INTENDED
APPOINTMENTS
GORDON PETERS
CONTENTS
Wednesday 10 December 1997
Committee business
Intended appointments
Chief Gordon Peters
Mr Brian Merrett
STANDING COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Chair / Président
Mr Floyd Laughren (Nickel Belt ND)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Président
Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt ND)
Mr Alex Cullen (Ottawa West / -Ouest L)
Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur L)
Mr Bill Grimmett (Muskoka-Georgian Bay / Muskoka-Baie-Georgienne PC)
Mr Bert Johnson (Perth PC)
Mr Floyd Laughren (Nickel Belt ND)
Mr Dan Newman (Scarborough Centre / -Centre PC)
Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt ND)
Mr Joseph Spina (Brampton North / -Nord PC)
Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough PC)
Substitutions / Membres remplaçants
Mr Tim Hudak (Niagara South / -Sud PC)
Mr Derwyn Shea (High Park-Swansea PC)
Also taking part / Autres participants et participantes
Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines L)
Clerk / Greffier
Mr Douglas Arnott
Staff / Personnel
Mr David Pond, research officer, Legislative Research Service
The committee met at 1008 in room 228.
COMMITTEE BUSINESS
The Chair (Mr Floyd Laughren): The first order of business is the subcommittee report dated November 27. Could we have a motion to accept that subcommittee report?
Mr Bert Johnson (Perth): I will move it.
The Chair: Mr Johnson has moved acceptance of the subcommittee report. Is there any debate? Carried? Carried.
There is the subcommittee report dated December 4. I await a motion.
Mr Bert Johnson: I will move that one too.
The Chair: It has been moved by Mr Johnson. Carried? Carried. Thank you, Mr Johnson.
The third item of business is an anticipated motion concerning the subcommittee.
Mr R. Gary Stewart (Peterborough): I will move that one.
I move that the following substitution be made to the membership of the subcommittee on committee business: Mr Grimmett for Mr Baird.
The Chair: You've heard the motion. It doesn't require a seconder. Any debate? All those in favour? Carried. Thank you for that, Mr Stewart.
INTENDED APPOINTMENTS
GORDON PETERS
Review of intended appointment, selected by third party: Gordon Peters, intended appointee as member, Ontario Judicial Council.
The Chair: The next item of business is the intended appointments. The first one is someone known to some of us for many years: Gordon Peters, to the Ontario Judicial Council.
Mr Peters, welcome to the committee. We are pleased you are here this morning. Make yourself comfortable. It is traditional that if you wish to make any opening comment you are welcome to do so, after which each caucus will have 10 minutes to ask you questions if they so desire. Do you have any opening comments, Mr Peters?
Chief Gordon Peters: My name is Gordon Peters. I come from a community called Moravian of the Thames, which is located in southern Ontario. I grew up in the community and lived there until I was about 18 or 19 years old.
I have done extensive travelling. I have worked with a lot of communities across Ontario and Canada. I have travelled internationally to deal with other indigenous peoples and their relationships with other state and national governments, which is part of my responsibility and I work along with the Assembly of First Nations.
I come here today with the understanding that there will be some questions about my ideology, perhaps, some of the roles I have played and some of the thinking I have about where I see the Ontario Judicial Council being.
I will stop it with that, Mr Chairman, just a short introduction about some of the things I have participated in during the last few years.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr Peters. Do the government members have any questions or comments to Mr Peters?
Mr Bert Johnson: No, I have no questions right now.
Mr Bill Grimmett (Muskoka-Georgian Bay): Could we pass and perhaps reserve our time, Mr Chair?
The Chair: Yes, you may. Can we proceed to the official opposition?
Mr Michael Gravelle (Port Arthur): Good morning, Chief Peters. I am curious. This is an interesting appointment to the judicial council, obviously a body that basically deals with the behaviour of the judges in the court system. How did the appointment come about? Did you seek out the appointment or did someone introduce the possibility of the appointment to this particular council to you?
Chief Peters: The idea was approached to me. I did not seek any particular avenue for any kind of appointment. I was asked if my name would stand in relation to the Ontario Judicial Council and I agreed to do that.
Mr Gravelle: If I may ask you your thoughts on the justice system in Ontario and the judicial council itself, are there some particular goals you have or things you want to achieve when you become a part of this council? Obviously, it's an interesting spot to be in.
Chief Peters: Yes, I do. I think if we go back and look at all the kinds of records that are kept in relation to indigenous peoples and their interaction with the law, we will find that a lot of our people are constantly dealing with the judicial system in respect to the provincial court. I think there is not a lot of knowledge about the Ontario Judicial Council. There is not a lot of knowledge among our people about how that might be used to be able to deal with some of the ongoing issues they have. I take it as an opportunity to help educate the people on the Ontario Judicial Council as well as an opportunity to educate our own people about some avenues that might be available to them to remedy some of the situations they find themselves in.
Mr Gravelle: So you view it as part of your role on this body to educate the people of the province, and perhaps the first nations people, as to the process they can go through if they're not satisfied with what has happened.
Chief Peters: That's correct. I think, based on my experience with the first nations communities, I have never heard very many communities ever talk about the Ontario Judicial Council or the role it might play in helping them to be able to deal with some of the situations they have.
Mr Gravelle: Probably a lot of people in Ontario are not aware that the judicial council exists. Certainly, Chief Peters, I think your addition to the council would be a good appointment by this government, and with your background and qualifications I can see no reason to object to it. I applaud the appointment. I wish you the best and certainly look forward to supporting your nomination to this position. Those are all the questions that I have.
Chief Peters: Thank you very much.
Mr Tony Silipo (Dovercourt): Chief Peters, good morning. My apologies for missing the opening part of your presentation. As representative of the party that asked that you come here, I want to first of all be clear about why we did that. It certainly has nothing whatsoever to do with your qualifications and your ability to serve in this capacity or many other capacities.
I have had the pleasure, as have many of my colleagues, to work with you in the past when we were in government, and even before then for some of them. Certainly I've enjoyed very much the working relationship we have had and know of the commitment and dedication you've brought to your tasks in the various capacities in which you've served and to the many different issues that affect the native communities in Ontario.
I owe it to you to explain that in asking for you to come here, we wanted to ask you the question you may already have answered in your last answer, but I just want to put it to you. It's fair to say that we were a little surprised to see not that the government would have approached you for this appointment or any other appointment, because as I say, on the basis of your qualifications and what you could bring, there would be unquestionably no doubt that you could add a lot to the work of a council, in this case the Judicial Council, and in terms of any other body that the government might have chosen to ask you to serve on; the basic question is, in light of what the government has done or not done vis-à-vis the various issues that affect native communities, particularly given the issues that are still outstanding with respect to the Ipperwash situation, why would you choose to serve on a body like this?
Chief Peters: I asked myself that question as well.
Mr Silipo: I suspect you have and that's why I was interested in hearing the answer to that.
Chief Peters: It's not something to which, when I was asked, I put my name forward immediately. As an individual I have spent the majority of my life trying to understand the relationships between our communities and the Ontario government and the federal government and, as I've said many times, the people who have come to occupy our lands. I've tried throughout my time to make a very significant stand in relation to how I view those kinds of relationships. It's no different with this particular government that we see in front us right now, the Conservative government.
I have advocated, for example in the case of Ipperwash, that an inquiry be held so that everybody will know the truth. I've advocated in relation to the restoration of our lands and the recognition of our treaties. I've done those with every government I've dealt with in the time that I have worked, starting with the Davis government right through the Liberal government and the NDP government as well.
For me, going into this position, which I saw as kind of a senior position, I thought it would be another way of being able to deal with a number of issues I would like to see being able to proceed. One, first of all, is that there needs to be an understanding of the behaviour of judges in relation to indigenous peoples and the understandings that are required by people to know. There are a lot of decisions that are made by provincial judges, especially in relation to family matters within our peoples, and they have no idea what it is in relation to the extended families that our communities have.
All of these things are simply based on laws that have been put in place to try to deal with our communities. You have to have a more operational understanding of that, a functional understanding about how we operate as people. I thought I would be able to bring that to this.
The other part that's important for me is that one of the things I'm trying to do right now is instil within our own communities the value of going back to ways to resolve disputes ourselves in our communities without having to turn to another body, in particular the provincial courts or federal courts, to resolve our decisions.
This will give me an opportunity to say that yes, I know how some of these things over here function. I have a great understanding of how these things can work and where they can benefit us or where they can't benefit us. My recommendations will be very clear in terms of what our communities can do to help ourselves in respect of conflict resolution as opposed to turning to these institutions that historically have not been favourable to our people.
1020
Mr Silipo: Thank you very much, Chief Peters. I certainly will support your appointment to this body with enthusiasm. I know you will add a lot of wisdom to this body.
Chief Peters: Thank you, Mr Silipo.
The Chair: Are there any questions from members of the government side?
Mr Grimmett: Welcome, Mr Peters. I wanted to ask you perhaps a bit about your background and what activity you've been involved with that might relate to the courts. Do you have much experience in dealing with courts yourself?
Chief Peters: Only from the opposite side of the bench. That's been the majority of my experience, but I have worked for the last 20 years with our people, and I have worked from the side of indigenous peoples trying to find justice within the political and legal systems of Canada, so I have worked with lawyers on constitutional processes. I have been a negotiator at the constitutional table for the Assembly of First Nations. I have been involved in all kinds of legal negotiations over land claim settlements, over attempts to try to deal with jurisdictional recognition for our people.
The law has played an important role in my understanding of how people view the relationship we have, and as a consequence to that, I've had quite a bit of interaction with the court system and with the entire justice system provincially and federally.
Mr Grimmett: As I understand it, the council's duties are really in two categories. One deals with new appointments to the provincial bench and the other deals with complaints that are brought against provincial court judges.
Under the legislation, the idea of having a performance review for the judges currently is discretionary, but there is Bill 130, which was a private member's bill brought forward by Mr Ouellette, the member for Oshawa, in the current legislative term which suggested that those performance evaluation programs for provincial judges should be mandatory. Do you have any thoughts on the person in your position, if you're on the council, whether that should be an annual event that you would review the performance of provincial judges?
Chief Peters: I've only had time to receive the information in that respect. I've gone through it and I've given it some thought. I have thought about the independence that's required by the judiciary to be able to operate. I've also thought about the accountability that's required, and I'm trying to figure out how to balance that off because I haven't had time to really proceed through and try to make an evaluation of how that would affect the independence at this point in time. I haven't really established a position myself about how that might be done.
I certainly see the debate that goes around the issue and I recognize that there will be probably in the future a time when I will have to make a decision in respect of my position on that. At this point in time I haven't reached a decision yet about whether I believe that it should be mandatory that the evaluation of judges take place.
Mr Grimmett: I certainly welcome your appointment. I think you can bring an awful lot of expertise and certainly a fresh perspective to the council. I want to thank you for accepting the offer that was made to you.
Chief Peters: Thank you.
The Chair: Anything further from the caucus? If not, Chief Peters, all three caucuses have supported your appointment. It's good to see you again and I wish you very well in this new task you've undertaken. All the best.
Chief Peters: Thank you very much.
The Chair: You are welcome to stay, if you wish.
Mr Silipo: Do you want to deal with the concurrence now?
The Chair: Do you want to do the concurrence now while Mr Peters is here? Can we have a motion for concurrence?
Mr Bert Johnson: I'll move concurrence.
The Chair: Mr Johnson has moved concurrence in the appointment of Mr Peters. Does anyone wish to debate it? If not, all those in favour? It's carried unanimously. Thank you very much. That is done.
BRIAN MERRETT
Review of intended appointment, selected by official opposition party: Brian Merrett, intended appointment as member and chair, Niagara Parks Commission.
The Chair: The second intended appointment this morning is Mr Brian Merrett to the Niagara Parks Commission. Mr Merrett, we welcome you to the committee.
Mr Brian Merrett: Good morning.
The Chair: Good morning. Make yourself comfortable. Do you wish to make any opening remarks?
Mr Merrett: Maybe just a few to introduce myself. Currently, I'm the regional chair of Niagara, completing my second term. I guess about 4 o'clock tomorrow afternoon the new chair will take office. I've been in that position for six years, a member of regional council a total of 12 years; prior to that, an alderman in the city of Niagara Falls for seven years. I live in the city of Niagara Falls. I've been involved in the community.
Specific to the Niagara Parks Commission, I have been a commission member approximately seven years, four years as an alderman and three years as the regional council representative, so I have an understanding of the operation of the Niagara Parks Commission. With that, Mr Chair, perhaps I'll stop and be available for questions.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr Merrett. We'll begin this round with the official opposition, Mr Bradley.
Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): Welcome to the committee, Brian. It's nice to see you here.
Mr Merrett: Good morning, Jim.
Mr Bradley: I should tell the Conservative government members that when the local newspaper phoned to say, "Do you think that Mr Merrett got this appointment because he's a Conservative?" I said they would look at the merit of Merrett, and Mr Merrett has many of those, you'll be happy to know. He did an excellent job as the chair of the regional municipality of Niagara.
Mr Merrett, the concern, as you know, is the controversy over what kind of development is going to take place in Niagara Falls. The Niagara Parks Commission has done an outstanding job over the years in preserving the natural attributes of Niagara Falls. When we compare Niagara Falls, Canada, to Niagara Falls, US, many people look upon ours as being much more positive.
There are now proposals coming forward which the mayor of Niagara Falls I think endorses and some others, that there be far more high-rise hotels around, that may mar the skyline and change the character. What would your view be on that?
Mr Merrett: Mr Bradley, as you are aware and mentioned, there is a great deal of interest right now as to the development pressures along the escarpment on the brim of the Falls area. I guess I'll take it from two points of view. First of all, philosophically I believe that the Niagara Parks Commission has a trust that they have to protect the Falls and the park area, and it has done so for 112 years. I'm very much a traditionalist as to what the parks commission has done in the past.
But as you also know, I'm very pro development and it's certainly an interesting problem for us to have in Niagara Falls and for the Niagara Parks Commission to deal with, that developmental pressure that is happening.
David Crombie has been appointed to act as a mediator, to come up with some alternatives and ideas. I had an opportunity in my position as regional chair to meet with him about a month ago and he has come up with some very interesting concepts that he is planning to bring forward to the commission and to the city of Niagara Falls.
Personally, I believe there are ways we can have some first-class, tastefully done development along the brim of the Falls without there being an intrusion into the park. I think there are some creative things that can be done. I look forward to that challenge as being one of the very first issues the parks commission and the city will have to deal with.
1030
Mr Bradley: I think that Mr Crombie was a good choice, by the way. I think Mr Crombie has an outstanding reputation here in Toronto and has done several pieces of work for the provincial and federal government and I'm certainly encouraged to hear that the commission will be looking very carefully at Mr Crombie's recommendations.
The Niagara Parks Commission, I have been informed, does not come under the jurisdiction of or answer under the Environmental Assessment Act, which surprised me. Previous commissioners have expressed that concern. Do you believe that the work carried out by or developments under the auspices of the Niagara Parks Commission should be subjected to the Environmental Assessment Act?
Mr Merrett: I look back at some of the development that they have done and, correct, it does not come under the act, and whether legislatively it does or not, I think there's a responsibility for them to carry out that process and to have the public input and to have everyone aware of what they are doing. As far as changing the legislation, that could happen, but I think they have a responsibility to react that way anyway.
Mr Bradley: In terms of the Niagara Parks Commission and all commissions of this kind and the accounting practices, do you think there's any need to improve accounting practices that have taken place? I know the last commission dealt with the issue of -- I'm not saying anything sinister or anything. As you know, just simply, all organizations have a different way of internal accounting. It's a lot of cash, because the parks commission deals in a lot of cash as opposed to others that may deal in invoices and cheques and so on. Do you think there's a way of improving the accounting practices, with all the cash that changes hands?
Mr Merrett: I'm not aware of a problem in the past, but certainly any accounting procedures can be improved and looked at. I know there are some efforts, some further automation that they're looking at in their accounting system, which I've read in some of the material, but I've not had a chance to study it that closely yet, Jim, to give you an exact answer.
Mr Bradley: I recall that the previous Chair, whom you are succeeding, was in fact, I think, an accountant as well as a business person and there may have been some observations by members of the commission that because you deal with a lot of cash, any organization that deals with a lot of cash, it's really difficult, it's a challenge to have internal auditing. As I say, I've never seen any problem. I don't know of any problem that exists, but I think every organization is looking to tighten up.
Mr Merrett: I am aware, Jim, of the amount of cash they handle because one of my summer jobs while a college student was actually counting that cash in the cash office.
Mr Bradley: The Niagara Parks Commission again has perhaps some responsibilities that could be extended. Do you see the Niagara Parks Commission extending its responsibilities to other areas in the Niagara Peninsula or working perhaps in closer cooperation with the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority in preserving that which is near Niagara Falls?
Mr Merrett: Certainly I see the role of the parks commission expanding in a couple of areas: in the area of dealing with the conservation authority, the Welland Canal parkway. In the Moriyama study, the 100-year plan, it talks about the park expanding to the Welland River. As you know, there's the Welland Canal master plan that has been put in place. I think there could be a role for the Niagara Parks Commission in that strategy. I also see them becoming much more involved in the overall marketing of Niagara. They have done a good job so far, but I see, as we become a binational destination, that the parks commission can have a greater role in that area as far as the promotion of Niagara is concerned.
Mr Bradley: It's very fashionable today in many quarters to talk about the privatization of anything that moves, and that which doesn't move. I once saw a story somewhere that the Niagara Parks Commission -- I don't know whether any of the government members might know this, but I saw somewhere that it was at least under consideration for privatization. Would you be in favour of privatization? Do you think this should be retained by the government of Ontario, the commission being part of the government of Ontario in a certain sense, arm's-length of course, for the good of the people, or would you see its being privatized as being desirable?
Mr Merrett: I guess we look at all services that are provided by the Niagara Parks Commission, and certainly I go back to that public trust that the commission has as far as protecting its lands is concerned. But I think you have to look at every service that's delivered and find out if it's being done cost-effectively. I point to the partnership the parks commission has now with the Maid of the Mist Steamboat Co, which is a private company that operates that attraction and does an excellent job of it. I don't see there being a wholesale privatization of the Niagara Parks Commission, no, but I point to that successful partnership with the Maid of the Mist company.
Mr Bradley: If privatization were to take place -- I'll say "Heaven forbid" in parentheses -- how would you ensure that friends or people in high places were not those who would receive the benefits of the privatization? How would the commission be able to ensure that simply people in influence would not have a leg up on others in terms of privatization? That's always a concern when there's privatization.
Mr Merrett: There would have to be a process in place to deal with any privatization if it happened. If it did occur, I would expect there would be a very public process that would take place, as they do with purchasing other services now.
Mr Bradley: Do you think that the present method of appointment of people to the Niagara Parks Commission is an appropriate one, or do you see any improvement? I know there are some municipal appointments and there are some appointments that are made by the provincial government. Do you see any change in terms of the mix that's on there, or do you think this works well now?
Mr Merrett: Looking at the current membership, I think there's a good balance of background and geography of those who are there, some with business experience, some with other experiences in the community. On balance, I think the process has been okay.
Mr Bradley: Do I have any more time? One minute? Okay.
Do you see any further relationship in terms of coordination and cooperation that can be affected with people on the other side of the border, since Niagara Falls appears to be a destination for both Americans and Canadians? We try to get people to come over to Canada, of course. Do you see any further cooperation with the American side to accentuate the positive aspects of Niagara Falls?
Mr Merrett: We've been involved over the last two years with the concept of "Niagara attracting the world," which has brought together representatives from Niagara, Ontario; Niagara Falls, New York; Buffalo; Erie county and Niagara county to put together a joint marketing plan. The past chair of the Niagara Parks Commission was involved with that, as I was in my capacity as regional chair. I see that expanding. I see developing a relationship with the Canadian consulate in Buffalo to do more marketing and more cross-border cooperation.
We've seen an excellent relationship develop with the new mayor of Niagara Falls, New York. He's anxious to work with us. I've had discussions with Ed Rutkowski from the state parks department, who again is anxious to meet and to work on some joint ventures. I really have seen a change over the last four or five years where it's now time to realize that Niagara as a destination has to be marketed worldwide. The bridges are only something to cross the water.
Mr Bradley: I thank you; I wish you well.
The Chair: Mr Silipo, do you have any questions?
Mr Silipo: I don't actually have any questions. Mr Merrett, I see that you bring a lot of expertise and a lot of useful input into this body. You obviously have the experience from both your present position and the past work that you've done. I certainly will be supporting this appointment.
Mr Tim Hudak (Niagara South): Good to see you again, Mr Merrett. Congratulations on hopefully soon being appointed to this position.
I can say with confidence Mr Merrett did an excellent job as chair of the Niagara region; very professional approach, very competent approach through some difficult times. The region as a whole's loss is the commission's gain, I anticipate.
Of course also the parkway and the Fort Erie area, the residents of Fort Erie would say, hasn't had the attention in the past that's been dedicated more so to the Niagara Falls and Niagara-on-the-Lake area. Do you see the commission advancing the Fort Erie area, to put it directly?
Mr Merrett: I know in the past there has been some work done by the commission in looking at land acquisition and other matters to further enhance the parkway and Fort Erie. The mayor has already had a chat with me about getting together to talk about projects with which the commission and the town could be involved. I look forward to whatever we can do to enhance the parkway and the amenities in the Fort Erie area, as with the whole 35 miles of the parkway.
With the expansion to the Peace Bridge and the discussions of that, there'll be a role the commission will more than likely play in that whole process too.
Mr Hudak: Excellent.
The Chair: Any other questions, comments? If not, Mr Merrett, thank you very much for coming before the committee. We appreciate your attendance here and we wish you well.
Are we ready for the concurrence of Mr Merrett's appointment?
Mr Bert Johnson: I'd move concurrence in this appointment.
The Chair: Mr Johnson has moved concurrence in Mr Merrett's appointment. Is there any debate? All those in favour? It's unanimous. Thank you very much for that.
Is there any other business for the committee? If not, we are adjourned.
The committee adjourned at 1041.