated that.
I would presume it's necessary, as a district health council, to review that review, if you will, not to change it but to begin to implement those items that obviously are due and proper. The Sudbury Memorial Hospital's role in the community, the function that it performed, should continue; whether or not it continues in that particular bricks-and-mortar location is another story, and obviously the restructuring review has indicated that it should close. I would presume that is the predominant position that has been taken, and the district health council therefore has to bear that in mind as well as act in its role as a district health council to ensure that the benefits the health care system brings are available to everyone.
Mr Bartolucci: Are you in favour of Sudbury Memorial Hospital staying open as a cardiac-thoracic institute?
Mr Poratto: Not necessarily. No, I'm not in favour of it staying open if the restructuring indicates clearly that that service can be provided in the restructured program.
Mr Bartolucci: So you're not in favour of it staying open as a cardiac-thoracic institute?
Mr Poratto: As long as that program and that service are provided in the new restructured form, there obviously is no necessity for it, or perhaps if it can't be done, Memorial should continue to provide that.
The Chair: Your time is up, Mr Bartolucci. Mr Kormos.
Mr Kormos: You became aware of a vacancy on the council?
Mr Poratto: Yes.
Mr Kormos: How did you become aware of the vacancy?
Mr Poratto: How did I become aware of what, Peter?
Mr Kormos: The vacancy on the council.
Mr Poratto: How did I become aware of -- I don't get the word you're using.
Mr Kormos: How did you become aware of a vacancy on the district health council?
Mr Poratto: Of the necessity for it? I don't get the word.
The Chair: Ray, could I try to help you? How did you know there was a position open on the health council for which you could apply? How did you find out about that opening?
Mr Poratto: How did I know that a position became available? Is that what you're saying?
The Chair: Right.
Mr Poratto: I was unaware. I made those initiatives I referred to, Mr Kormos. I took that proactive position, I suppose you'd call it, and as a result, I was invited by the DHC itself. They said, "If you feel you have special expertise or an ability to bring these groups together" -- and on and on -- "then please apply." I wrote a letter to the editor, as I mentioned, and I wrote a letter to the ministry as well. The main impetus for my approach was the result of the discussions I had with the DHC people, who were a little exasperated at my approach and my suggestion that they should end their wrangling and get at it, in that tone. They simply said, "Invite yourself to become a member," so I did.
Mr Kormos: You did that by making a written application to the Ministry of Health?
Mr Poratto: As well, that's correct.
Mr Kormos: As well as a written application to whom?
Mr Poratto: I was told by the DHC that I should send in an application to the boards and commission people as well, so I inquired about that.
Mr Kormos: Did you ever meet with the nominating committee of the district health council to which you were applying?
Mr Poratto: No.
Mr Kormos: Who did you speak with on the district health council prior to your application?
Mr Poratto: Mr Knight and Mr Ferguson, those two. One is the chair and the other is a member.
Mr Kormos: When did you make your application to the Ministry of Health?
Mr Poratto: Some time after that.
Mr Kormos: When was that?
Mr Poratto: Several months ago.
Mr Kormos: And you became aware that the district health council was advised of the imminent appointments of you and other people?
Mr Poratto: Had I been advised? No. That's the reason I'm here, I thought.
Mr Kormos: Quite right. When were you advised that you were being approved by the government for nomination pursuant to the rules and prior to your appearance before this committee?
Mr Poratto: I received communication then from the person who administers the boards and commissions appointments to respond. That was several months ago.
Mr Kormos: You spoke with at least two members of the district health council prior to your application?
Mr Poratto: Correct.
Mr Kormos: You made a written application to the Ministry of Health and to the public appointments secretariat?
Mr Poratto: Correct.
Mr Kormos: But you never made a written application to the district health council to which you are applying?
Mr Poratto: No. I spoke with them.
Mr Kormos: But you never made a written application to them?
Mr Poratto: No.
1050
Mr Kormos: Are you aware that the guidelines for appointment indicate that the nominees are to be submitted by the district health council?
Mr Poratto: No, I'm not aware.
Mr Kormos: Are you aware that the district health council has expressed great concern about the propriety of appointments being submitted and contemplated by the government?
Mr Poratto: The nominations by the government, is that what you said?
Mr Kormos: Yes.
Mr Poratto: My nomination has not been made by the government, to my knowledge.
Mr Kormos: Are you aware that the district health council has expressed great concern about the appointment by the government of people to its council?
Mr Poratto: That concern was not expressed to me by Knight or Ferguson.
Mr Kormos: As recently as April 15, in its letter to Jim Wilson. You're not aware of that?
Mr Poratto: That they expressed concern?
Mr Kormos: Yes.
Mr Poratto: Prior to that they had made the suggestion that I should apply.
Mr Kormos: But you never applied to the district health council, did you?
Mr Poratto: No, they told me to apply to the board.
Mr Kormos: Are you aware that the district health council has bylaw requirements to meet in terms of the makeup of its health council?
Mr Poratto: I presume they have bylaws to cover that.
Mr Kormos: Are you familiar with that bylaw and what it requires?
Mr Poratto: Am I aware of the specific terms of the bylaw? No, I'm not.
Mr Kormos: Are you aware that the district health council's recommendations in terms of nominations have been ignored by the government?
Mr Poratto: No, I'm not aware of that.
Mr Kormos: Are you aware that the district health council has advised the Ministry of Health that the appointments being proposed by the government conflict with or contravene the bylaw requirements of the makeup of that health council?
Mr Poratto: I'm not aware of that.
Mr Kormos: Do any of those things cause you concern?
Mr Poratto: No.
Mr Kormos: Contravention of the bylaw of the district health council is of no concern to you?
Mr Poratto: It is of concern, but I'm sure they would accept the application, because I've spoken to both those people and they indicated that's exactly what I should have done: make an application. They should have told me at that time that I should have made an application to them as well. I'm not aware of that.
Mr Kormos: Have either of those people offered letters of support to you for your application?
Mr Poratto: Other than to indicate that if I had a good deal of thought as to how the council should function, I should proceed, other than that, I have no knowledge of any specific support.
Mr Kormos: Had you ever applied for appointment to the district health council prior to this application you're speaking of?
Mr Poratto: No.
Mr Kormos: Why not?
Mr Poratto: The controversy erupted only in the last year or two, and I have followed it during that time.
Mr Kormos: Had you ever applied for appointment to any board, agency, commission of any government in this province prior to this application?
Mr Poratto: I did several years ago to the Ontario Training and Adjustment Board, and I was appointed to the council by the previous government. We sat for a period of about six months and then in July of last year the OTAB and its councils were disbanded.
Mr Kormos: Is that on your résumé? Yes, "Past Member of Business Reference Council of OTAB." That's what you're referring to.
Mr Poratto: The council is actually called the entry/re-entry council. It was a council of OTAB.
Mr Kormos: Yes, but under memberships, you put "Past Member of Business Reference Council of OTAB."
Mr Poratto: Yes, it was the business reference that was made to the council. That's why I referred to it as the business reference council, but it was the entry/re-entry council of OTAB.
Mr Kormos: But your notation in your résumé, your CV, is accurate, as you noted it? "Past Member of Business Reference Council of OTAB."
Mr Poratto: There were two sections: one was business and one was labour, so I just identified which it was. On the council, there were two groups.
Mr Kormos: You list a number of participations in boards of directors and in memberships. None of these indicate activities that indicate a specific interest in health issues.
Mr Poratto: Yes, the seniors' advisory council addresses health care issues and has. I'm on that board and have been for several years. It's the umbrella group that coordinates all the seniors' groups in the region.
Mr Kormos: The problem is that that's not on the résumé.
Mr Poratto: If I tried to put everything I did on my résumé, I'd have to take up three or four pages.
Mr Kormos: I understand.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr Kormos.
Mr Bert Johnson (Perth): On a point of order, Mr Chair: I wonder if Mr Kormos could be instructed to speak plainly and upfront. We're having a heck of a problem trying to hear him over here. It sounds like his mouth might be full of marbles. I wonder particularly if he could be instructed to talk plainly and out clearly.
Interjection: He was speaking loudly because of Ray's hearing aid.
The Chair: Mr Johnson, I don't think that's a particularly helpful suggestion.
Mr Poratto: Mr Chairman, may I respond to Mr Kormos?
The Chair: No, I'm sorry. We've run out of time. Mr Poratto, thank you for your patience in coming back again and appearing before the committee. You will be notified by the committee.
Mr Kormos: Chair, it's remarkable on Mr Johnson's part that if I but whisper in the Legislature that he's a dupa in the most sotto voce reference, he hears it at the drop of a hat.
The Chair: I think we should spare Mr Poratto from any more of this. Thank you, Mr Poratto.
We are now at the point of the agenda where we consider concurrences in the intended appointments. The first one is for Mr Rossetti.
Mr Bob Wood: Do you consider Mr Kormos's motion to be on the floor?
The Chair: No.
Mr Bob Wood: Do you want to move concurrence on Mr Rossetti? It's yours.
Mr Kormos: Thank you. I so move.
The Chair: Mr Kormos has moved concurrence on Mr Rossetti. All those in favour? Opposed? Carried. Thank you very much for that.
The second motion for concurrence -- well, there isn't one yet.
Mr Bob Wood: I move concurrence in Mr Poratto.
The Chair: So moved. Any comments? Any discussion?
Mr Crozier: In view of the fact that Mr Kormos brought up the question that his appointment may not be according to the bylaws of the district health council, I wonder if there's some way we might clarify that, and in so doing, I would ask for a deferral of one week for his appointment.
The Chair: It is in order to request a deferral for an appointment. Therefore, ergo -- is that the right word, Mr Kormos, "ergo"?
Mr Kormos: You got it.
The Chair: We'll have a deferment of one week.
Mr Crozier: In the meantime, could we get some clarification about whether he is not being appointed according to the bylaws of the district health council, and if not, why not, and what can be done to correct that?
The Chair: Okay.
Mr Bert Johnson: Also within that research, I wonder if Mr Pond would look into what happens if the bylaw of a district health council contradicts or conflicts with a provincial guideline.
Mr Crozier: I don't know if you can do all this for us.
Mr David Pond: I can give you the answer right now.
Mr Crozier: No, wait for a week to tell us. The Chair: There's been a deferral for one week suggested, and that is completely in order.
Mr Bob Wood: Mr Chair, I can speak to this now if you want, but if you really want the deferral, we'll do it in a week.
The Chair: I think he wants the deferral.
Mr Crozier: We'd like to see Mr Poratto's letter of application as well, if that's possible.
Mr Pond: I presume the letter of application can be provided.
Mr Bob Wood: Mr Crozier has asked the committee to request it from the minister, and he'll either give it to you or he won't.
Mr Crozier: I would think the appointments secretariat would have it. He said he sent one.
Mr Bob Wood: You may be right. I think the request should go to the public appointments secretariat and to the minister, who will either produce it or not, in accordance with what they want to do.
The Chair: We'll try to get that letter for the committee for a week from today. Anything further on that? That's done, then.
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
The Chair: The final agenda item is the report of the subcommittee. Do you have copies of this? Okay.
Mr Bob Wood: I move adoption of the report of the subcommittee of April 23, 1996, and I'd also move that reading of it be waived.
The Chair: Any debate on that? All those in favour of Mr Wood's motion for acceptance of the subcommittee report? Any opposed? Carried.
That concludes this meeting of the standing committee. I thank members for their attention and cooperation, and Mr Poratto for his attendance. We're adjourned.
The committee adjourned at 1102.