INTENDED
APPOINTMENTS
DOMINIC GIROUX
CONTENTS
Wednesday 17 September 1997
Subcommittee report
Intended appointments
M. Dominic Giroux
Mr Edward Takacs
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Chair / Président
Mr Floyd Laughren (Nickel Belt ND)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Président
Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt ND)
Mr John R. Baird (Nepean PC)
Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury L)
Mrs Brenda Elliott (Guelph PC)
Mr Douglas B. Ford (Etobicoke-Humber PC)
Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur L)
Mr Garry J. Guzzo (Ottawa-Rideau PC)
Mr Bert Johnson (Perth PC)
Mr Peter Kormos (Welland-Thorold ND)
Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora L)
Mr Peter L. Preston (Brant-Haldimand PC)
Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt ND)
Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough PC)
Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Simcoe Centre / -Centre PC)
Clerk / Greffier
Mr Douglas Arnott
Staff / Personnel
Mr David Pond, research officer, Legislative Research Service
The committee met at 1006 in room 151.
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
The Chair (Mr Floyd Laughren): The standing committee will come to order. The first order of business is the subcommittee report of Friday, September 12, which calls for two persons to come before the committee.
Mr John R. Baird (Nepean): I move adoption of the committee report dated September 12.
The Chair: You've heard the motion. Any debate? All in favour? Opposed? It's carried. Thank you for that.
INTENDED APPOINTMENTS
DOMINIC GIROUX
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Dominic Giroux, intended appointee as member, Education Quality and Accountability Office.
The Chair: The second order of business is the review of the intended appointment of Mr Dominic Giroux to the Education Quality and Accountability Office. Mr Giroux, if you would take a seat at the table; we welcome you to the committee this morning. We're pleased that you are here. If you wish to make any opening statements, each party at the table has 10 minutes they can utilize. Part of the government's 10 minutes is any comments you would make. If you wish to make any, now is the time to do so.
M. Dominic Giroux : Parfait. Merci beaucoup, Monsieur le Président. Je m'exprime en français, si vous permettez, et je m'excuserai de ma voix. Je me soigne d'une vilaine grippe.
Membres du comité, il me fait plaisir d'être parmi vous ce matin afin de répondre à vos questions relativement à ma nomination proposée au conseil d'administration de l'Office de la qualité et de la responsabilité en éducation.
Permettez-moi de présenter brièvement mon engagement en éducation. J'ai été élu président du Conseil des écoles catholiques de langue française de la région d'Ottawa-Carleton en décembre 1996, devenant ainsi le plus jeune président de conseil scolaire au Canada. Conseiller scolaire depuis 1994, j'ai présidé, entre autres, le comité d'éducation, en plus d'être un membre actif de plusieurs autres comités du Conseil, notamment ceux des ressources humaines et des négociations des conventions collectives. Je suis membre du comité local d'amélioration de l'éducation pour le Conseil scolaire du district no 66, et je préside le sous-comité de services administratifs.
À titre de conseiller scolaire, j'ai initié des mesures avec l'appui de quelques collègues pour améliorer la qualité et la responsabilité dans les écoles. Voici seulement quelques exemples.
Nous avons cette année des évaluations systémiques du conseil pour certains cours de français et de mathématiques au niveau de la 12e année et des cours préuniversitaires de l'Ontario. Au printemps dernier, nous avons fait parvenir un sondage sur la satisfaction des parents à tous les parents du conseil. Les résultats ont été compilés et permettront à chacune des écoles d'identifier ses forces et les aspects à améliorer.
À compter de cet automne, chaque école va préparer annuellement un rapport de performance qui inclura un profil de la clientèle, un plan d'amélioration, les résultats académiques des élèves, les résultats du sondage de satisfaction des parents et un aperçu de l'aide additionnelle requise, tant au niveau de l'école que du conseil.
Nous avons une nouvelle politique budgétaire qui fait en sorte que les prévisions budgétaires ne peuvent inclure d'augmentation de taxes et qu'elles doivent allouer une part plus importante au plan pédagogique, être précédées d'une consultation des partenaires en éducation et des membres du personnel, démontrer l'argent investi dans chaque école ou service par rapport à chacune des priorités du conseil, et présenter non seulement une comptabilité financière, mais aussi une comptabilité de gestion par programme et services offerts.
Ces initiatives ont été ou sont en voie d'être mises en oeuvre.
C'est donc dans ce contexte que le mandat de l'OQRE m'intéresse au plus haut point. J'ai suivi attentivement la mise en oeuvre des évaluations provinciales dans nos écoles le printemps dernier. J'ai discuté avec bon nombre d'enseignantes et d'enseignants de troisième année qui ont vécu cette nouvelle expérience. Plusieurs suggestions très intéressantes m'ont été communiqué.
J'ai aussi un intérêt particulier pour l'autre volet du mandat de l'OQRE, soit celui d'élaborer des indicateurs de rendement pour les écoles élémentaires et secondaires et d'accroître la responsabilité des conseils scolaires. En fait, plus d'outils ont été développés dans le passé dans ces domaines tant en Ontario que dans d'autres juridictions. Il s'agit donc là d'un défi intéressant qui laisse beaucoup de place à l'innovation.
À titre de bénévole, j'aimerais pouvoir contribuer aux délibérations du conseil d'administration de l'OQRE en partageant le fruit de mes démarches des trois dernières années au sein d'un conseil scolaire et en continuant à travailler étroitement avec les parents, le personnel des écoles et des conseils scolaires, les élèves et les contribuables.
The Chair: Thank you very much for that. We can move to the government members now. Do you have any questions or comments?
Mr Baird: We'd defer at this time to our colleagues in the official opposition.
Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): Welcome, Mr Giroux. Thank you for your opening comments. I'll speak English because my French is not nearly as proficient as yours is. I know your English is pretty good, so I look forward to your responses.
Let me say at the outset that I appreciate your dedication to education. I think by and large much of the direction your board has achieved is because of the excellence of trustees who have been elected to the position and the direction you collectively have taken. I might want to start off with just a few general questions that are not directly related to your office but I think play a crucial role in some of the decisions you will be making over the course of the next little while.
Certainly, the reduction of trustees -- let me zero in on the regulation that disqualifies a spouse of a teacher from being a trustee. Do you agree that that is a direction that will benefit education, both in the short term and in the long term? Qualify your answer, please.
M. Giroux : Oui, j'ai appuyé cette clause du projet de loi 104 parce que je croyais qu'il y avait des conflits d'intérêts. J'ai moi-même siégé à un comité de négociation de conventions collectives et on se retrouvait dans des situations où parfois des conseillères et conseillers scolaires prenaient des positions de bonne foi à titre des buts, mais souvent il y avait un potentiel que ces personnes-là étaient en conflit par rapport à des membres de leur famille, des membres de leur entourage. Ayant déjà étudié la réglementation fédérale en matière de conflits d'intérêts, on sait bien qu'un potentiel de conflit d'intérêt égale un conflit d'intérêt. Donc, dans ce contexte-là, j'ai appuyé cette disposition du projet de loi 104.
Mr Bartolucci: So you don't think that simply declaring a conflict of interest would have solved the problem you've alluded to in your answer, as it has in the past.
M. Giroux : Non, je ne crois pas, parce qu'on vit également la même situation au niveau du personnel administratif des conseils scolaires. Surtout dans les milieux francophones, où souvent les personnes se rencontrent à la faculté d'éducation des universités, ça cause un problème. Les gens se connaissent beaucoup trop, souvent, et c'est bon d'avoir des gens qui ne sont pas en conflit. Ne serait-ce pour une question de crédibilité, je crois que c'est important.
Mr Bartolucci: If we carried that to other departments of municipal and provincial and federal governments, then you would say anyone who has a relative working at any level in municipal government should be excluded from running for municipal office.
M. Giroux : Je ne serais pas prêt à me prononcer là-dessus. Tout ce dont je peux témoigner, c'est de mon expérience au niveau scolaire, où je crois que c'est important d'avoir des élus qui ne sont pas en conflit d'intérêt immédiat.
Mr Bartolucci: Do you believe, as a trustee, that a teacher's working conditions are a student's learning conditions?
M. Giroux : Oui. Je crois que tout conseil scolaire a un devoir d'assurer des conditions de travail acceptables pour son personnel et d'assurer un milieu de vie optimal pour les élèves auxquels le conseil a une responsabilité.
Mr Bartolucci: Thanks very much, and I certainly agree with your answer here. There's absolutely no question about that. Let me follow it up a little bit. You know that the government continually says they have two goals in education, and their first goal is one that I think every party and every individual and every pupil and every student and every trustee and everyone in Ontario agrees with. We've been striving for that since the education system began and I think we will be striving for it after this government is replaced by another government, whenever that happens.
The second one, of trying to get improvements to the education system by withdrawing the enormous amount of money that they're suggesting they're going to withdraw, another $1.3 billion: Do you agree that that is achievable, and if so, how do you ever think they will be able to improve that quality by diminishing the dollars so significantly?
M. Giroux : Personnellement, j'adhère à l'objectif d'éliminer le déficit particulièrement comme jeune Ontarien. Je crois que les réductions de dépenses peuvent se faire. Nous l'avons fait dans notre conseil, et le nôtre en 1996 était le conseil scolaire dont les subventions étaient réduites le plus dans la province, c'est-à-dire de l'ordre de 7,6 %. Malgré cela, nous avons fait un surplus budgétaire, nous avons diminué le ratio d'élève par enseignant et nous avons augmenté des budgets d'école et les fonds alloués à la technologie. Donc, ça peut se faire, mais ça requiert des décisions difficiles dans certains cas.
Mr Bartolucci: That's a great political answer and it speaks well about what you've done in Ottawa, but it doesn't answer really directly the question I asked with regard to the direction of this government.
Mr Garry J. Guzzo (Ottawa-Rideau): The miracle on the Rideau.
Mr Bartolucci: Yes, right. But as a trustee, are you not concerned with regard to the diminishing ability of school boards to offer early childhood education? Are you not concerned, as a trustee, about the diminishing opportunities of school boards across this province to provide effective special education programs? As a trustee, are you not concerned with the growing student teacher population? As a trustee, are you not concerned about the reduction of per pupil expenditure of square footage that this government is I think musing about now in some of the releases the minister has made? Are you not concerned that all those factors detract from the quality of education you as a trustee have worked so very, very hard to create over your short term, but also from the work that every politician in Ontario has done in the past regarding education? Are you not concerned about some of the cuts that are taking place?
M. Giroux : À quelle question voulez-vous que je réponde ? La dernière dernière ?
Mr Bartolucci: All of them.
M. Giroux : Je vais tenter de donner une réponse globale. Certainement, la première réaction serait de dire qu'on voudrait toujours plus d'argent dans le milieu scolaire, sauf que si on regarde au cours des 10 dernières années, il y a eu plus d'argent et les résultats n'ont pas été comparables à la norme nationale.
Je crois qu'il peut y avoir des réductions de dépenses dans l'enveloppe globale de la province, et les compressions budgétaires peuvent se gérer, mais elles doivent se gérer avec sensibilité au niveau local. Ce que j'aime du nouveau modèle de financement qui est proposé, c'est que ça laisse la flexibilité aux conseils scolaires de déterminer leurs priorités, mais ça va assurer une certaine transparence.
Donc, je crois que ça peut se faire, et comme je vous dis, nous avons eu des compressions budgétaires et ces services n'ont pas été amputés chez nous parce que nous avons planifié avec soin. S'il y a d'autres compressions budgétaires, nous aurons à faire le même exercice : être plus imaginatifs dans nos façons d'opérer et ainsi préserver les programmes.
Mr Bartolucci: Again thank you for your answer, but I'm concerned that you're not addressing -- are you in favour, simply yes or no, of this government's reduction to school boards, which have caused junior kindergarten programs to vanish, regardless of local priorities? Are you not concerned that the reduction in funding has caused enormous impacts on children with special needs, on their parents, on their ability --
Mr Guzzo: Where?
1020
Mr Bartolucci: All over Ontario. I can cite examples in Ottawa. I can cite examples in Sudbury. I can cite examples all over this province. I don't think you as a trustee will dispute that. Are you not concerned about these cuts, as a trustee and as a young Ontarian coming up?
M. Giroux : Comme conseiller scolaire, c'est évident que je suis très préoccupé lorsque je lis dans les journaux que les conseils scolaires réduisent ces services, sauf que dans l'expérience que j'ai vécue depuis trois ans, nous avons augmenté le nombre d'éducateurs pour l'intégration de l'enfance en difficulté. Nous avons maintenu le nombre de classes distinctes. Nous n'avons pas fait ces réductions-là.
Comme expérience personnelle, je ne peux pas vous dire que c'est affreux, parce que je ne l'ai pas vécu. Pourtant, nous sommes un conseil francophone et catholique, et on sait que les francophones catholiques sont doublement pénalisés au niveau du financement. C'est une injustice qui a perduré longtemps dans la province. Alors, personnellement, je ne les ai pas vécus. La maternelle, nous l'avons toujours chez nous, mais nous l'avons à journée alternante. Les parents semblent satisfaits de ce mode de service-là. Donc, je suis très préoccupé de ce qui peut se passer ailleurs en province, mais dans la situation du conseil où j'ai de l'expérience je ne peux pas en témoigner.
Mr Bartolucci: But Dominic, to be fair to you and for you to be fair to this committee, you're going to get an appointment that's provincial, and I'm happy that that's happening in your school board. I only wish it was happening in every other school board in Ontario. The sad reality is, I think it's 28 school boards that have cut junior kindergarten; 55 school boards have reduced significantly the amount of special education programming and resources available. You're going on to what I, as a parent first but also as a former schoolteacher, consider to be a very, very important committee. Your expertise is going to be very crucial to the direction taken by this government. Are you not concerned that that many school boards are having to reduce or eliminate programs?
M. Giroux : Ce qui m'intéresserait dans mon mandat à l'OQRE, ce serait une revue des recommandations de la Commission d'amélioration d'éducation. Si vous avez remarqué dans les 31 recommandations, il y en a trois qui s'adressent à l'OQRE, dont une est d'évaluer l'efficacité des programmes de la petite enfance -- je prends l'exemple que vous avez soulevé -- et d'évaluer la question du nombre d'élèves par classe, et également d'évaluer l'ensemble des changements en éducation. Donc à la lumière de l'expérience que j'ai vécue pour les trois dernières années, je pourrais contribuer à ce niveau-là, dans une perspective provinciale, en développant des indicateurs des rendements.
The Chair: That's the 10 minutes allocated to the official opposition. I take this opportunity to welcome the newly elected member for Ottawa West to the committee. Mr Cullen, welcome.
Mr Bartolucci: Who remains temporarily nameless because he hasn't got a sign with his name on it.
The Chair: Oh, I see. That won't take long. Third party.
Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt): Those are things that time will heal, I say to my colleague as I welcome him to the committee.
The Chair: Time heals all wounds, or is that "wounds all heels"?
Mr Silipo: Most wounds, maybe not all.
Monsieur Giroux, bonjour. Je vous remercie d'être ici et aussi pour nous forcer -- et je mets ce mot dans le meilleur contexte -- un peu à utiliser l'autre langue officielle de notre pays et aussi de la Législature de l'Ontario. Je dois dire qu'en regardant votre curriculum vitae, c'est remarquable. Ça me fait penser aussi à mes premiers jours dans la politique parce que, comme vous j'ai commencé -- pas si jeune ; j'ai commencé à 21 ans, vous quelques ans avant ça. Donc, c'était vraiment bien de voir cela.
D'un autre côté, je crois qu'on n'a pas vraiment beaucoup de questions à vous poser. On reconnaît que la position pour laquelle on vous a sélectionné, même dans les deux ou trois ans que vous êtes dans la vie publique, vous avez certainement acquis beaucoup d'expérience qui va être utile pour ça. Je n'ai qu'une question. Peut-être que mon collègue en aura d'autres. Vous savez peut-être que n'importe quelle autre question que je pose aux candidats qui se présentent devant nous, j'aime toujours savoir s'ils sont, et donc si vous l'êtes maintenant, ou si vous l'avez jamais été, membre d'un parti politique dans la province ou dans le pays.
M Giroux : Je suis progressiste-conservateur de l'Ontario.
Mr Silipo: Merci.
Mr Peter Kormos (Welland-Thorold): The qualifications I think are outstanding. This is one of those rare cases of patronage that also has merit attached to it. I wish there were more occasions with this government -- we all understand patronage, but here's the rare case where the government is engaging in patronage of a highly qualified person who I think will make an interesting contribution to this particular office. I'm going to support it. I have no question about that.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr Kormos. We now go to the government members.
M. Baird : Merci, Monsieur Giroux, pour votre présentation ici. Notre but comme gouvernement provincial est d'essayer d'améliorer la qualité de l'éducation pour les élèves partout dans la province. Votre conseil à Ottawa-Carleton a travaillé très fort dans ce domaine pendant les dernières années. Je sais bien que votre conseil dépense moins d'argent pour éduquer un élève à Ottawa-Carleton que peut-être le conseil public d'Ottawa. Quelles expériences avez-vous appris dans votre conseil que vous pouvez utiliser comme membre de ce poste, des expériences dans la qualité de l'éducation et des expériences dans le domaine du financement de l'éducation d'un élève ?
M. Giroux : Comme j'ai mentionné tout à l'heure dans mon mot d'ouverture, j'ai initié avec des collègues certaines initiatives au niveau de la responsabilité particulièrement dans les écoles, que ce soient les évaluations systémiques à la fin du secondaire, que ce soient des rapports de performance où les directions d'école doivent rendre des comptes à leur communauté, et je l'ai dit d'une façon positive et non pas de la façon péjorative comme on l'entend souvent.
En travaillant avec les gens sur le terrain, dans les écoles, autant les élèves et les parents que le personnel, je crois avoir surtout développé une bonne relation avec eux et une bonne compréhension également de leur réalité, que je pourrais partager avec mes collègues à l'OQRE, qui sont également très compétents. Donc, je pense qu'à ce niveau-là ça devrait m'aider.
M. Baird : Dans votre opinion, est-ce que le projet de loi 104 va aider, va améliorer l'éducation des élèves dans votre conseil et dans votre région de la province ?
M. Giroux : Certainement comme francophones -- le projet de loi 104 reconnaît un droit qui nous était acquis depuis longtemps et que la province ne respectait pas. Ça fait 15 ans que l'Ontario est en situation inconstitutionnelle par rapport au jugement de la Cour suprême et à la Charte des droits. Donc certainement ça va améliorer notre sort, parce qu'il a été reconnu que la gestion par et pour les francophones permet une éducation qui répond vraiment aux besoins des jeunes.
Dans le cas particulier de notre région, notre conseil, le Conseil des écoles catholiques d'Ottawa-Carleton -- nous allons faire partie d'un nouveau conseil, le district 66. Le territoire va être d'une superficie de 33 000 pieds carrés, alors jusqu'à Deux-Rivières au nord et Trenton au sud, et déjà on est en train d'établir de bonnes relations avec les autres sections de langue française, et voir comment on peut partager les services et puis apprendre de nos expériences particulières autant à Kingston, à Ottawa ou à Renfrew. Donc je pense que, en bout de ligne, les élèves devraient en profiter à ce niveau-là.
Mr Guzzo: Welcome. I want to make it clear to you that you've received two fantastic compliments here this morning. For the Vice-Chair, Mr Silipo, to compare your career to his -- I mean that sincerely; he is a very respected member of the House. And for one of the most ferocious cross-examiners of witnesses, as a lawyer, to pass on the opportunity to cross-examine you, that is also a tremendous compliment. Mr Kormos's compliment this morning must be appreciated.
I want to draw from you some information with regard to the board in Ottawa-Carleton, of which you were chair, and the costs related thereto. You continue to provide junior kindergarten, correct?
M. Giroux : Oui.
Mr Guzzo: Your school board doesn't own a golf course, correct?
M. Giroux : Non.
Mr Guzzo: Unlike another school board in Ottawa-Carleton, apparently you don't own a farm.
M. Giroux : Non.
Mr Guzzo: Last year in February, when the conference for trustees was held in the Bahamas, you sent no trustees, correct?
M. Giroux : Oui.
Mr Guzzo: Notwithstanding that other boards sent as many as six, but you have funds available for junior kindergarten and others don't, correct?
M. Giroux : Oui.
Mr Guzzo: Mr Bartolucci, it's strictly a question of priorities. Thank you very much.
The Chair: M. Giroux, thank you. That utilizes the time of the committee. We thank you very much for appearing before us this morning. Merci beaucoup.
1030
EDWARD TAKACS
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Edward Takacs, intended appointee as member, Health Services Appeal Board.
The Chair: The next intended appointment is Mr Edward Takacs to the Health Services Appeal Board. If he would take a seat at the table, we can begin the process. We welcome you to the committee. You have an opportunity to make any opening remarks if you wish.
I'm sorry. Mr Bartolucci.
Mr Bartolucci: Do we have a quorum?
The Chair: I don't know. The clerk will check.
Clerk of the Committee (Mr Douglas Arnott): A quorum is not present, Chair.
Mr Baird: Mr Chair, on the same point, perhaps we could check with the three opposition members who just went out in the hall.
Mr Bartolucci: Perhaps we can check with the rest of the government members who should be here.
The Chair: Order, please. We'll stand down the meeting until there's a quorum.
We have a quorum. Let us proceed, then. Did you wish to make any opening remarks?
Mr Edward Takacs: Thank you very much; I will. I'm very happy to be in front of the committee this morning. By way of brief background, I have been in the health care industry for 18 years. I've achieved two degrees, one in Philadelphia and one at the University of Toronto, and I've enjoyed different venues in various different capacities in health care.
I've worked in Fredericton, New Brunswick. I've worked in Markham, opening up the new hospital there. I had a very short secondment through to the Ministry of Health. Most recently I am associated with Stevenson Memorial Hospital in Alliston. My role as executive director and administrator at the hospital largely entails board relations, community relations, medical staff, public relations, and of course, on an operational level, to ensure that the hospital operates efficiently and effectively in providing quality services to the catchment area of Alliston and New Tecumseh.
During my 18 years of health care, to say the very least, there have been dramatic changes. We are all very aware of those given the present situation in health care at this time.
On a brief personal note, I am the father of two children. I reside in Alliston. Originally, however, I hail from Brantford, Ontario.
I'm very happy to respond to any questions the audience may have.
The Chair: Thank you for that. We'll start with the official opposition.
Mr Gerard Kennedy (York South): Mr Takacs, thank you for being here. I'd like to talk to you about the Health Services Appeal Board. You recognize that it's backlogged, that there's a tremendous wait involved for people. I had an experience lately with someone, for example, from the United States, who went to school in the United States, was injured and had to go for another half-year completely uninsured because the Health Services Appeal Board couldn't hear them in time. Do you have any ideas about how you would address that backlog?
Mr Takacs: Speculatively, one could say that one could perhaps add on additional days. I understand the board meets up to 10 days per month. Could it be enhanced, Mr Kennedy?
The other aspect is, I do understand that this board, along with three or four other boards, may collapse together in the interests of efficiency and in the interests of trying to group like denominators together. That may have a positive bearing on the waiting list.
Mr Kennedy: How would expanding the number of days affect your ability to participate and your function as a full-time executive director of the Stevenson Memorial Hospital?
Mr Takacs: I would have to prioritize my activities here potentially on the board and certainly at the hospital. I understand the averaging is certainly not 10 days but is something less than 10 days.
Mr Kennedy: That would be required of you, yourself?
Mr Takacs: I understand so, a few days per month.
Mr Kennedy: You are a previous employee of the Ministry of Health, institutional division.
Mr Takacs: Correct.
Mr Kennedy: As a member of the board, you would be expected to be independent and you would be expected to be separate from the ministry in terms of their decisions. Do you think you would find yourself in a position to do that, having been an employee, having seen that side of the ministry and been part of that bureaucracy?
Mr Takacs: In my opinion, no, none whatsoever.
Mr Kennedy: I'm sorry. You would or you would not be able to be independent?
Mr Takacs: I would be able to be independent. My involvement in the Ministry of Health was about 10 months and it was on a front-line consultant level, responding to issues, concerns, operating plans, matters related to hospitals and government. Certainly it was not at a level of an upper echelon in the Ministry of Health; it was very much at an operational level, Mr Kennedy.
Mr Kennedy: In a related concern, where would you find yourself in terms of coming up against potential conflicts with policies from the Minister of Health? You are a member of a hospital whose riding is represented by the Minister of Health. Would that influence your view? From time to time, for example, in long-term care, there are problems now because regulations and laws haven't been passed. Today, in fact, the appeals court is hearing whether or not they can hear cases of long-term care that have been referred to them. It's a mess coming from the government. It's a political problem that issues from there. Do you think your proximity and your interaction with the Minister of Health will put you in any kind of conflict for that?
Mr Takacs: First, I do not interact with the Minister of Health per se. He happens to be the member of provincial Parliament for Simcoe West and in his role he is there as MPP. I know Mr Wilson as I know the mayor of Alliston, as I know other individuals walking down Main Street. The professional interaction is not one of influence or perceived influence whatsoever.
Mr Kennedy: Can I ask you, then, how the special status of Stevenson Memorial Hospital was obtained? On September 20, 1995, the new Minister of Health, in his capacity as Minister of Health, said that Stevenson Memorial would not close. This was ahead of the time that every other hospital in the province was up for scrutiny, was being looked at, for whether or not they fit some supposedly objective health system, yet there's been a free pass given on the part of the Minister of Health to Stevenson Memorial. I think people everywhere across the province look a bit askance at that and wonder about the connection between the ministry and the hospital. Then of course, unfortunately, this brings into relevancy your presence here today as a potential member of an objective committee. Would you care to comment on that?
Mr Takacs: As best as possible, I can say I'm not aware -- I'm aware of the statement, both in the Toronto Star and certainly in our local paper, Mr Kennedy. As far as the legitimacy of the statement, I do not know. I can however offer my comment. I see our hospital being a small, rural hospital subject to the rural and northern health care framework recently announced by the Ministry of Health, along with its associated draft guidelines. We're one of 74 or 75 small hospitals in Ontario and we indeed will be reviewed and evaluated in the context of those two documents. Those two then go into the MOH, then go into HSRC.
1040
Mr Kennedy: But you do recognize that the Minister of Health said publicly -- and it's quoted in your local paper, the Herald, not the Toronto Star -- that Stevenson Memorial Hospital is in no danger of closing. The minister, at your community meeting, said that there are problems in the health care system but that Stevenson is well positioned geographically and financially to make its position secure. This is far ahead of any framework.
We could get into the efficacy of the rural framework. Do you think it would survive as a B-level or C-level hospital? That's a separate question I'd like you to answer. But right now it seems very clear that the minister, in advance, assured the citizens of Alliston their hospital would be there. That infers a certain amount of political inference on his part, because he was speaking as the Minister of Health.
Mr Takacs: I can best respond to that by saying these were the remarks of the minister, and I would respectfully suggest that you direct those remarks to the minister. These were his remarks. I've tried to honestly respond as to what I feel will be the review and evaluation of Stevenson Memorial Hospital in Alliston and New Tecumseh.
Mr Kennedy: Yes, but the question we're still trying to get at is whether or not that status in Stevenson puts you in a position -- and not necessarily you personally -- in terms of, will the people be able to see you on the appeals board as independent, knowing you're this chief executive officer of a hospital that is seen to have special treatment? We'll see in terms of the review coming from the commission as to whether that special treatment is borne out. I think that's what you're saying to us, but do you appreciate that this is a perception problem that could affect the way people value your participation?
Mr Takacs: I appreciate your issue. There is perception and there is reality. Historically speaking, at my hospital, whatever we had done, because we are in the minister's riding, we have had to work harder, more diligently, in order to make any proposal for success. I don't believe there would be a perceived influence in my capacity as executive director in the hospital which happens to dovetail in the local MPP's riding. I do not believe so.
Mr Kennedy: Mr Takacs, are you involved in partisan politics at all?
Mr Takacs: No, I am not.
Mr Kennedy: I'd like to ask you about your views about the Health Services Appeal Board in terms of the board itself, whether you feel that the consolidation of other boards -- you mentioned the word "efficiency," and your résumé says that you are "supportive of current systemic health care reform." I want to ask you about that generally, but specifically the idea that making boards, in this case covering a lot of fields, bigger is necessarily going to be better, that there are going to be efficiencies there.
We have problems now in terms of people being able to get the answers they need from the health system in a timely fashion. I am, for example, aware of a case that will be heard in the next few days of a woman who's going to lose her home care and be forced into a long-term-care facility. There is no such facility available, and it has taken weeks and weeks to get to the appeal board.
The government is proposing to tack on a whole bunch more responsibilities -- and yes, related in the sense that they're in health fields -- into the same board. From a layperson's perspective, that looks like more confusion, more adjustment and a longer delay for the people who are involved. How do you separate out the useful reforms from the simplistic just mushing things together in the hope of staking out some short-term savings, and what do you know about the appeal board that would tell you which category that falls into?
Mr Takacs: I'm aware of the function and the mandate and the mission of the appeal board itself. To try to answer your question, which is very broad -- how does it interface with the other three or four boards that may come together? -- I believe you're asking whether there are any efficiencies. My best answer to that is, before conducting a review and evaluation, the way I personally like to operate, I would like to see what the actual outcomes will be. We have to have a tangible result in order to reinforce or to prove that whatever we do is for the best for the most. There has to be an objective, evidence-based review of whatever we do. Otherwise we're doing it for the sake of principle as opposed to the sake of best interests and pragmatics.
Mr Kennedy: How long do you think someone should have to wait to be heard by the appeal board, reasonably?
Mr Takacs: I don't know. I would have a better answer should I be appointed to the board. Certainly one year is too long; one week is too short.
The Chair: Sorry, Mr Kennedy. Can you make this your last question?
Mr Kennedy: Yes, I can. Is there anything about the government's current systemic health care reform of which you don't approve?
Mr Takacs: I think there could be a question of pace. What we're doing is very fast and it certainly interfaces in all areas. I must qualify that by saying, however -- and I have declared it, as you noted, on my CV -- that I am a proponent of the systemic changes in our health care delivery system.
Mr Kennedy: The "current" reform is how it's worded on your résumé.
Mr Takacs: Yes, exactly. I say that because not only for health care, but from a global perspective or from a provincial perspective, this province is incurring something like $17 billion in debt on an annualized basis. That figure closely dovetails with the total expenditures of the health care budget. Said another way, if we didn't have the provincial debt, we could run a whole parallel system in health care. I'm saying specifically for health care, yes, I agree, but globally, provincially, I think we have some issues that also have to be addressed.
The Chair: Could we move to Mr Silipo.
Mr Silipo: I was interested very much in the exchange between Mr Kennedy and Mr Takacs, particularly the last exchange. It seemed to me that what the witness indicated was that he was supportive of the Liberal position, which was that the government is moving generally in the right direction, just moving too fast. I just want that noted for the record.
Seriously, I think Mr Kennedy asked a lot of very good questions and I listened intently to the answers. I don't have any more that I could add to that.
The Chair: Thank you. Mr Kormos.
Mr Kormos: Once again, here's a nominee who has extensive qualifications. We're going to support his nomination. However, I note that in view of the fact that neither Mr Cullen nor Mr Kennedy is a formal member of the committee -- they have every right to be here -- should Mr Gravelle, Mr Silipo and I leave to respond to urgent phone calls, what have you, the government will have scuttled the appointments of Mr Takacs and Mr Giroux because they won't have a quorum. I'm being overly generous, I suppose, by warning them of that prospect, but that's just my nature. It's the kind of guy I am.
Mr Baird: Give, give, give. That's all you do.
Mr Kormos: I wouldn't want to see the government caught with its pants down by virtue of there being no quorum and this committee having to adjourn without having approved these two appointments. I'd like to see the whip of the government caucus there do something about the prospect of a serious quorum problem.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr Kormos. I'm sure the government members appreciate those remarks as much as I do. Are you finished now on the appointment?
Mr Kormos: Yes, I am.
The Chair: Do the government members have any questions or comments?
Mr Baird: Thank you very much for your time and for coming in today. We do appreciate it. Obviously you have a tremendous amount of experience both in terms of direct hospital administration and in terms of working with the Ontario Ministry of Health, which is sort of a unique blend, just in the last three or four years. Can you tell me what you've learned in terms of being an administrator at Stevenson Memorial that you think would assist you in the new role?
Mr Takacs: Certainly the aspect of board relations, developing a good relationship with those around you. In my capacity as administrator, one just does not make a decision based upon pragmatics sometimes but one must have a degree of compassion in their decision-making. When appeals are made to the Health Services Appeal Board, I think one certainly has to be, in their decision-making, very fair, objective, reasonable. They also have to have a degree of compassion and appreciation for the issue at hand.
Mr Baird: Thank you very much.
The Chair: If there are no further questions, thank you very much for coming before the committee. The committee now deals with confirmation of your appointment and Mr Giroux's. You can stay for that if you wish.
Mr Takacs: Thank you very much.
The Chair: Is the committee prepared to entertain the confirmations?
Mr Baird: I move concurrence in the appointment of Dominic Giroux as a member of the Education Quality and Accountability Office.
The Chair: You've heard the motion. Is there any comment on it?
Mr Baird: I would ask for a 20-minute recess.
The Chair: Okay, we'll --
Mr Baird: Just a moment. I'll withdraw that request for a recess.
The Chair: So we don't need it? All right, then, you've heard the motion. All those in favour of the concurrence?
Mr Baird: Could I ask for a recorded vote.
The Chair: Recorded vote.
Ayes
Baird, Bartolucci, Elliot, Bert Johnson, Hastings, Tascona, Silipo.
The Chair: It's unanimous; thank you for that. The next concurrence?
Mr Baird: I move concurrence in the appointment of Edward Takacs as a member of the Health Services Appeal Board.
The Chair: You've heard the motion. Does anyone wish to speak to it? If not, are you ready for the question? All those in favour? All those opposed? It's carried. Thank you for that.
Mr Bartolucci: Mr Chair, just a point. I came back in to vote because I wanted to maintain the quorum, because I didn't want to have the two appointees travel all the way down here and then end the day without some resolution to it. But I might tell the government members that it is clearly their responsibility to maintain quorum. You can pass the buck and say the two opposition members walked out who weren't members of this committee or weren't subbed in, but I want to inform the whip and the government members that, as they know, it is their responsibility to maintain quorum -- their responsibility. Had Mr Silipo and I not been here for the vote, there would be no resolution to these two appointees. I think that's wrong. I think that shows disrespect to your Tory appointees.
The Chair: Mr Baird, same point of order?
Mr Baird: I would simply indicate to Mr Bartolucci that it was your party, the Ontario Liberal Party, which requested these appointees come before the committee, as is their right. It was not the New Democratic Party; it was not the government party. They were your selections. You chose to have them come forward. If all of your members on the committee don't want to show up to hear the people you have called, there's a degree of responsibility on that point.
Mr Bartolucci: Mr Chair, let's not mislead anybody around here. It's clearly the government's responsibility to maintain quorum. It is our right to question and have anyone appear before the committee. Clearly it's the government members who must ensure that a quorum is maintained.
The Chair: The point is, there must be a quorum regardless of who makes up that quorum.
All right. End of debate? The committee is adjourned. Thank you.
The committee adjourned at 1054.