CONTENTS
Wednesday 5 March 1997
Intended appointments
Mr John Spink
Mr Joe Mavrinac
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Chair / Président: Mr Floyd Laughren (Nickel Belt ND)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Président: Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt ND)
Mr RickBartolucci (Sudbury L)
Mr EdDoyle (Wentworth East / -Est PC)
Mr Douglas B. Ford (Etobicoke-Humber PC)
Mr GaryFox (Prince Edward-Lennox-South Hastings /
Prince Edward-Lennox-Hastings-Sud PC)
Mr MichaelGravelle (Port Arthur L)
Mr BertJohnson (Perth PC)
Mr PeterKormos (Welland-Thorold ND)
Mr FloydLaughren (Nickel Belt ND)
Mr Gary L. Leadston (Kitchener-Wilmot PC)
Mr FrankMiclash (Kenora L)
Mr DanNewman (Scarborough Centre / -Centre PC)
Mr Peter L. Preston (Brant-Haldimand PC)
Mr TonySilipo (Dovercourt ND)
Mr BobWood (London South / -Sud PC)
Substitutions present /Membres remplaçants présents:
Mr JackCarroll (Chatham-Kent)
Mrs BrendaElliott (Guelph PC)
Also taking part /Autres participants et participantes:
Mr GillesPouliot (Lake Nipigon)
Clerk / Greffière: Ms Donna Bryce
Staff / Personnel: Mr David Pond, research officer, Legislative Research Service
The committee met at 1035 in room 228.
INTENDED APPOINTMENTS
The Vice-Chair (Mr Tony Silipo): Could I call this meeting of the government agencies committee to order, please. We have three items before us today, the first being the report of the subcommittee on committee business dated Thursday, February 27.
Mr Bob Wood (London South): I move adoption of the report of the subcommittee of February 27, 1997.
The Vice-Chair: As you see, the report indicates no intended appointees are requested for review out of that particular report. Any comments? All right, we'll deem that to have been accepted. Thank you.
The next item is to begin the review of the two intended appointees before us this morning. Before we go on, Mr Gravelle, I gather you wanted to make a point.
Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur): I don't think we need to seek unanimous support, but if I may, I seek unanimous support to remove the five submissions we put forward to appear before the committee. We have now withdrawn those and hope that's acceptable to everybody here.
The Vice-Chair: There's a memo from the clerk in front of us which reflects that. Do we require agreement of the committee? We just note that. That means we will have three intended appointees to review at the April 2 meeting. All right. Thank you.
JOHN SPINK
Review of intended appointment, selected by the third party: John Spink, intended appointee as member, Ontario Film Review Board.
The Vice-Chair: We'll proceed to invite Mr John Spink, intended appointee as member of the Ontario Film Review Board, to address us. Mr Spink, welcome to the committee. The procedure we follow, as I'm sure has been outlined to you, is we'll offer you a chance to make any opening comments you wish and then we'll have some questions from members of the committee.
Mr John Spink: I'm not sure whether all the members have seen my résumé, but I thought I would take a minute just to talk a little bit about myself and then answer any questions members might have.
I was born and raised in Toronto. When I graduated from the University of Toronto, I took at position with Bell Canada. In the last 25 years, I've held a number of management positions with the company. I worked and lived in London, Ontario, for three years. Then I spent some time in Montreal, a couple of years in the Middle East working for Bell, and I've been back in the Toronto area for about the last 13 or 14 years.
I moved out to Ajax with my family in 1985. I'm married. I have two grown children. The younger, my daughter, is a student at the University of Toronto.
In Ajax I've held almost every executive position, including president, of the Ajax Lions Club and had a number of activities within the community. I've been involved in numerous fund-raising activities with the Ajax-Pickering General Hospital as well as the Kids Help Phone, which is a particular organization that my company is extremely involved in. I have had dealings with them in terms of fund-raising.
When my job responsibilities were a little different, I was a member for about a year and half of the Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade, so I had some involvement with them. In recent years, I have had some political involvement in the community as well.
With the type of job I have, where I do have extensive interfacing with large numbers of employees as well as the public, plus various things that I have been involved in in the community, I feel comfortable that I can do a good job in representing the community on this particular board.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you, Mr Spink. We'll go first to the government side for questions.
Mr Bob Wood: We'll reserve our time.
The Vice-Chair: To the official opposition.
Mr Gravelle: Good morning, Mr Spink. It's probably not difficult to describe the Ontario Film Review Board as a sensitive position in terms of what it is that you're trying to achieve. One of the issues that continues to be discussed is the whole concept of community standards. So it's probably not a bad place to start to ask you if you've got a sense yourself in terms of how you would define community standards, recognizing of course that there's the community of a place like Toronto, perhaps, and there's a community like Thunder Bay, for my community, and many of the smaller communities as well. What are your thoughts in terms of that?
Mr Spink: I think this really underscores the importance of the work that the film review board does in that it has to represent quite a cross-section of the community across Ontario in terms of not only geography and demographics and social economic, but also varying philosophies and opinions. I think it's important that there is a good mix.
In terms of the issue of community standards, in doing some of the research that I've read through, I find that my own personal opinions are quite consistent with some of the things that I've read, and I guess most notable was the definitive Supreme Court decision in 1992 on Butler v the Queen, which did try to define the fine line between the right of freedom of speech and expression versus community standards and what constitutes obscenity.
I think that's a moving target. It's very difficult to be extremely definitive in terms of what that is, but the court referred to the types of activities that were detailed in the Criminal Code and I certainly think there is a consensus that those types of activities dealing with the exploitation or apparent exploitation of minors, degradation of men or women, certainly sexual violence, things of that nature clearly do cross the line and would not be acceptable to the community as a whole.
In reading some of the opinions of a former chair of the board, Robert Payne, he talked about how it's important to look at what the community as a whole will either accept or tolerate and not what individual groups within that community would find acceptable. That goes back to the need for a board cross-section of representation.
Mr Gravelle: You're right, it's a moving target. I think it can be very difficult, but I think if you define it that way -- and I'm certainly pleased you've obviously done your research. Not all the appointees who come forward to government agencies are always as well prepared as you are, which is good.
I'll pass you on to my colleague Mr Bartolucci and I may come back at the end. Thank you.
Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): Thank you, Mr Spink, for appearing before us this morning. It's interesting that you're going to sit on this film review board. I'm wondering, did you review the videocassette that they sent you to prepare for this presentation?
Mr Spink: A videocassette on the review board?
Mr Bartolucci: No, a videocassette for this committee. Did you not get a videocassette?
Mr Spink: I have seen a videocassette of a committee hearing that was held last year some time. It had nothing to do with the film review board.
Mr Bartolucci: No, absolutely, it doesn't. It has everything to do with this committee. That's right. Certainly no nudity here; we dress well.
How much time did you spend watching the video?
Mr Spink: To be honest with you, I fast-forwarded a lot of it.
Mr Bartolucci: Do you think it's worthwhile that they send out this videocassette?
Mr Spink: I think it's only worthwhile in the sense that it gives you some idea of the type of questions you could receive, but unless it's specifically related to the particular board or agency -- I mean, in this particular case it didn't have anything to do with this. It was interesting background, but not overly valuable.
Mr Bartolucci: A waste of time for you, I guess. That's what you're saying?
Mr Spink: It was after dinner at home; I had nothing else to do at that point.
Mr Bartolucci: I look at your work experience and I'm really impressed with it, to be perfectly honest with you. There's a good background here. You spent three years over in Saudi Arabia. You could have extended that for another three. Why did you choose to come home?
Mr Spink: I'd had enough. I was there about two and a half years in total and my children were quite small. They were, I guess, in grades 1 and 3 when I came back. You know, it's an important time in terms of grandparents being available in their lives.
Mr Bartolucci: It safe to say that you didn't watch too many movies over there during that time.
Mr Spink: No.
Mr Bartolucci: Your education certainly prepares you well for the committee, and some of the same courses that I took you took. Top-quality management will hold you in good stead in the committee. I look at your community activities. This is a question that normally the New Democratic Party asks, but I'm going to ask today because Tony's caught in a bit of a bind here. I don't see any political involvement. Are you a card-carrying member of any political party?
Mr Spink: I've been a member of the PC Party of Ontario since 1994.
Mr Bartolucci: Have you ever run for them?
Mr Spink: No.
Mr Bartolucci: Were you active in this last campaign at all?
Mr Spink: Yes, I was, in the community. Also, I was a volunteer in the last two federal campaigns. Before that, I was not politically active for a number of years, but if you go back far enough, at one time I was a federal riding president for the Liberal Party and a vice-president of the Liberal Party in the --
Mr Bartolucci: There are so few converts that go from Liberal to Conservative. I may want to ask you why -- I would normally allow the NDP to ask that -- and I won't.
The Vice-Chair: Mr Bartolucci, let me assure that when I asked you to ask that question, I had no idea what the answer would be.
Mr Bartolucci: But Tony, it will be the last time I ever ask this question.
There's absolutely no problem with that in this democracy. I'm sure before the end of this term is out you'll be coming back over. And you know what? We'll accept you.
I have to ask how you found out that there was this opening.
Mr Spink: About a year ago, I was talking to a woman who worked in our local constituency office and I indicated to her that I would be interested in serving on some sort of provincial agency or board and that I did have a particular interest in film. What she advised me at the time was to submit my résumé to the Public Appointments Secretariat, which I did, and that was about a year ago. I'd forgotten about it, to be honest with you, because I didn't hear anything until a few weeks ago when they said that my name had been presented for this particular agency. I was thrilled because it was an area that I was interested in on a personal level.
Mr Bartolucci: Listen, I wish you well. I think you'll be great on the board. Good luck with it.
Mr Gravelle: I just wanted to ask a quick question. Do you have any personal views on censorship?
Mr Spink: I don't like the word "censorship." I believe adults should be in a position that they can make an informed choice for both themselves and their children in terms of what films or videos they want to see. That goes back to the idea of classifying films, and certainly putting warning labels is extremely important. My wife and I are avid moviegoers, but if my wife sees a warning that says that there is brutal violence, she will not go to see that film. If that warning wasn't there, then she could be subjected to things that she personally would find extremely offensive. I think the classification and labelling system is very important.
Mr Peter L. Preston (Brant-Haldimand): My question is very similar. You mentioned classification of films, you talked about obscenities, and in most minds we end up with a sexual connotation to obscenities. What about the obscenities and freedom of speech regarding racism, regarding the events of the Second World War. Those are two good ones; tell me about those. Tell me what should be allowed on the market regarding these things.
Mr Spink: The Second World War issue is an interesting one because there was a bit of controversy in Washington this past week because one of the US networks showed Schindler's List uncensored, and if you've seen that movie, you'll know that not only is there a considerable degree of violence but there's also full frontal nudity and what not. A couple of -- I'm not sure whether it was a senator or a congressman who was extremely offended by the fact that this was shown on television.
I look at the way the Ontario Film Review Board handled that particular film. Because of those factors, technically it would be a restricted film. However, you then weigh that against the educational value of younger people being aware of some of the things that did happen and so it did get an adult accompaniment classification. I think that was a wise and prudent thing to do in that particular situation.
The racism issue is even more complex because certainly there have been a number of films that have a racial theme to them, but the idea of actually advocating blatant racism I would find personally very offensive. I've not read anything in the Supreme Court decision that specifically dealt with that issue. I'd certainly like to find out more about it, because it's something I haven't really thought of, but it is something that is extremely offensive to me personally.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you, Mr Spink, for appearing before the committee.
1050
JOE MAVRINAC
Review of intended appointment, selected by the third party: Joe Mavrinac, intended appointee as member, Ontario Realty Corp board of directors.
The Vice-Chair: I call on Mr Joseph Mavrinac, to come before us, intended appointee as a member of the Ontario Realty Corp board of directors, although I'm sure we may have seen Mr Mavrinac here in his other capacities. Welcome, Mr Mavrinac. The process we have is to spend about half an hour with you, if need be, and to ask you, if you wish and would like, to make some opening comments. Then we'll have members of the committee in rotation ask some questions.
Mr Joe Mavrinac: Thank you very much, Mr Chairman. I'm glad that the individual who preceded me put you in the proper frame of mind so you can take it easy on an old man.
Mr Preston: They don't do that for me.
Mr Mavrinac: I want to thank you very much for the opportunity of making a few remarks and give you some background and why I feel I would make a suitable candidate for the position for which I have been nominated.
My business experience encompasses in excess of 30 years, primarily in the hotel-motel business but also in other private business and partnerships. I'll just mention a few. A group of us had Norten Holdings Co and primarily we dealt with apartment buildings and commercial properties. Raven Mountain Resorts was another group I was involved with. I was president of that group for several years. It's a mountain that is situated on the Quebec border, 27 miles east of Kirkland Lake, a 520-foot vertical drop. It's not as nice as Searchmount, but we're getting there as soon as we develop the other ridge and get a few more chairlifts, but up till now it's been the best-kept secret in Ontario.
The other area I was very much involved in was the catering business. I have the catering contract for the three campuses of Northern College -- Haileybury, Timmins and Kirkland Lake -- and I also had a private catering business.
My public experience has been as mayor for the past 16 years. This is my sixth consecutive term. I was a councillor in the 1950s and 1960s and a representative on numerous municipal committees. My provincial relationship experience has been as president of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario and prior to that on numerous AMO committees and boards of directors. I gained extensive experience for a need to rationalize priorities, both spending and resource planning, through the disentanglement process, of which I was one of the principals. I was president of AMO at that time.
As you remember, Mr Chairman, I also had to endure the social contract and the expenditure control plan. We did exceptionally well in Kirkland Lake. We're proud of that because our employees did not have to take any of the so-called Rae days. We found substantial and sustainable cuts within the system that more than offset the losses we had in terms of cutbacks.
Through public and business experience, I've gained insights into effective management in human and physical resources. I have a personal appreciation of the need to rationalize real estate holdings to meet fiscal targets established by both the present and the past governments. I understand the need to house government agencies in single buildings, where possible, to minimize costs. Consolidation could make for greater understanding of what the province entails within communities. I'm a strong proponent of the one-stop-shopping principle.
I have a firsthand knowledge of the effects on northern communities related to the provincial initiatives and its real estate. I have gained extensive experience in large projects through spearheading public campaigns such as the Kirkland Lake Community Complex and the Museum of Northern History. I was the chairman of the needs and feasibility studies and also the chairman of the fund-raising committees on both of those projects. They were multimillion-dollar projects. When they opened the doors, we didn't have to raise a cent, debenture or borrow from anyone. They were paid in full.
With those few remarks, thank you very much.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you, Mr Mavrinac. We'll go to the government side, questions?
Mr Bob Wood: We'll reserve our time.
The Vice-Chair: To the Liberal caucus.
Mr Frank Miclash (Kenora): Mayor Mavrinac, I must say that your CV here is quite impressive. Most important, your contribution to northern Ontario has certainly come through loud and clear in terms of your accomplishments in the north and on behalf of Kirkland Lake.
At the present time, you are mayor of Kirkland Lake, I take it. Do you see any conflict in terms of sitting on this board and being the mayor of Kirkland Lake?
Mr Mavrinac: I don't think so. I thought of that. I made my announcement in January because in a lot of the smaller communities people think you're going to run forever. This is my sixth consecutive term. I made the announcement early in January. I didn't think that I was going to get called this early in the process, but I am not running this time. I'm quite aware of the process you speak of, and if there was any conflict, I'm sure that I could at that point in time step down or step aside, or leave the room, I should say. From what specific perspective are you coming?
Mr Miclash: I guess in general decisions in terms of the board. I appreciate your comment that you could step outside of the room if Kirkland Lake were ever involved in any decisions, or northern Ontario, in your capacity as mayor of that particular community. That's where I would say conflicts possibly come in.
Mr Mavrinac: Right now there is one building that we are looking at, and that's the OPP. We downsized our municipal force. The OPP detachment closed its building in Kirkland Lake and it closed the one 27 miles east of us in Virginiatown and housed everything in one building. That was very productive and cost-effective for both organizations. We saved about $300,000 in that move and the OPP did about the same. So now we have that building, it's vacant, and what we're pursuing -- hopefully, the Attorney General will see fit that we'll be able to move a courthouse into that building instead of having us move 75% of the caseload down to Haileybury, 55 miles to the south of us. That's about the only instance I can think of.
Mr Gravelle: Good morning, Mr Mavrinac. For members of the government party, Mr Mavrinac is truly a northern legend. I had an opportunity to work with you before. I'm not sure if you recall me, Mr Mavrinac.
Mr Mavrinac: I remember you very well.
Mr Gravelle: Northern development councils and all that sort of stuff.
Mr Gilles Pouliot (Lake Nipigon): Let's not overreact.
Mr Gravelle: He just said he knew me well; he didn't make any comment. Anyway, it's good to see you today. Indeed, you have had remarkable service in terms of the north.
I think it's very clear with your experience -- I think Mr Miclash's question was a fair one and I appreciate that you took it seriously, that in terms of potential conflicts you'd be very careful. I have little doubt that you'll probably be a fine member of this particular corporation and I can see no reason why we would object to you being on it.
But I want to ask you as a northern mayor, if I can sort of slip off topic, because it's an opportunity to talk to someone who is on the front lines, so to speak, what is your reaction in Kirkland Lake -- and you've talked to other northern mayors -- in terms of some of the initiatives the government has put forward in this particular winter session, or spring session, as they prefer to call it, the transfer of responsibilities, basically the dumping from provincial to municipal the social assistance, the child care, libraries -- there's a whole list of them. I'm curious as to how it's going to affect Kirkland Lake.
Mr Mavrinac: Let's go back to last year. The total amount of decrease in funding was $750,000. We had to make some very important decisions and some that weren't all that popular. I've told you about the police. We were thinking about going to OPP service because we were one of four municipalities in all of northeastern Ontario that had our own police force. Right now, all that's left is New Liskeard, believe it or not, less than 5,000 people, and North Bay and Timmins.
We were really seriously thinking about that, because you have to appreciate, and I don't care what municipality you're in, that about 35% or 40% of your net general levy goes to policing. We found out through the studies we conducted that we could save a considerable amount of money. So the $750,000 the first year -- last year -- was quite easily attained, but the most difficult decision that I had to make was in my jurisdiction. I appreciate the support that I've had over the many years from the seniors, and we have a very high percentage of seniors in Kirkland Lake. We cut out our transit system and that saved another $300,000. So the $150,000 was easy to pick up.
We expected the same amount of cut this year, but that didn't happen. The northern mayors lobbied Chris Hodgson and every other minister we could talk to, and we explained to them the uniqueness of northern Ontario. Instead of a $750,000 cut this year, we got a $410,000 cut. It's still going to be difficult, but it's attainable. I can't see the cuts going any further, because we have been cutting since 1990. We've cut our personnel in the works department by 19. It's just on and on and on, because it's that kind of an economy there. We got started way before the province started cutting back.
1100
Mr Gravelle: But have you done a calculation in terms of the most recent announcements, in terms of the downloading that's happening? Obviously education is being taken off the residential property taxpayer, but the other responsibilities will be added to the municipal burden, financial burden. I know most towns, most communities have done, as best they can, a calculation of what it's going to mean, and certainly there's been a number of communities that really feel that based on the service level now their property taxes are going to have to go up a significant amount, if not a frightening amount. I just wondered whether your community has done a calculation of that.
Mr Mavrinac: We did the same studies like any other municipality, to be in the area of $2 million, maybe a little more. We were at the Ontario Good Roads Association convention last week and the Association of Mining Municipalities had our minister, Chris Hodgson, there. We were discussing the three funds, the transition funds and the $1-billion-plus restructuring fund, and we were assured that it could be revenue-neutral after the whole situation is worked out. We're hoping that happens. But getting back to your question, it would mean in excess of $2 million.
Mr Gravelle: Do you agree with the government's decisions in this area?
Mr Mavrinac: We have a very good financial situation in Kirkland Lake because of the obvious. It's a non-renewable resource. We could not spend more than we took in. That principle I agree with wholeheartedly. The previous government took a route that wasn't popular. I'm really getting a charge out of the whole process right now and how the unions, OPSEU especially, are dogging this present government, because every time Mr Laughren and Mr Cooke and I walked out of a meeting, they were there, in northern Ontario or southern Ontario.
Nobody wants to give up anything on their turf, but yet I feel very strongly that we all have to look at that very seriously and start living within our means. How this is all going to evolve and what procedures and what other people have, how they would handle a problem, the problem's still there and it has to be addressed and it has to be accomplished.
The Vice-Chair: We'll move then to the NDP caucus, Mr Pouliot.
Mr Pouliot: Thank you, Joseph.
Mr Mavrinac: Joe. I was baptized Joseph, but nobody has ever called me that since.
Mr Pouliot: Well, Joe, good morning. It's nice to be in your company. Humour becomes you.
We go back some time. I'm wondering, how were you approached, how did you find out about the Ontario Realty Corp? Did someone come knocking on your door one day and say: "Ah, a miracle. Joe, we want you to serve the province in a different capacity." By the way, your intention of not seeking re-election, was it fairly well known at that time when this came about? When was it public knowledge that you were not to seek re-election? I understand from my neck of the woods that you're not seeking re-election.
Mr Mavrinac: I did it the first week in January to let everybody know so they could prepare, because a lot of the people up there still thought I was going to be running in November, on November 10, and I just had to make it very clear, to give them all kinds of opportunity to -- because no one's come forward from my council or from the chamber of commerce, and that bothers me. I just didn't want to leave them in the lurch because my wife and I made up our minds after the last election that it would be the last time. You've got to remember, this was the sixth consecutive election and this is going to be 17 years.
Mr Pouliot: So after all those years the family comes first. That's nice to see. You bring an unusual human dimension to your forte.
Mr Mavrinac: Now getting back to your first question, how this came about, I was in Timmins and I told my friend Peter Doucet that I was not running, and just after the press conference, "Well, what are you going to do?" I made the announcement at the press conference. I said that with all the years of service I'd like to still have some connection with the whole process, I'd like to sit on a board or a commission a day or two a month. I told that to Peter Doucet. This was back in November when we had a farewell party for Bob Gervais, the president of Northern College in Timmins. When I made the announcement, Peter asked me to send a résumé. I just assumed he sent it down to Toronto here and that's how it started.
Mr Pouliot: Very well. By virtue of your background and the involvement that you put into anything you tackle, I take it that you're familiar with the mandate if you are appointed, what you are about to be asked to do. I just overheard when you were addressing the financial Mecca opposite, friends and colleagues of the Conservative Party, about living within your own means. Then right before that you had mentioned that in terms of cuts there are thresholds, that you can cut so much and so forth. Do you get paid for this? Do you know if there is a stipend?
Mr Mavrinac: I think it's $150 a day -- I stand to be corrected; I'm not sure, to tell you the truth -- $150 per meeting, and expenses. I haven't even gone into that.
Mr Pouliot: Does it entail being out of town quite often? Where are the meetings?
Mr Mavrinac: I was told that the meetings were once a month. That is not a problem.
Mr Pouliot: You'll be asked to borrow money to buy government surplus land. How do you see your mandate? Have you had any discussion with other people on this as to what methodology they used, how they arrived at that?
Mr Mavrinac: Until I get to the meeting, I just assume that if you buy the land, you borrow the money to buy the land, you sell the land, you're going to make a profit. That's what the exercise is, hopefully. I don't know what the real estate is like out there, but that money could be used to downsize the deficit. I think that's what the nature of the exercise is.
Mr Pouliot: So with respect, I better not know that you're anxious to sell the land because your margin of profit may be adjusted accordingly. There are a lot of market conditions that prevail. Of course, you will be under pressure. You're not the one saying this all day; you do have immunity here.
Mr Mavrinac: Well, I guess we get a certain --
Mr Pouliot: There's a group of people. It's quite simple. You make some commitments, and at the time you make them they seem to be so facile, you can do all kinds of things. A lot of people will make you rich in 15 years if you put your money down now. The commitment's like a balanced budget, giving people like -- there's nothing wrong with that, they say -- Frank Stronach a quarter of a million dollars per instalment by virtue of the tax break, and at the same time you're closing hospitals -- that's okay; human dimension; people should be able to stand on their own two feet -- and hitting the poor going up the foodline.
It creates a lot of pressure to sell things because there is a mindset -- quite often it's correct, in my humble opinion -- that the private sector will do it better. The trick here is that we must allow a margin because the private sector is motivated by the bottom line. Money is a motivator. Great stuff. I have no quarrel with that. But you have to factor these in.
We've been on opposite sides, you and I. I had four ministries with the previous administration. I can't think of a person who is better equipped in terms of integrity. There are others, there are many others, but I can't think of anyone who is as dedicated in the service that you've offered year after year to the people of Kirkland Lake and the people of the north in general. It certainly deserves commendation. We don't belong to the same philosophy, and I can appreciate that, but I'm certainly
envious of the many qualities that Joe brings forth and I would highly recommend his appointment.
The Vice-Chair: Are there any questions from the government caucus?
Mr Bob Wood: We'll waive our time, Mr Chairman.
The Vice-Chair: Thank you, Mr Mavrinac, for appearing before us.
We'll move now to dealing with votes on the two intended appointees.
Mr Bob Wood: I move concurrence in the intended appointment of Mr Spink.
The Vice-Chair: Is there any discussion on that? All those in favour? Opposed? Carried.
Mr Bob Wood: I move concurrence in the intended appointment of Mr Mavrinac.
The Vice-Chair: Any discussion on that? All those in favour? Opposed? Carried.
That concludes our business for this morning. The committee stands adjourned.
The committee adjourned at 1110.