STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
COMITÉ PERMANENT DES ORGANISMES GOUVERNEMENTAUX
Wednesday 15 December 2004 Mercredi 15 décembre 2004
INTENDED
APPOINTMENT
HAMLIN GRANGE
The committee met at 1032 in committee room 151.
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
The Vice-Chair (Ms Andrea Horwath): Good morning, everyone. Welcome. We're going to start the meeting off. As you'll see from the agenda, the first order of business is the report of the subcommittee on committee business dated Thursday, December 9, 2004. Can I have someone move it?
Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): I move that.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you, Mr Parsons. Mr Tascona?
Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): Before we move acceptance of the December 3 certificate, I've got a matter to raise regarding the TVO appointees. On December 1 in the Hansard, Minister Chambers said, "We actually have 13 board members, and of those 13 we have made a commitment to five francophone members. At this point we have four, because we actually did two more appointments today. You should be up to date. So it's done." That was in response to Mr Bisson, who is here today, and Minister Chambers is the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Well, in our opinion, it's not done. The minister's comments came two days before the information was made available to members of this committee. Minister Chambers has totally disregarded the role this committee plays in the appointment process.
Madam Chair, in the past, when a minister has made a mistake of this magnitude, we have asked that you write to the minister on behalf of the committee. I would like you to do that in this situation, and Minister Chambers needs to apologize to this committee. Quite frankly, I think she also should be apologizing to Mr Bisson, who's the MPP for Timmins-James Bay, for suggesting that he ought to have known something that was not yet public. Those are the comments I have, and I would request that that information be forwarded in writing from this committee, on behalf of the Chair.
The Vice-Chair: OK. I'm not sure whether that actually requires a motion, but I believe that's the case. Are you moving that, then?
Mr Tascona: I'm requesting that the clerk do that. Mr Bisson may have some other comments.
The Vice-Chair: Are there any other comments?
Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): It's a little bit, you know, of somebody being too cute twice type of thing. I think Mr Tascona raises it -- it was just an attempt by the minister to be seen as doing the right thing, which I guess I'm not in disagreement with. But he raises a good point, that that information had not yet been forwarded to this committee, so the minister was actually speaking out of turn. There is a process, which is that appointees are first sent to the members of the subcommittee in order to be vetted, and then we decide from there who's going to be called before this committee. There's been a fairly long practice around here that we don't disclose names of people who are appointed until after they've actually been concurred in.
Mr Parsons: I just raise this -- it was not intentionally done. It was a slip of the tongue during a very high-pressure moment, I suspect. Certainly our government appreciates the process and is endeavouring to follow it as closely as possible.
The Vice-Chair: OK. I still have the request outstanding. Unless there's any reason why, that I hear from members, that shouldn't be done, I could certainly send a letter as a Vice-Chair, chairing this particular meeting, that indicates our concern about the process and just reminds the minister of the process that's required. That's great. Thank you, Mr Tascona.
We'll go back to the subcommittee report. Can I get a mover? It was moved by Mr Parsons, Thank you.
All those in favour? Any opposed? That's carried.
COMMITTEE BUSINESS
The Vice-Chair: Our next item of business is the extension of deadlines. Pursuant to standing order 106(e)11, unanimous consent is required by the committee to extend the 30-day deadline for consideration of the following intended appointees. I believe you all have the list with you: Thomas Little -- I'm not going to go through the various --
Mr Bisson: Can I ask the clerk what the reason for the extension is?
The Clerk of the Committee (Ms Susan Sourial): The certificates expire on January 2, and the committee won't have a chance to meet before then.
The Vice-Chair: So Thomas Little, Diane Desaulniers, Peter Gavan, Liam McCreery, Victoria Gerra --
Mr Bisson: Dispense.
The Vice-Chair: OK. Thank you. Can I get a motion for the extension?
Mr Parsons: I'll move it.
The Vice-Chair: Is there any other discussion? Seconded by Ms Smith.
All those in favour? Any opposed? That's carried.
INTENDED APPOINTMENT
HAMLIN GRANGE
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Hamlin Grange, intended appointee as member, Toronto Police Services Board.
The Vice-Chair: We now will move to the review of the appointee. We only have one interview this morning, and it is with Mr Hamlin Grange, who is an intended appointee as a member of the Toronto Police Services Board. Mr Grange, if you could please come forward. Welcome, and thank you for joining us this morning.
As you're getting ready, I'll explain to you the process. As you might already be aware, the way it works is that you'll have an opportunity to make some comments, to say a few words, if you want to do so. You don't have to, but that's often been the tradition. After you have made that statement, all the parties, in rotation, will have an opportunity to interview you, ask some questions. Any time you take for your initial comments will come off the allotted time for the government members in terms of their interview, and each of the parties will have about 10 minutes to ask questions of you. With that, please begin when you wish.
Mr Hamlin Grange: I do have a statement to make. Good morning, Madam Chair and ladies and gentlemen.
First, let me say how honoured I am to be nominated to be a member of the Toronto Police Services Board. I'm also pleased to appear before you this morning as you consider my appointment for this very important position.
As you can see from my resumé -- you may have it in front of you -- I have significant experience serving on a variety of volunteer boards. They include being a member of the board of directors of the YMCA of Greater Toronto, where I'm also co-chair of the council of advisers, a member of the audit committee, as well as a member of the board of development and governance committee. I'm also a trustee of the Royal Ontario Museum, where I am a member of the governance committee and the research and exhibits committee, as well as the board's representative on the Institute for Contemporary Culture. I'm also a board member of the Innoversity Creative Summit, which is an organization that finds and shares best practices in diversity management in a variety of sectors.
For four years, I was president and a board member of the Canadian Association of Black Journalists. Until recently, I was a member of the community advisory committee to the commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police.
Besides a range of experiences with a variety of community organizations, I bring significant managerial experience to this new role on the police services board, and that would include being a former managing editor of a weekly newspaper, a former national director of a federal youth internship program, and currently I'm president and managing partner of my own company, DiversiPro Inc, which is a diversity consulting firm.
I'm an experienced facilitator and consultant in diversity management in organizations. I help managers to understand and manage diversity in their workforce and marketplace. I also work with journalists and others to help them understand and integrate diversity into their work.
I've also worked for a variety of public sector, service sector and media organizations on diversity-related projects. In my many years as a journalist, I developed a reputation for being fair and also uncompromising in getting to the facts by listening well and asking straightforward questions. As a result, I have developed a network where I'm well known in a number of community sectors and areas of concern. I believe these connections with be invaluable in my work on the police services board.
Since my nomination was announced, if you want to call it that, I've been surprised at the overwhelmingly positive support I've received from a wide range of individuals, not only here in Toronto but from across the province. I have received phone calls and e-mails from ordinary folks, community workers, politicians of all stripes, members of the faith community and even police officers. They've all talked about the need for the police services board and the police service to better serve all citizens, all residents of the city, as well as the rank-and-file officers who are sworn to serve and protect them.
1040
I believe the phone calls, cards and letters are indicative of the important role the police play in our society. After all, what our police service does affects of us. As a result, I've been left with one conclusion: They all want the same thing, an effective and efficient police service that serves all Torontonians, including its officers, and it should be done fairly. They may differ in how to get there, but the goal is the same. This, I believe, is in line with my own goals, and I bring to the board strong personal values of fairness, inclusiveness and accountability.
Madam Chair, I'm now pleased to answer any questions from the committee.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much. The last time we were in committee we began with the New Democratic Party members, so the government members have about six or seven minutes. Ms Smith?
Ms Monique M. Smith (Nipissing): Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr Grange, you certainly have an impressive resumé, and I think you'll bring a lot to the board. I wanted to ask, do you now or have you ever had a membership in a political party?
Mr Grange: No, I have not.
Ms Smith: And have you ever made a contribution to a political party?
Mr Grange: No, I have not.
Ms Smith: Thanks.
Mr Grange: That's the curse of being a journalist, perhaps; I don't know.
Ms Smith: It could be. Thank you very much. I think my colleague has some questions.
Ms Laurel C. Broten (Etobicoke-Lakeshore): Mr Grange, I represent a riding in Toronto, Etobicoke-Lakeshore, where we are struggling with a lot of issues that we struggle with, I think, in the rest of the city. We have high levels of diversity, and we have a lot of youth who are having concerns. We work very closely with the police in our community to try to ensure -- I think you're right that everybody does want the same thing. But at times they come about that same thing in a different manner. There are obviously different forms of policing theory, and I'm wondering if you could share, just a little bit, what you see as the role you can play on this board to help our police in Toronto meet the common goal that we all have, because there are very many different routes to get to that goal.
Mr Grange: Yes, you're absolutely right. The police services board, as you know, is not necessarily involved with how the police do their work -- the operational side of things -- but is responsible for putting in place policies and procedures to make sure that the force goes in a particular direction. I think the concept and the reality of community-based policing is still a good way to go. How the force implements that, I think, is going to be dependent upon the board giving specific directions on how to go forward on that. Community-based policing, I believe, is good. What it does is put people and the police in a situation where they're working together as opposed to at odds with each other, so I'm very much in favour of it.
In terms of what I can bring to the board, not just as a journalist but as someone who has a family, who has kids: There's a real concern that I have in terms of youth involved in crime. I think that sometimes it's not necessarily a law enforcement issue. I think we might be thinking about crime prevention more than law enforcement. You don't always want to lock up the bad guy. Let's get to them before they become bad guys. I'm really for that.
Ms Broten: Can you share with us a little bit, perhaps, what your experience with the YMCA will bring? I would suspect some of the concepts you've just shared with us have been formulated somewhat from the years of experience working with the Y.
Mr Grange: Absolutely. Let me tell you about the program I was involved with. The federal public sector youth internship program was a program that was funded by the Treasury Board and was quite a large program. The goal there was to give young people -- these were youth at risk as well as young people who were graduated from high school -- an opportunity to get their first job. Something like 4,000 young people went through that program.
Coming out of that, I got a keen sense -- I went to the job at the Y on a secondment when I was at the CBC. You know, being a journalist you can detach yourself so much from real life in many ways. The attitude is, "I report on things. I don't get involved in things." Going to the Y forced me to do the opposite. It forced me to understand and really get up close and personal with young people. What I saw in some of these young people, especially those who were youth at risk, was a real desire to do better, to better themselves if they're given a chance. That's what I learned. Many of the things I've learned at the Y in terms of working with people, certainly listening to and helping people make healthy choices, have really shaped the way I look at things in many ways today.
Mr Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): Thank you, Mr Grange, for appearing here today. I'm a former city councillor in the city of Toronto, and I've had experience dealing with the police services board. Some of our members sat on the board. It seemed at times that there was a lot of controversy, and at times some of the city council members felt frustrated that they couldn't get their views put forward. They thought the police had their basic -- I don't know if I should use the word "agenda," but put forward their point of view very strongly at board meetings. How do you see yourself fitting in there and being sort of proactive, or at least able to view the concerns of the citizens of Toronto, as opposed to the views of the police?
Mr Grange: There's no doubt that this is a difficult assignment. The board has had some challenges, and I think a lot of the challenge has been a result of board members talking to themselves through the media. That is not at all helpful. I think board members need to speak among themselves and come to some understanding, but the board also needs to be in contact with the chief. The sense I've always had, reading in the press -- I'm not there -- is you have a command structure that feels they're at odds with the board, and I don't think that's what we want.
Hopefully, what I can bring to it is a good sense of governance. I'm a very strong believer in good governance in boards. I think if you put good structures in place, good rules of conduct in the way the board members conduct themselves and the relationship they have with management -- which is the chief -- we can avoid a lot of those things. I suspect a lot of that stuff simply wasn't being followed and maybe that's the reason we had the problem. But I just don't know; I wasn't there.
The Vice-Chair: That concludes the time for the government side. Members of the official opposition?
Ms Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): Thank you very much for appearing here before us today, Mr Grange. I see on your application that you live in Brooklin.
Mr Grange: That's right. Brooklin is a part of Whitby, and it's growing.
Ms Scott: Yes, I've been through Brooklin a few times.
I just wondered: It's the Toronto Police Services Board but you live in Durham, right?
Mr Grange: That's correct, yes. I moved there about seven years ago. I grew up and lived in Toronto all my life, and my business is in Toronto. It's just one of those things. I didn't think it was a requirement of this position to live in Toronto.
Ms Scott: It was a requirement?
Mr Grange: It is not a requirement.
Ms Scott: I'm not sure of that; I was just interested in the fact that you are in Durham.
Mr Grange: The chief lives in Vaughan, so I don't think it really matters.
Ms Scott: How did you hear about the appointment?
Mr Grange: I received a phone call from the appointments office saying that my name had been submitted. Somehow my name came up. I guess a number of people were putting forward names of individuals they thought would be qualified to do this job, and I received a phone call to ask if I would be interested. I said, "Tell me some more." We talked, and from there I had a meeting, over the telephone initially, with the office --
Ms Scott: Do you know with whom in the office?
Mr Grange: This was Debra Roberts.
From there, it was filling out a formal application -- I think the timeline on that was about November 15 or the week before that, the 7th. Then I had a meeting with Minister Kwinter on about the 15th. We talked about many of the questions that were asked here. From there, I was waiting to hear back. I woke up the next Friday morning to see my name on the front page of the newspaper. I didn't realize I was a nominee.
Ms Scott: Have you ever spoken to Premier McGuinty or Mayor David Miller?
Mr Grange: No, I have not, not at all on this matter.
Ms Scott: I think my colleague would like to ask you some questions.
Mr Tascona: Looking at the Toronto Star headline of Friday, November 26, 2004, it says, "Diversity Activist Named to Police Board: Board Moves in Activist Direction." Did you see that?
Mr Grange: I saw it. Do you want my reaction to the headline?
Mr Tascona: Sure.
Mr Grange: It's a lousy headline. It was bad journalism.
Mr Tascona: Do you think you're an activist?
Mr Grange: To suggest I'm an activist is an insult to activists, quite frankly. I thought it was a bad headline, to be frank about it. I thought it was sensational and had no need to be there. I was actually quite surprised when I saw the story.
1050
Mr Tascona: We know that Chief Fantino lived in Woodbridge, so obviously there's not a residency requirement in Toronto.
Mr Grange: No.
Mr Tascona: Do you have any opinions on Chief Fantino's contract not being renewed?
Mr Grange: No opinion at all.
Mr Tascona: "Critics have charged that the board" -- this is out of the Toronto Star article -- "became too much of the rubber stamp for police requests and didn't aggressively fulfill its role as civilian watchdog." Do you share that opinion?
Mr Grange: I think that's been the case in the past, and certainly that's the impression I had when I was covering the police services board.
Mr Tascona: Do you have any specific examples that would give you that impression?
Mr Grange: I can't give you specific examples. It's just that tough questions weren't being asked of the force at the time. I don't know what has happened since. But it's my impression that hard questions weren't being asked, and perhaps certain information just wasn't being given, but I just don't know; there is that impression. I don't know whether that's the case today, but that was the impression in the past, when I was covering the police services board many years ago.
Mr Tascona: Was there one specific situation where you felt that the hard questions weren't asked?
Mr Grange: It's been a few years. The budget is always a big issue; budgetary issues are always big ones. The chief brings forward a budget, and the board has to make some decisions on that. Perhaps certain questions weren't being asked; some hard questions weren't being asked at the time. I don't know if that's the case today, though.
Mr Tascona: I think, from what you've stated about crime prevention and certainly more of a civilian watchdog role that the police services board should have -- do you have confidence in the Toronto police?
Mr Grange: Absolutely, I do.
Mr Tascona: Do you feel that they're being adequately supported in terms of what they're dealing with in Toronto these days?
Mr Grange: What do you mean by "adequately supported"?
Mr Tascona: Do you think they have the support of the police services board?
Mr Grange: I think they do have the support of the police services board, from what I've seen. I can't speak for each individual there; I'm not on the board. But as a board of directors -- I think there must be some level of support or we'd have total anarchy now, wouldn't we? There must be some level of support.
Mr Tascona: From what I can discern, I think you would believe that Toronto may be in need of some new community policing ideas. Would you agree with that?
Mr Grange: Yes; I believe so. You're probably going to ask me what those things would be, and I'd have to answer that I really don't know what those things are, because I don't have all the details in terms of the various elements they've put in place.
But times change. Community-based policing, as I recall, came into being -- it had to be in the early 1980s, perhaps, and this is a different city. Things have changed. The demographic has changed, people's demands have changed -- you see every day in your own constituency that things have changed -- and perhaps we need to change that as well.
As I said, I don't know what is in place right now, but perhaps there is time to take another look at it. I'd have to take a look to see what exactly is there and see what the board can instruct the chief to do to respond to the different changes we're seeing in our community today.
Mr Tascona: Along those lines, do you have any specific goals you'd like to achieve on the board?
Mr Grange: Specific goals: I really would like to get this board to be functioning better than it has been. The former chair described it as dysfunctional, and I have no reason to doubt that, based on media reports and some of the things that were happening. So I think governance is a big issue; the relationship between board members; and the relationship between board members, the board itself and the chief. That, I think, should be at the top of the agenda going forward.
Mr Tascona: What about relationships between ethnic groups, the black community and --
Mr Grange: I think relationships with all communities are really important, and as board members I think we can do some work there as well, along with the police, absolutely.
Mr Tascona: Those are all the questions I have.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you, Mr Tascona. Mr Bisson?
Mr Bisson: I have just a couple of quick questions. I was interested in your response to the question earlier in regard to the headline. I hear what you're saying, that it's a bit of bad journalism. But why is it that you thought that particular comment about "Activist Appointed to Board" was a bad thing? Do you consider yourself progressive when it comes to trying to advance community policing? I'm trying to figure out why you didn't like that comment.
Mr Grange: I consider myself an advocate, an advocate for change, an advocate for fairness and all of those things. I've never considered myself to be an activist in the strictest sense of the word, and so what I was responding to when I saw the headline -- it was unfortunate that they used that language because I think -- and I'm very sensitive to the fact that, you know, it's obvious I'm a black man. You put a black man who's outspoken about social issues and change -- automatically he's got to be an activist. Excuse me; I have issues with that.
It's the same as calling a woman an activist because she stands for particular things. I think it was an unfortunate headline. That's what I was responding to.
Mr Bisson: It was being somewhat of a stereotype. They were judging you --
Mr Grange: Yes, exactly. That's shorthand journalism, and it's lazy journalism.
Mr Bisson: I'm particularly interested in some -- looking at your CV, I've got no doubt that you bring the necessary qualifications to the board, but I just want to explore a little bit more. Policing, as you say, and we all recognize, is changing with the times. Toronto is becoming an increasingly more diverse community, which is a good thing; I think we need to embrace that. My view is that we need to do more in order to make sure that the police are able to work within communities, and my observation, as least from my vantage point, is that it's not that the police are intentionally doing a bad job -- I wouldn't even say that they're doing a bad job -- but sometimes not understanding a community doesn't make you very effective when it comes to being able to do policing. So what kinds of things do you think you can bring to the board to assist in developing policies for the police to work within communities that may now not be understood by the police, specifically, the newer arrivals?
Mr Grange: I think you've touched on a good point here, and the term I use is "cultural competency." I do a lot of work in that area. Cultural competency is really about understanding. Culture is not just about ethnic cultures and racial cultures; even in a monocultural environment you have many cultures, whether it's a single mom, whether it's a single dad, whether it's someone who commutes from -- heaven forbid -- Brooklin, Ontario, to downtown Toronto or whatever, whether you live downtown. These are different cultures, and if an organization does not understand these various cultures, you simply will not be very productive. Higher-functioning organizations are becoming attuned to the fact that you must become much more culturally competent, and that applies to the police as well.
Mr Bisson: What are some of the steps that we can do to achieve that, to try to get there?
Mr Grange: There are four areas I think you need to take a look at. Cultural competency is really based on awareness, attitude, knowledge and skill. So you need to take a look at those four areas. How aware are we of the various cultures within our society? Listen, we can test for that. We can do surveys. We can do all sorts of things. What are our attitudes toward it? Because sometimes our attitudes will drive the level of awareness we will have, or even our behaviour toward people. I think sometimes we need to check those attitudes. The attitudes of your middle managers will very much decide whether or not your initiatives are going to be effective, because they have to implement those things.
Also, how knowledgeable are they, and what skills are you going to give them? That means that it's training, so you have to take a look at the training you're giving our officers and our front-line workers around this issue of cultural competency. The OPP is doing some work in that area, and I think -- I don't have all the information in terms of what's being taught by Toronto police at this time, but I think it's something for them to look at. So cultural competency for me is a big piece.
Mr Bisson: Those are some good comments. On the other side, in regards to the police themselves, it's not an easy job. I personally would not want to do it. What they've got to put up with as far as the danger they risk and sometimes the situations they find themselves in are not the best ones. One of the issues, I know in talking to police officers back home, is that sometimes they feel they're not as supported as they need to be, and sometimes, for good reason or bad reason, we decide that we want policy changes, for example, high-speed chases. We just had an incident recently, and I think you might have seen it in the media, where somebody was hurt as a result of a high-speed chase. I forget exactly where it was.
What's your view of how we approach the issue of use of force as far as the police? I expect that the police are going to have to use force at times, but it has to be limited. What are your views about how we can be proactive in trying to figure out ways that we can make sure there's only an adequate use of force and not too much force being used in high-speed chases or whatever it might be?
1100
Mr Grange: That comes down to certain operational things that I think the chief would have to deal with. From a board perspective, the use of force is always going to be an issue. Some of the policies that are in place right now, whether it's filing reports when you draw your weapon -- the Taser issue is a use-of-force issue that's not going away; it's coming back -- I think the board has to take a look at all of the information it has before it. There's a sense I'm getting from listening to reports that the board feels it may not have all the information on Tasers, for example, so it needs more information in order to make a decision. Being a cop in this town is a very tough job -- I don't think anybody denies that -- and they should be supported as best they can. But they should also be supported with proper procedures, policies that are put in place. That requires some sane and reasoned dialogue between both parties, whether it's the chief and the board or the chief and the chair. Perhaps that has not taken place in the short term, and maybe we need to have more of that.
Mr Bisson: I just have one last quick question. Where are you with the issue of officers on the beat? Often we don't see the presence of the police on the streets that we need to see in certain areas. What's your view on that -- even if it means a higher number of police officers?
Mr Grange: That was a concept of community-based policing, wasn't it? Get them out of cars and get them on the street. We seem to have shifted away from that a little bit because of resource allocation. Maybe we need to revisit that as well. It's a budgetary issue.
Mr Bisson: So you support more police officers on the street.
Mr Grange: I want to see our police officers walking the beat and being in touch with the people, especially in the downtown areas, especially in places like Etobicoke. I think we need that. We've moved away from that, it seems. That's just my sense of it, but I don't have all the facts to give you.
Mr Bisson: Thank you very much.
The Vice-Chair: That concludes the questioning. Mr Grange, thank you very much for appearing before us. You can take a seat now, if you'd like. We're going to immediately go into the discussion of your appointment. Thank you for coming.
Interjection.
The Vice-Chair: Yes, you're allowed to.
Mr Parsons: I would move concurrence.
The Vice-Chair: You jumped the gun on me, Mr Parsons, but thank you very much. Mr Parsons has moved concurrence. Any further discussion?
Mr Bisson: No disrespect to the appointee -- I think actually he's going to make a good addition to the board, and that's not my point. However, I'm a little bit, I guess the word is "miffed," at how we sometimes come to these appointments. I understand that we need to be proactive in making sure that we seek out the best people for the job, but it's pretty clear in this case that there was a pretty direct attempt on the part of the Solicitor General's office to find this individual. It just bothers me to the extent that -- I understand there's a need to be proactive in order to go out and find people, but in this case it's pretty clear that this has the hands of the government all over it as far as an appointment. I just want to put that on the record.
Mr Parsons: If I could respond to that, I would like to state irrevocably that the Solicitor General did not seek this appointment. We have a Public Appointments Secretariat whose role is to find the best candidates for these positions. I think there's no question that the Public Appointments Secretariat sought it out, but the Solicitor General was not involved in this process.
The Vice-Chair: Any further comments?
Mr Tascona: I was just looking at this situation in respect to the candidate before us. The fact that he lives in Durham and he's going to be serving on the Toronto Police Services Board to me is -- certainly it's a provincial appointment and they can choose people. I just would have thought that you would be looking for someone, if you're going to be serving the Toronto Police Services Board, who is a resident of that particular community. To perhaps feed on Mr Bisson's comments -- because the government side can say what they wish; the fact that we have the parliamentary assistant to the Premier here today says a lot. She has not appeared here before and this is a high-profile appointment. This is a situation where the government's stamp is all over it; probably the mayor's office has been quite interested in this too, by the reports.
There's the fact that the individual lives in Durham and this is the Toronto Police Services Board. If it were my riding, the Barrie Police Services Board, and someone came in from another riding, I think people would be wondering why that would be the case. This is somewhat unusual. I don't think I've come across any situation where an individual who is chosen to sit on a police services board actually lives outside the riding, no matter what their relationship to the community has been in the past -- and obviously Mr Grange has had a strong one, but that's not the point. It seems somewhat peculiar.
The government can respond as they wish, but those are the facts. He admitted that he did meet with the Solicitor General. He's the first one we've had here, I think, where there was an actual meeting with a minister. There's also the fact of the residency issue -- whether it's required or not, it just seems a little unusual for the normal course of events. That's what we're faced with today.
The Vice-Chair: Mr Bisson and then Ms Broten.
Mr Bisson: I'll listen to the government first.
Ms Broten: I just wanted to correct Mr Tascona's statement. I have been a member of this committee before. I represent a riding in Toronto that is struggling under significant issues as to how we police our community, and those are the reasons I was interested in participating in the discussion today.
I don't think the evidence that came out in the round of questioning supports the allegations that are being advanced now. The role of the Public Appointments Secretariat is, as my colleague has said, to seek out the best individuals, and it is appropriate to interview those people in any process. There is not one position in this city that we would fill without an interview process taking place. I think it demonstrates prudent action, and I think a lot is being made of interviews taking place, when, in fact, if they weren't taking place, that's when concerns should be being advanced.
Mr Bisson: I guess the point I make is this: I'm sure there were other people who applied for the position of being appointed to the police board. We all know it's a fairly significant appointment. The police services board of the city of Toronto, to keep it short, is a pretty significant appointment, and I'm sure other people have applied.
The point I was trying to make is, it seems pretty apparent to me that the way this went down is the Public Appointments Secretariat contacted this gentlemen to tell him that if he's interested in applying, his name came up. That tells me somebody in the government basically talked to the Public Appointments Secretariat, who happens to be an appointee of this government. It's pretty clear that this is your guy. He might be the right person. At the end of the day, the argument that this person is qualified is not my argument; my point is, we go through this from time to time where this committee is asked to make a decision on one particular person who was selected from the Public Appointments Secretariat and we have no way of knowing who the other applicants were and if there were other applicants who were just as qualified. It's a bit of an odd process. That's the point I'm making.
I think one of the discussions this committee may want to look at is, whenever we're dealing with appointments, it might not be a bad idea that we know who else has applied and have their CVs so we can see whether other qualified people --
Ms Broten: Good lucking getting good people to apply if you use that process, Gilles.
Mr Bisson: Well, listen. Imagine being the owner of a business and you're going out to hire somebody, and all you do is hire your friends and you don't look at the CVs that come into your in-box. You might be bypassing people who are perfectly capable of doing the job as well.
All I'm saying is, what we should be looking at as this committee is, whenever appointments like this come up, it would not be a bad idea to know who else has applied so that we have a sense of what the choices were and just how unpolitical or political the Public Appointments Secretariat has been.
Mr Parsons: This is getting more prolonged than we had anticipated. First of all, there is no evidence that the government approached the PAS to do that, and the reason there is no evidence because is it did not happen.
Mr Bisson: He said it himself.
Mr Parsons: There were discussions after. We were talking about how the initial contact was made.
With regard to the residency requirement, the obligation of this committee -- indeed, of anyone -- is to get the best candidate, and I don't think residence affects it. I would suggest an example is that from time to time, political party leaders run for by-elections in ridings other than where they reside, and they have been able to represent that community very well.
1110
The Vice-Chair: OK, I think we've had a fulsome discussion on the issue and I think everybody --
Mr Bisson: You can't close down debate.
The Vice-Chair: I thought you were finished; I'm sorry.
Mr Parsons: No, I'm not.
The Vice-Chair: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought he was finished.
Mr Parsons: Just to respond to listing the other candidates, I would suggest that it would make it more difficult to attract candidates to positions when they know there's a possibility that if they're not successful their name will be published. No one wants to be listed as the first loser. I think making public everyone who applied and didn't succeed would impede the process, rather than help the process.
Mr Bisson: What a silly comment. Listen, people go out and apply for jobs each and every day in the economy of Ontario. They know that when they're applying, they're applying against other people, and there are winners and losers in job interview processes. To somehow suggest that by this committee at least having an ability to take a look at who the applicants were somehow or other is going to discourage people from applying -- maybe somebody who says, "I'm not willing to apply unless I get the job" shouldn't get the job. I'll tell you, I've interviewed people in many capacities before, and whenever I've had somebody come to me and say, "I'm giving you my CV, but if I have to compete against somebody else, I'm withdrawing it," I chuck it out, because that's not the person I want on my team.
Mr Parsons: That's a misinterpretation of what I said. I've certainly been in the same position when interviewing, but I didn't say to the ones who weren't successful, "If you're not successful, I will be publishing your name in the paper and putting it over the radio." Certainly they're prepared to compete for a position, but not necessarily to have their name published if they're not successful. There is a profound difference.
Mr Tascona: I just want to clarify for the listening public what we're dealing with here. This is an appointment to the Toronto Police Services Board. The province has some appointments to make to the police services board, and so does the municipality. On the police services board, whatever part of the province it's in, there are provincial appointments and there are also municipal appointments. What we're dealing with here today is not a provincial agency, tribunal or commission. What we're dealing with here is the Toronto Police Services Board, for the city of Toronto. What we're dealing with here is a provincial appointment to that particular board.
My point is, with all due respect to the intended appointee, that the intended appointee does not live in the city of Toronto. I don't know why. He obviously is involved in the city of Toronto. This is the city of Toronto Police Services Board. The province has made a decision in terms of this appointment. This is a provincial appointment. The stamp is all over the province in terms of, this is their appointment that they're putting forth and who they're going to vote for today. So let's not mince words here; this is a provincial appointment. This is the Liberal government's appointment to the Toronto Police Services Board, and they have selected an individual who doesn't live in Toronto. That's just the fact. This is a provincial appointment to the city of Toronto Police Services Board, not a provincial agency. That's the point, for the record, so the public understands what we're dealing with here today is the city of Toronto Police Services Board and a provincial appointment.
Mr Bisson: I'm just going to end it at this; I don't want to belabour it, and obviously we're going to vote. Two things: One, I'm not as hung up about where he lives. I know that this gentleman knows the city of Toronto, works in the city of Toronto and has a business in the city of Toronto, so it seems to me that he has some interest in the city. I understand the point that Mr Tascona makes, because if I was in Timmins and they appointed somebody from Sudbury to the police services board who didn't live, work or do anything in the city of Timmins, I would have a problem. But if the person obviously has a business there, I'm a little bit less concerned about that point.
I just want to come back to my other point. What I'm suggesting, Mr Parsons, is not that we make public the names of all of those people who applied to a particular position. What I'm saying is that this committee, before we get to this point where we're in an actual sitting of the hearings, should see who has applied, what is the range of applicants for the position, so that when we're making up our minds about who we call before this committee and who we don't call when it comes to the interview process, we have a sense of, why did they call this person up for an appointment and give it when there were five other people, and on the CVs these people are just as qualified. That was my point.
I'm just saying it's clear that this is an appointment to the government. The gentleman made it clear that he was contacted by the Public Appointments Secretariat. The Public Appointments Secretariat is appointed by the government. He was contacted by the minister's office, and this is a political appointment. That was my point. I would just ask, for further reference, that we look at the rules of this committee in order to do a better job.
Mr Berardinetti: I just want to make the point that the process we are following is the process we've followed throughout the existence of this committee and is the process that was established by the previous government. So I don't think the process is any different today from last Wednesday or from any previous meeting we've had. The process is the same, and if we want to change that, maybe the subcommittee can meet and discuss that at some point in time. I think we've had that discussion previously.
The second point I want to make is that the applicant here doesn't live in Toronto, but he works in Toronto, and I think Mr Bisson made that point already; I think that's quite significant. His resumé is full of Toronto connections in terms of where he has worked and what he has done in Toronto in various capacities.
The third point I want to make, my experience being with the city of Toronto, is that a number of top civil servants, the bureaucrats, the heads of various departments -- I won't name names, but I found this very frustrating on city council -- did not live in Toronto. They lived in places as far away as Newmarket, Vaughan or Oshawa and they'd drive in to work every day. We had this discussion many times at Toronto council, whether or not all civil servants should live in Toronto, and we decided not to do that for various reasons that I won't get into today.
Mr Bisson: That constitutional issues wouldn't allow.
Mr Berardinetti: Exactly. The constitutional issues wouldn't allow otherwise. That was a frustrating point, when you'd have some top positions held by people who didn't really live in the city. I know that the United States has passed rules in various cities that commissioners and various top city officials have to live within the boundaries of the city, but we don't have that here.
I think all those points are relevant in considering today's appointment. The applicant has made a good presentation today, and I see no reason why we can't go forward today with appointing him. If there are discussions to be made on process, that should be left to the subcommittee or be discussed at some other point in time. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr Tascona: I just want to make one point. This is an important appointment, and we have here today the chief government whip, Mr Levac, and also the parliamentary assistant to the Premier, so it just tells you how important this is to the government. That's all I want to say. Call the vote.
Mr Parsons: I was watching this telecast from outside this immediate area. When my colleague refers to Toronto, he really means Trawna. I need to translate for the viewers.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you for that clarification, Mr Parsons.
Mr Bisson: I appreciate the comment made by Mr Berardinetti that maybe the subcommittee should meet. The first point you made was that these have been the rules and we've operated under them all the way, and I'm sure you didn't mean that we shouldn't look at whether there is a better way of doing public appointments. That's how I took your comment. I appreciate your willingness to refer this to the subcommittee and look forward to that happening.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you. My understanding from the clerk is that a lot of the processes are set out in the standing orders, so there may be some changes required to standing orders if we do anything significant in regard to how we operate the committee.
That having been said, concurrence in the appointment has been moved by Mr Parsons, seconded by Ms Smith.
Mr Tascona: I'll third that.
The Vice-Chair: He'll third that one. Thank you, Mr Tascona.
All those in favour, then? Thank you. Any opposed? No. That's been carried.
Congratulations, Mr Grange. Your appointment is confirmed.
COMMITTEE BUSINESS
The Vice-Chair: There is only one other small piece of business for committee members. If you recall the last meeting, there had been a discussion about finding a date during the intersession for us to actually have a meeting. I don't know if anyone has had the chance to review their calendar. We were looking for a date in January, if possible, so if you haven't had a chance to review your calendar and you don't have any dates to suggest, we'll do that through the clerk. The clerk will be --
Mr Tascona: I would suggest that there be some discussions with the whips' offices, because we're doing committee hearings. I'm going to be involved in Bill 132, the pit bull hearings, which is four days, and I'm also on the subcommittee, so I'd like that to be discussed -- I emphasize the point "discussed" -- before we set a final date. The government whips are setting up meeting dates for all the committee hearings, and this is just another one of them. I don't want to be double-booked for that.
I do have one other point of business.
The Vice-Chair: OK.
Mr Tascona: On the Job Mart site, the intragovernment site, there is listed as a restricted competition the position of the chair of the Environmental Review Tribunal, government of Ontario. So on the Job Mart Web site, intra.jobmart.gov.on.ca, the position of chair of the Environmental Review Tribunal, government of Ontario, is a restricted position. On the Public Appointments Secretariat, the same position, Environmental Review Tribunal chair, is advertised and it's not shown as restricted. I'd just like to know -- maybe the Chair can find out for us what it is -- is it restricted or is it not restricted?
The Vice-Chair: Further to that, why is it inconsistent in terms of the information?
Mr Tascona: You said it.
The Vice-Chair: Yes. We will look into that and have an answer for you at the next meeting.
With that, I'll adjourn the meeting. Thank you very much. It was a very productive discussion today.
The committee adjourned at 1121.
CONTENTS
Wednesday 15 December 2004
Subcommittee report; committee business A-295
Intended
appointment
Mr Hamlin Grange A-296
Committee business A-303
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Chair / Président
Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln PC)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Présidente
Ms Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East / Hamilton-Est ND)
Mr Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest / Scarborough-Sud-Ouest L)
Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North / Thunder Bay-Superior-Nord L)
Ms Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East / Hamilton-Est ND)
Mr Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln PC)
Mr David Orazietti (Sault Ste Marie L)
Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings L)
Ms Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock PC)
Ms Monique M. Smith (Nipissing L)
Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford PC)
Substitutions / Membres remplaçants
Ms Laurel C. Broten (Etobicoke-Lakeshore L)
Also taking part / Autres participants et participantes
Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay / Timmins-Baie James ND)
Clerk / Greffière
Ms Susan Sourial
Staff / Personnel
Mr Larry Johnston, research officer, Research and Information Services