ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIO ROAD SUPERINTENDENTS ACT, 1996
ASSOCIATION OF REGISTERED GRAPHIC DESIGNERS OF ONTARIO ACT, 1996
CONTENTS
Wednesday 17 April 1996
Association of Ontario Road Superintendents Act, 1996, Bill Pr53, Mr Arnott
Ted Arnott, MPP
Gary Williamson, past president, Association of Ontario Road Superintendents
Don Dean, chief administrative officer, Association of Ontario Road Superintendents
Association of Registered Graphic Designers of Ontario Act, 1996, Bill Pr56, Mrs Marland
Dave Boushy, MPP
Albert Ng, past president, Association of Registered Graphic Designers of Ontario
Pauline Jaworski, past president, Society of Graphic Designers of Canada, northern Ontario chapter
Joanne Radford, accreditation adviser, Radford Game and Associates
Chris Yaneff
Town of Milton Act, 1996, Bill Pr50, Mr Chudleigh
Ted Chudleigh, MPP
John Challinor II, councillor, town of Milton
STANDING COMMITTEE ON REGULATIONS AND PRIVATE BILLS
Chair / Président: Barrett, Toby (Norfolk PC)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Président: Smith, Bruce (Middlesex PC)
Barrett, Toby (Norfolk PC)
Bisson, Gilles (Cochrane South / -Sud ND)
*Boushy, Dave (Sarnia PC)
*Hastings, John (Etobicoke-Rexdale PC)
*O'Toole, John R. (Durham East / -Est PC)
Pettit, Trevor (Hamilton Mountain PC)
*Pouliot, Gilles (Lake Nipigon / Lac-Nipigon ND)
*Pupatello, Sandra (Windsor-Sandwich L)
*Rollins, E. J. Douglas (Quinte PC)
Ruprecht, Tony (Parkdale L)
*Sergio, Mario (Yorkview L)
*Shea, Derwyn (High Park-Swansea PC); parliamentary assistant
to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
*Sheehan, Frank (Lincoln PC)
*Smith, Bruce (Middlesex PC)
*In attendance / présents
Clerk / Greffière: Lisa Freedman
Staff / Personnel: Susan Klein, legislative counsel
The committee met at 1004 in committee room 1.
ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIO ROAD SUPERINTENDENTS ACT, 1996
Consideration of Bill Pr53, An Act respecting the Association of Ontario Road Superintendents.
The Vice-Chair (Mr Bruce Smith): The first item on the agenda today is Bill Pr53. The sponsor is Mr Ted Arnott. Mr Arnott, please proceed and, for Hansard purposes, introduce yourself and the applicants.
Mr Ted Arnott (Wellington): Good morning. I'd like to introduce my friends here today. I'm pleased to sponsor Bill Pr53, An Act respecting the Association of Ontario Road Superintendents. With me this morning are my constituent Gary Williamson, the roads superintendent for the town of Mount Forest and past president of the Association of Ontario Road Superintendents, and Don Dean, the chief administrative officer of that particular organization. I'd like to turn it over to them. They have a brief presentation for committee members.
Mr Gary Williamson: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. It's my pleasure to be able to speak to you with regard to our act. Ted has been good enough to sponsor it for us. I'd just like to give you a brief background as to what our association is about and why we would like to have legislation.
The Association of Ontario Road Superintendents has gone through many changes over the past few years, which reflects how our members' responsibilities have changed in the municipal world. We are responsible for spending millions of dollars on infrastructure, and due to the economic times, it is very important for today's road superintendent to be well versed in every aspect of his or her job in order to achieve the best bang for a buck.
The precedent from the past, when a road superintendent could be a part-time farmer, a semiretired person or someone hired as a political favour, has come to an end. The position of road superintendent has grown into a very important profession, and the AORS is committed to the professional development of its members which will lead to the recognition and credibility they deserve. Our annual trade show, one-day seminars and forming of local associations have all helped to promote today's road superintendents, but we are looking to the future, using the Ontario Good Roads Association's road school as a base for AORS development of a certification program for its members that involves a combination of education and experience. This program has been accepted very well by the AORS membership and in fact some municipalities, when advertising to hire a road superintendent, ask for someone who has or is willing to obtain a CRS designation.
For the reasons aforementioned, AORS believes it is time for the next step in our development, and that is to have our association, as well as our certification program, recognized by way of legislation. This recognition would help to develop the credibility road supervisors deserve, protect our CRS designation and confirm the importance of our certification program as a whole. Clerk-treasurers, engineers and drainage superintendents are all examples of associations that have been recognized through legislation, and it is our position that today's road superintendent is also very important to the future developments in the municipal world and deserves the same recognition.
Taking into account that there are no more conditional grants for roads and that the decision to spend or not to spend on municipal roads is made at the local level only emphasizes the need for a qualified road supervisor. With the pending cutbacks to municipalities, road supervisors will become even more instrumental in assisting local councils to decide on priorities and then maintain a consistent infrastructure system throughout the province.
While our association provides a means to stimulate and disseminate the exchange of ideas and information relating to road construction and maintenance to and between municipalities, our main objective is to promote training and development of experienced, reliable and efficient personnel to manage public roads.
Legislative recognition of our association, certification program and CRS designation will be an integral step in achieving our goals. The position of road supervisor would be accepted as a profession, resulting in credibility not only with municipalities but also with other government agencies and professional people.
The AORS membership is committed to achieving this goal, not only for today's road supervisors, but also so that future road supervisors will be proud and qualified in their chosen profession. As always, AORS is committed to being professional, progressive and proud.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much for your presentation. May I call on the parliamentary assistant, Mr Shea, for any comments on behalf of the government.
Mr Derwyn Shea (High Park-Swansea): As most of us are aware, the act will allow the Association of Ontario Road Superintendents to govern and discipline its members and to grant to members the exclusive right to use the designation "certified road supervisor." It continues in the track of other certifications. There are no ministerial objections from any of the ministries in the government.
The Vice-Chair: We'll take some questions from the committee now.
Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor-Sandwich): Can you tell me what the cost of certification is for the individuals, and the cost is borne by whom?
Mr Don Dean: The cost for certification is $150. It's a one-time fee. We have three levels within the certification program, so they don't have to pay that again. There's a maintenance fee of $50 per year. These are sometimes paid by municipalities or they're paid by individuals.
1010
Mr Gilles Pouliot (Lake Nipigon): Let me begin by mentioning that you're very well sponsored, very well represented by Mr Arnott's presence. For those of us who have been in the House for some years, we certainly appreciate his sense of fairness, so it's of little surprise that we're acquiescing to your demand and we will join in wishing you well. I also happen to be very fond of the Milton-Cambridge area; it's a special place in Ontario.
Given the government's present state of mind, I think you're deserving and need all the help you can possibly get in terms of jurisdiction, imagination, for the dollars are getting fewer. I'm not the one saying this, but I read in one of the newspapers that it was simply an act of downloading. I want to wish you well in the future. If you persevere, things comes to pass. I will be supporting the bill.
Mr Mario Sergio (Yorkview): In order to acquire the so-called CRS designation, where and what kind of training would these people be getting?
Mr Dean: Where could they get the training? Is that what the question is?
Mr Sergio: In order to acquire the designation.
Mr Dean: We have been basically tied in with OGRA school in the University of Guelph in the past. They can gain it there, they can gain it at local colleges throughout the province, pretty near anywhere, except there are some courses that are pretty near tied in to OGRA because they deal with maintenance of roads and there are not too many colleges that really get into how to set a snowplow up and stuff like that. But it's very universal; it's not a closed-shop thing or a closed educational --
Mr Sergio: I have no problem supporting your request here, but tell me, in answer to one of the comments that this would help in providing better, more qualified service and assist in infrastructure maintenance and stuff like that, what do you think pertaining to the present state of roads in Ontario?
Mr Dean: What do I think of the present state of roads in Ontario?
Mr Sergio: Yes, and what have you been doing, what has your association done about that?
Mr Dean: The present state of roads in Ontario is deteriorating. I think you can see that across the province.
Mr Sergio: Wouldn't that be one of your association's concerns, to speak up for it?
Mr Dean: In a sense, yes, but we're not a political association.
Mr Sergio: It's safety.
Mr Dean: We're more professional, but our responsibility is to maintain the roads and any new construction on the roads.
Mr Sergio: A question of safety: Aren't you concerned that most of the roads are full of big potholes?
Mr Dean: Oh, definitely.
Mr Sergio: Yes. Are you voicing your concern to the government?
Mr Dean: I think that has happened. I don't know if you've read the London Free Press, but OGRA -- we're not really completely related to them, but we're good friends with them -- has expressed that concern in the London Free Press.
Mr Frank Sheehan (Lincoln): I apologize for being late, but I've just had a quick look at Mr Arnott's notes. You might have to repeat yourself, and I apologize.
What is the certification process? Is there a course of studies already determined? If I start here and it is a recognized progression, can you tell me about it?
Mr Dean: Yes. In the first level, which we call CRS, there are two Mahoney courses that you have to take at the University of Guelph. One is in construction and one is in maintenance. These are three-day courses and the binders are about yea big. Then, having taken those courses, you're still not considered certified; you still have to have three years' experience in the field in a supervisory capacity. That's the first level. The second level is that you must complete the first level and take some additional courses and have five years' experience in the field as a supervisor.
Mr Sheehan: What are the additional courses?
Mr Dean: Human relations is one. There's a varied amount they can take. Health and safety is one of them as well.
Mr Sheehan: The reason for my questions is that the act seems to suggest you want to set up a quasi-professional status to this, all right? I don't have a problem with that, but you're not engineers.
Mr Dean: We're not engineers, no.
Mr Sheehan: What makes you different from somebody else? What do these courses qualify you to do?
Mr Dean: To work in roads and maintenance and construction. We're not designers.
Mr Sheehan: Is there another way to recognize yourselves, as opposed to putting in a provincial act which gives you quasi-professional status?
Mr Dean: Not that I'm aware of.
Mr Sheehan: How did you function up to this point in time? Let's say you wanted to move from where you are to another job. How do you cite your qualifications? Are there any designations?
Mr Dean: If you're moving from one job to another, it depends on what the new municipality wants and what qualifications they're after, but you would state that you had passed the CRS courses and what level you were in.
Mr Sheehan: Do the available courses take me from the fundamentals of roadbuilding to the end of it?
Mr Dean: Yes.
Mr Sheehan: So there is a progressive and a fairly detailed course of study?
Mr Dean: Yes, there is.
Mr Williamson: If I could add to that, initially when you take the Mahoney course, it's a generalization of construction and maintenance. As you progress to level 2, it becomes more specialized, whether it be bridges or asphalt or roadbuilding itself. As you move on to level 3, you get more into the administration end of it, techniques, how the government works, funding scenarios, your liability with regard to accidents, that type of thing. It basically starts you at ground level and takes you up through.
Unfortunately it's very hard to say that yes, you're going to go to school for two years so that you can come out with that designation. We are a hands-on group of people. As I've stated in the past, rightly or wrongly, very often a road superintendent was someone semiretired who ran a farm on the side or was the reeve's cousin who got hired for the position because the council itself actually ran what was taking place.
As changes have come through not only in funding but with everybody maturing and a little more responsible for what's actually happening because the dollars aren't out there, the individual who is a road supervisor is looked upon to give ideas and suggestions as to how the money can be spent most wisely.
We're trying to set up a system where, if a municipality wishes to invest some money in its personnel being a road supervisor and wishes to send him to school to help him make those decisions more properly, then it's advantageous not only to the government and to the municipality, but also to the road supervisor to be more qualified to do his or her job.
Mr Sheehan: Where do these Mahoney courses come from?
Mr Williamson: They're set up through the Ontario Good Roads Association. They're put on basically by volunteers who may be engineers, designers or some road superintendents who have taken other courses who are already qualified. Again, it's tiered to the hands-on perception in that there's a lot of discussion, interacting. We have people from health and safety come to put on courses. It's very generalized, and as you step through it, it becomes a lot more specialized, but it is OGRA that actually sets the criteria in these courses. I might add that after the courses are taken, there is an exam that generally takes anywhere from an hour and a half to two and a half hours that must be written.
Mr Sheehan: Is there some intent in the bill -- I just scanned it -- that would give you some kind of exclusivity to providing that service in the future? If the township of whatsit wanted a road superintendent, is it your intention that you stipulate somewhere along the line that you must have this kind of certification before you can be a road super?
Mr Williamson: No, that's not our intention.
Mr Sheehan: You do not intend to be exclusive.
Mr Williamson: What we're trying to do is give municipalities the opportunity to have qualified people to help them make their decisions. If they wish to do it otherwise, that is totally their decision.
1020
Mr Pouliot: I need your help. I was the Minister of Transportation with the other regime before these people cost me my job. I know the Ontario Good Roads Association, which is your sponsor, quite well. In fact, I used to dread their conventions-not because you don't meet nice people. In fact, I met my best friends every five minutes throughout the convention, for they wanted some of their money back.
I've read your mandate and I'll save you the quote, but I want to draw your attention to section 11 on page 3 of Bill Pr53: "This act does not affect or interfere with the right of any person who is not a member of the association to practise or work as a road supervisor, municipal officer or municipal employee in the province of Ontario."
Allow me to be parochial. I live in a small town, Mantiouwadge, in northwestern Ontario. It's inland, it's not very large, and we do things with moderate means. People do the best they can, and profess and bring forth a certain expertise. But we have over 880 hamlets, villages, municipalities, jurisdictions that depend on transfer payments and also depend on the province to set standards, the focus being that you have approximately 136,000 kilometres of roads in the province.
My riding is the size of Germany; it's 26% of the overall land mass. We have 400 miles of the riding that has anything but a winter road; it goes all the way to Hudson Bay. We don't have members who belong to sophisticated organizations. It's not our makeup, where we live. I'm pleased that section 11 of the bill does not restrict people. In other words, you can do a job, can get that essential service to the citizens without having to belong to the honourable organization you are seeking acquiescence for. I'll be supporting it. It takes two years; it's done in spare time, evenings. It's costing people in the pocketbook so that we all benefit. It's about time they get recognized.
Mr E.J. Douglas Rollins (Quinte): I suspect the intent of having this course is to move people already working with your municipality up into that position, rather than having somebody come in from outside who hasn't had that experience. Is that basically one of the intents?
Mr Dean: That's the basic intent, yes.
Mr Rollins: And having somebody who has worked with the municipality and has had some experience snowplowing and running a grader and things of that nature working up through the system, to acknowledge them. It is an association, of course, but it will allow those people to move forward. I think you should be complimented for doing that. People who have more experience should be acknowledged. You're to be commended for trying to bring something like this forth, and I'll certainly be supporting it too.
Mr Williamson: Just to add to that, not only does it allow you to move within your municipality up to that position, but many municipalities have found that it's advantageous for them to send people who are not in that position at present away to take the course, and it's allowed them to look elsewhere for a job, whether it be with another municipality or whatever. It increases how valuable you are as an employee not only to them but should you go looking for a job elsewhere.
The other thing I'd like to touch on is that we had some people from Alberta come down to the road convention probably about six years ago the first time, and then they sent down someone else from one of the universities, with whom we met, and they are instituting a form of certification in Alberta. They were impressed with what we have here.
Mr Rollins: Any further education helps anybody out. This is of further education, and recognition of that education and experience you people have.
The Vice-Chair: Seeing no further questions, are the members prepared to vote?
Shall sections 1 through 14 of the bill carry? Carried.
Shall the preamble carry? Carried.
Shall the title carry? Carried.
Shall the bill carry? Carried.
Shall I report the bill to the House? Agreed.
Thank you very much, gentlemen, for your presentation today. We certainly appreciate the time and thoughts you provided to the committee.
Mr Arnott: Mr Chairman, could we get an explanation of where the bill goes from here, for the benefit of the deputants?
Clerk of the Committee (Ms Lisa Freedman): This afternoon all of today's bills are reported back into the House. They then are put on the order paper to be called for second and third readings, and second and third readings would be coordinated through the government House leader's office.
Mr Arnott: Thank you very much.
ASSOCIATION OF REGISTERED GRAPHIC DESIGNERS OF ONTARIO ACT, 1996
Consideration of Bill Pr56, An Act respecting the Association of Registered Graphic Designers of Ontario.
The Vice-Chair: The second item on our agenda today is Bill Pr56. Mr Boushy will be the sponsor of this bill today. I ask the applicants to come forward. Make yourselves comfortable.
Mr Dave Boushy (Sarnia): Actually, Margaret Marland was to present this to you. She is unable to be with us this morning, so I'm taking her place.
Bill Pr56 will incorporate the association and enable it to govern and discipline its members and to grant its members the right to exclusive use of the designation "registered graphic designer." In short, it establishes the graphic designers as a self-regulating profession.
This bill appears to be well accepted by the graphic designers. Many other professions are self-regulating, and typically the only resistance possibly encountered is from already practising members, if any. They feel that their right to practise is threatened. However section 10 on page 3 in the bill takes care of that. It says, "This act does not affect or interfere with the right of any person who is not a member of the association to practise as a graphic designer."
Now I'll turn it over to the people who represent the association.
Mr Albert Ng: Good morning, Mr Chair, committee members. My name is Albert Ng, co-chair of the graphic design professional accreditation committee. With me today are Pauline Jaworski, past president of the Society of Graphic Designers of Canada, northern Ontario chapter, and Joanne Radford, accreditation adviser.
Thank you for your consideration of Bill Pr56, An Act representing the Association of Registered Graphic Designers of Ontario. I would also like to thank Mr Boushy for standing in for Mrs Marland, the sponsor of the bill, whose support and encouragement we appreciate very much.
Design for a Strong Ontario, 1995: A Strategy for the Ontario Design Sectors, funded by the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade, noted that at present graphic design is the only one of five core design disciplines whose members are not licensed, registered or chartered. One of the 13 recommendations of the report is that graphic design work towards accreditation. The report also stated, "The sector strategy supports the Ontario chapter of the Society of Graphic Designers of Canada in its efforts to obtain accreditation and formally requests the province of Ontario to proceed with the accreditation."
Last year the federal government, through Human Resources Development Canada, commissioned a year-long study of the design sectors across the country. In the draft report it is recommended that graphic designers seek accreditation.
The Association of Registered Graphic Designers of Ontario will regulate the practice of its members for the protection of the public as well as furnish means and facilities by which members of the association may increase their knowledge and skills in things related to the practice of graphic design. The bill does not prevent non-members from calling themselves graphic designers; it prevents them from using the designations "registered graphic designer" and "RGD," thus the public's right to choose is not impinged upon.
In anticipation of the passage of Bill Pr56, the graphic design community in Ontario has begun to set up committees to develop a grandfathering provision, develop bylaws and engage in other activities necessary for the association to fulfil its mandate of protection of the public interest and advancement of the profession.
1030
The accreditation drive in Ontario is impacting not only the rest of the Canada, where the other provinces are just starting their accreditation process, but also the rest of the world. I would like to quote from one of the major American design magazines, Step-By-Step Graphics: "It would be a mistake to consider the accreditation in Ontario simply as a history lesson. The Society of Graphic Designers of Canada's efforts in Ontario may be a map to the accreditation for designers around the world."
I am the vice-president of the International Council of Graphic Design Associations. I have been asked to share our experience and assist other countries, such as Germany, Austria, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil, Taiwan, Korea and Australia in their accreditation efforts.
I would like to thank you for your consideration of Bill Pr56. Pauline, Joanne and I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much for your presentation. Mr Shea, as parliamentary assistant do you have any comments for the committee or the applicants?
Mr Shea: As with Bill Pr53, so too with Bill Pr56. This is one of a large number of bills that have been requested and obtained since 1985 and it follows on the same track. In this case the act will enable the Association of Registered Graphic Designers of Ontario to govern and discipline its members in the public interest and grant its members the right to exclusive use of the terms "registered graphic designer" and "RGD."
I might indicate also for the purposes of the committee that this initiative is strongly endorsed by the government of Ontario in the document Design for a Strong Ontario. There are no ministerial objections at all to this bill.
Mrs Pupatello: Can you tell me what the cost is for the accreditation system? Does the company typically pay for its employees who are graphic designers or is it borne by the individual who carries the accreditation?
Ms Pauline Jaworski: The cost for a membership into the society is $300 per member. Individuals usually pay for their own. Some government bodies pick up that cost and some companies pick up the cost for their employees. It's a split, I would say.
Mrs Pupatello: So it's not a company that becomes registered, it's the individual.
Mr Pouliot: I too listened intently to your presentation. After having looked at the similarities pointed out by Mr Shea in terms of counsel drafting these bills, they tend to be similar and unless you're a real hockey fan, you tend to treat one like the other and not always give it the attention it deserves.
You mentioned twice that protection for the public was important, was paramount. I took from your tone that if you're able to self-regulate yourselves, you would have more of a hands-on, and I liked this act of benevolence to protect the public.
There are other associations that exercise, with respect, the same claim. For instance, members of the law profession also have in their preamble that they will protect the public, and they do so. But you've also mentioned, and so do they, that it would protect members of the profession. You didn't say that the first time, but the second time you threw it in and it is quite blatant. Why would I as a member of the public, a client, need to be protected? Does that entail that perhaps I really need protection, that I could be a soft touch or I could be taken?
We will be supporting this. We don't have the numbers, but we have the right to ask questions.
Ms Joanne Radford: If I could answer that, as you know, what these registration acts do in all the professions is set for their members minimum standards of education, of special development etc. If a member of the public is looking for a graphic designer but doesn't know how to judge, they could, for example, phone the new association and say, "Is this person on your register?"
If they are, they are at the very least assured that the person has a certain basic skill level and certainly isn't in any kind of trouble legally, has not behaved in a sleazy fashion, or else they would not be on the register. Even though it's not a life and death thing, for example, like with the College of Physicians and Surgeons, it's simply a way the public can be given a choice.
Mr Pouliot: So you're sort of a registry. One last question. Are there any in the sister provinces, Alberta, Quebec, Manitoba, or are you in Ontario the first aside from the national organization?
Ms Radford: Yes, we're the first, and they are very anxiously awaiting the outcome of this, because they've already started. When, hopefully, the act goes through, the information that has been developed over the past few years will be passed on gratis to the other provinces. Now of course things differ from leg to leg, but the system is still basically the same in every province in Canada.
Self-regulation is provincial and, as I say, there's the odd quirk here and there, but once this goes through it will be the model and we've already discussed with the other provinces how anxious we are to give them whatever assistance we can, because it's an idea whose time has come. As Albert said, it's the only design profession that does not have self-regulation, and it has been recognized by all the provincial governments and the federal government. It is in the interests of the province to have this happen.
Mr Sheehan: Following up from Mr Pouliot, graphic design takes in packaging design, portraiture work or whatever?
Ms Jaworski: Signage.
Mr Sheehan: Why does the public need the provincial protection from you? What are you going to do me?
Ms Jaworski: Specifically for the signage part, if signage is not designed correctly by a designer, there could be major accidents on the roads. There should be special regulations around billboards on the roads, that they're designed properly not to have any effect on the public in terms of accidents and so forth.
Mr Sheehan: Is that not more of an engineering function?
Ms Jaworski: The design also has a major effect on that. With package design as well, the design of packaging to make sure that "Very dangerous" labelling is put on there specifically and visible to the public quickly. Those are some of the effects it could have on the public if the package is not designed properly.
Mr Sheehan: With respect, I find this to be just a bit overkill. I don't think the provincial Legislature should be certifying your skill as an artist. If you want to put a warning label on something, don't you think it would be sufficient for the Ministry of Health to have the proper requirement for warning, or engineering? I don't see any purpose to this, quite frankly. If I want to be a graphic artist, I can go to art school or somewhere like that and learn the requisite skill. I don't see there's any compelling public need to be protected here, I'm sorry, unless you can convince me otherwise.
Ms Jaworski: In graphic design anything we design leads your eye throughout the element you're looking at. Specifically for a package, if a label is placed on the wrong side or is small and in a corner where the eye will not quickly see it, it could easily not be noticed by an individual. When you are designing, there are elements and colours that have to be placed in strategic positions, and the layperson would not know how those things would fall on there to protect people.
Mr Sheehan: Sorry. It doesn't go ding-ding.
Ms Radford: The other thing too is that in these documents, like the Design for a Strong Ontario and the federal government study in terms of economic competitiveness in the world, as we develop our various industries people have to be assured, if bids are going in and all this other kind of stuff, that there is at least a basic level of competence, expertise, ethics etc.
That is also one of the reasons that both the federal and the provincial governments have been extremely encouraging, almost directive, to the graphic design community to get accreditation. As mentioned before, it's the only one of the five design disciplines that does not have accreditation. I suppose there are wheels within wheels. Also, by the way, in terms once again of public protection, if somebody feels they've got ripped off, they have a place to go to complain.
1040
Mr Sheehan: But they have a case without having us put on the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval, and this Legislature almost does that.
Ms Radford: No, I think they have to go to court. They have to go through a whole long court thing, whereas this way there are standards and basic things by which they can measure their choice of a designer.
Mr Sheehan: I would have to suggest to you that the public cannot abandon its sense to take care of itself to the Legislature and hope we will anticipate everything to which they're exposed. I think you could do the same thing by properly promoting your association so that association symbol of yours would bespeak all the things you have to say without us overkilling this thing and putting it in the Legislature and the legislation of this province.
Ms Radford: We don't see it as overkill. This is a very standard registration act -- I believe somebody said there have been many since 1985 -- which simply allows a community to accept the Association of Registered Graphic Designers, and it just reserves for them the title of "registered graphic designer" or "RGD." It's not a licence; it's hardly exclusivity. This is very standard. The human resource professionals have it, all the graphic --
Mr Sheehan: I'm missing something.
Mr Chris Yaneff: My name is Chris Yaneff. I'm a graphic designer. I've been operating in Toronto for 50 years. I just want to address Mr Sheehan's question.
I was hired by the city of Toronto parking to simplify the parking. What was happening with the city of Toronto, people were going in and out in the wrong areas. Being a graphic designer who studied communication and colour, I simplified to save the city a lot of money by marking the ins of the parking lots green and the outs red so that people knew where to go. I also worked for Metro Toronto in designing all the signage so the trucks that were on the road had markings from a safety point of view. Our years of training in colour and design have helped the city save money on these areas, and I think it's more scientific than you think.
Mr Sheehan: All I'm saying is, that just gives you a competitive advantage, because you're really good at what you do. I don't see why you need certification --
Mr Yaneff: But if someone came to the city and they hired someone who wasn't a registered designer, he may not have the knowledge and the experience.
Mr Sheehan: I defer.
Mr Pouliot: If you use blue as a colour, you get the bill passed right away; if you use green and red --
The Vice-Chair: Could I have the attention of the committee members? In an effort to avoid debate on the issue, Mr Sheehan, I have an additional question from Mr Hastings for the applicants.
Mr John Hastings (Etobicoke-Rexdale): You were speaking earlier about international competitiveness and how that impacts the Ontario economy. Does the use of the designation "RGD" enhance and protect your work, particularly in packaging and advertising internationally and with respect to intellectual copyright?
Ms Radford: I don't believe so. What it is more, with getting this, is that if Canada wants -- okay, here's a perfect example. In the area of plastics, I don't know if you're aware of this, but there is a sector strategy in plastics. We know plastics are used for everything, and of course there's a lot of design involved in plastics, be it packaging or be it actual objects.
When Ontario firms or Canadian firms are making bids and they've got their list of people, they look for experience, they look for credentials. As a matter of fact, from the plastics industry we have encouragement, because they use designers so much, to have a registered graphic designer -- member of -- in other words, a professional. Not only do we have professional engineers, we have professional marketers, professional operators. That's why there is interest of both the federal and the provincial governments in this in that it is part of a thing that's bigger than simply designation.
Mr Hastings: I guess what Mr Sheehan may have been talking about is an article in Canadian Business in 1995, I think in summer, dealing with the whole theme of excessive credentialism that's starting to appear in education etc, and if you do not have the specific designation of whatever particular field you're in, that somehow you are marked as a failure. The article went on to point out that particularly entrepreneurial people are managing to compete without all the professional designations, degrees and so on.
My concern would be from that perspective. Would you like to comment on whether you see this in any way as part of that trend towards excessive credentialism?
Ms Radford: No. First of all it is a registration act; it's not a licensed, exclusive right to practice. In the compendium that went with the bill, even though it isn't called for in the rules, we added in very deliberately the section on grandfathering, because, number one, the idea is to bring people in as opposed to excluding people. It's a grandfathering clause that is mainly based on the fact that until now, if you've been making your living as a graphic designer, then the public has spoken.
In years to come, because there are graphic design programs throughout the province at the various community colleges, there will be new membership standards and there will be the standard one. There will be graduation from a recognized course in graphic design and a few years of experience, and probably in the years to come an accreditation exam, but they take forever to develop.
There isn't anything in here that would prevent anybody from calling themselves a graphic designer, doing graphic design. If they said, "Look, I don't want to be bound by or bothered with this," then there isn't anything to prevent them from doing their own thing. There's no punishment and there's no sort of, "They're going to be in big trouble if they don't."
Ms Radford: This is simply a quality signal to the public saying that if you hire a registered graphic designer, at least you're assured of these four basics. That's all.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much for your presentation. Seeing no further questions, are the members prepared to vote on this bill? Okay.
Shall sections 1 through 13 carry? Carried.
Shall the preamble carry? Carried.
Shall the title carry? Carried.
Shall the bill carry? Carried.
Shall I report the bill to the House? Agreed.
Thank you very much for your presentation this morning. Perhaps the Clerk would give you a quick overview as to what happens with the bill now so you have some information on where you're going.
Clerk of the Committee: As with the previous bill, this bill will be reported back to the House this afternoon. Then it sits on the order paper to be called for second and third readings.
Ms Radford: Is it on the order paper to be called for second and third readings today?
Clerk of the Committee: It's up to the government House leader when it's called for second and third readings.
Mr Pouliot: In very short order.
Ms Radford: Thank you so very, very much. The entire graphic design community in Ontario, Canada and the world thanks you.
1050
TOWN OF MILTON ACT, 1996
Consideration of Bill Pr50, An Act respecting the Town of Milton.
The Vice-Chair: The next item on the committee's agenda is Bill Pr50. I would ask Mr Chudleigh, who is the sponsoring member, to come forward with the applicants. Perhaps you can wait just for a moment until the room clears a little bit so you have an opportunity to be heard.
Mr Ted Chudleigh (Halton North): I'd ask Mr Challinor, councillor for the town of Milton, to make some introductory remarks and answer questions.
Mr John Challinor II: Thank you. My name is John Challinor and I'm a town councillor with Milton. I was hoping that the audience would stay and listen to this; it's quite a bill and it's quite an interesting piece of legislation, but I guess they chose otherwise.
Mr Sergio: No voters in here.
Mr Challinor: We'll have them back in a couple of years. As a preamble, I should let you know that Bill Pr50 sets no precedent for the Legislature or for the province of Ontario. The bill is in existence in support of the town of Oakville, the city of Hamilton and the city of London, and I'm sure that my former municipal counterparts Derwyn Shea and John Hastings are knowledgeable about things heritage and would have some understanding of what this bill proposes. It is not a partisan issue.
Mr Pouliot: Why mention their names?
Mr Challinor: Because I know them, Mr Pouliot, as former municipal politicians. That's why I mentioned their names.
With legislation such as this, you either support things heritage in our province or you don't, and this seeks to provide us with some assistance in protecting things heritage in this province. It will not supersede property rights. Ultimately, the owner of a property that is in conflict with a municipality under this legislation has the authority to demolish that building, ultimately.
What this bill does is to provide an opportunity for cooler heads to prevail. That's how I would describe it. It gives us some time to sit down with the land owner and look at some options. In the final analysis we may not reach an agreement and that building may be torn down, but at least we'll have had a suitable length of time to state our case, look at some options and attempt to come to an alternative solution other than tearing down the building.
I just have about a minute's worth of written material that I would place into Hansard which hopefully will explain the current situation and what we're proposing from the standpoint of the act.
The Ontario Heritage Act currently provides, under section 34, that the council for a municipality "shall consider an application" for demolition of a heritage building "within 90 days of receipt" of the application, and within that time frame the council shall either "consent to the application; or refuse the application and prohibit any work to demolish...for a period of 180 days from the date of" the council decision. After the 180 days have expired, "the owner may proceed to demolish or remove the building or structure on the property, subject to any other act or regulation thereunder."
Bill Pr50 permits the council of the corporation of the town of Milton to refuse an application for demolition and provide notice of that decision within 90 days of receipt of the application for demolition. Bill Pr50 then provides that where an application for demolition has been refused on a designated property, the owner of the property shall not "demolish or remove the building or structure or" do any work "unless the owner has obtained a building permit to erect a new building on the site of the building or structure sought to be demolished or removed; and 180 days have elapsed from the date of the decision of the council."
This requires an individual to obtain a building permit for the new building prior to the demolition taking place. This will provide the municipality with some guarantee that the owner will be providing a new building on the site and would allow for discussions to take place regarding the preservation of heritage features in any new building. It also provides that any new building shall be completed within two years of the commencement of the demolition or removal.
The same requirements hold true for any buildings contained within a heritage conservation district. This legislation will prohibit random demolition of heritage buildings without some guarantee from the owner that a replacement building will be constructed.
That's the extent of my presentation.
The Vice-Chair: I'd ask Mr Shea, the parliamentary assistant, if he has any comments for the committee or the applicants on behalf of the government.
Mr Shea: This bill follows exactly the same wording and template as the Scarborough Bill Pr41 that this committee dealt with just a few weeks ago. There is significant precedent to it: Toronto, Hamilton, Burlington, Scarborough, and there are other examples. I think it's been well outlined by the applicant and no objections have been received; no ministries have made any objections, and I think that speaks for itself. It should be approved.
Mr Pouliot: In anticipation of having to leave early -- I thought the proceedings would take longer -- I availed of the very beginning, so I won't repeat what I said about what is really a special part of Ontario. It's not like public accounts; we don't last three hours per meeting here. I'm fully supportive of what you're attempting to get passed here.
Mr Sheehan: More for clarification, I hope, because I voted in favour of the bill that Mr Shea referred to: You just said something about random demolition. In light of market value assessment and a few other things that seem to be going around, raising a lot of havoc with people's finances, I have a building which has no economic value other than this aesthetic value of being antique. Does this bill preclude me from knocking that building down to avoid excessive taxes?
Mr Challinor: If your building has been designated by the province of Ontario as a heritage building, this legislation would affect your ability to immediately knock that building down. However, if your building has not been designated by the province, there is no objection other than what may be raised by the municipality or the local LACAC committee; but in legislation, no.
Mr Sheehan: Can you tell me the impact of the Ontario Heritage Act on the situation I described? I'm thinking of a particular situation in St Catharines, where the man had a building and he couldn't rent the thing right on Main Street. It was vacant about five years but they were hitting him on the tax bill just like it was still an office building.
Mr Challinor: I don't know the situation in St Catharines.
Mr Sheehan: I'm just giving that by way of reference.
Mr Challinor: Unless that building or that district was designated by the province of Ontario in law, and legal counsel can certainly confirm this, then there is no problem with his coming forth to the city of St Catharines for a demolition permit, receiving it and knocking the building down.
However, as part of the municipal process of approving a demolition permit, it will be circulated through the various departments within that municipality, and you may hear from the LACAC committee because they may have a concern. However, unless the building is designated, there is no authority to hold that owner up in terms of his knocking the building down.
Mr Sergio: I just want to make a comment that the people who have left were all against your bill, so you're lucky that it's coming out now.
The Vice-Chair: Seeing no further questions, are the committee members prepared to vote on this matter?
Shall sections 1 to 10 carry? Carried.
Shall the preamble carry? Carried.
Shall the title carry? Carried.
Shall the bill carry? Carried.
Shall I report the bill to the House? Agreed.
Thank you very much for your presentation today, gentlemen. We certainly appreciate your time.
Mr Challinor: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I encourage all members of the committee to come this summer and enjoy our community. It's a great part of Ontario.
The Vice-Chair: Just before the committee members depart, the parliamentary assistant has one additional item of business he'd like to discuss.
Mr Shea: Mr Chairman, a bit of housekeeping. Members will recall that a few weeks ago I did table some documentation flowing out of some questions we had and procedures and protocols. There was one we had not yet had an opportunity to report on that I will table with members today.
You may recall the application for the revival of corporation 1092404 Ontario Inc by a private bill which came before us. That was an unusual case inasmuch as the cheque was returned to the bank because the applicant's law firm had failed to sign it. In addition, the address of the registered office of the corporation, as set out in the articles of incorporation, was incomplete and the notice of opportunity to be heard was therefore returned to the company's branch by the post office.
I table with the members some further information about that unusual instance and also assure members that there will be a review to determine whether an administrative revival should be available for corporations cancelled for failure to pay the prescribed fee for incorporation, when we are considering the housekeeping amendments to the act. I will table that with members now. I'm always very pleased to respond to the directives of members of this committee and assist wherever I can.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you very much, Mr Shea and committee members.
The committee adjourned at 1102.