Chair /
Président
Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines L)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Président
Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex L)
Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines L)
Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex L)
Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington
L)
Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex PC)
Mr Morley Kells (Etobicoke-Lakeshore PC)
Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie ND)
Mr Joseph Spina (Brampton Centre / -Centre PC)
Mr Bob Wood (London West / -Ouest PC)
Substitutions / Membres remplaçants
Ms Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton L)
Mr Dan Newman (Scarborough Southwest / -Sud-Ouest
PC)
Also taking part / Autres participants et
participantes
Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East / -Est L)
Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair L)
Mr John Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands / Kingston et les
îles L)
Mr Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina ND)
Clerk / Greffier
Mr Douglas Arnott
Staff / Personnel
Mr David Pond, research officer, Research and Information
Services
The committee met at 1006 in room 228.
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
The Chair (Mr James J.
Bradley): I'm going to call the meeting to order. For
the purposes of Hansard, the meeting has begun. The first item of
business we have is the report of the subcommittee on committee
business, dated Thursday, December 2, 1999. You have that report
before you. The subcommittee of course considers any and all
appointments that are eligible to come before this committee and
then there are selections made. It reads as follows-I'll just do
it because it's brief:
"Your subcommittee considered
on Thursday, December 2, 1999, the selection of intended
appointments for committee review, and has agreed to
recommend:
"That the following intended
appointees from the certificate received on November 26, 1999, be
selected for review:
"Official opposition party:
no selections;
"Third party: no
selections;
"Government: no
selections."
Can we have a motion to
accept the subcommittee report?
Mr Dan Newman
(Scarborough Southwest): I'll so move.
The Chair:
Moved by Mr Newman. All in favour? Opposed, if any? The motion is
carried.
INTENDED APPOINTMENTS
ISABEL BASSETT
Review of intended
appointment, selected by third party: Isabel Bassett, intended
appointee as member and chair, Ontario Educational Communications
Authority.
The Chair:
We now move into the process of appointments review. As you are
aware, there is half an hour devoted to this time today for the
individual whom we will be dealing with. Also, the rotation in
which I will go is one which the previous Chair used to follow:
the official opposition for 10 minutes, the third party for 10
minutes, the government for 10 minutes. If we had further people
before the committee, then it would rotate the other way. That is
what the previous Chair followed.
Our guest appointee today, if
I can say that, is Isabel Bassett, intended appointee as member
and chair of the Ontario Educational Communications Authority,
the organization we know as TVO. Welcome, Ms Bassett.
Ms Isabel
Bassett: Thank you very much.
The Chair:
You have an opening statement, I understand.
Ms Bassett:
Yes, I do. I'll read it now.
The Chair:
Please begin.
Ms Bassett:
I think the clerk is going to give you out a copy of my brief
statement. Then I'll turn it back to you, Mr Chair.
First of all, I want to say
to everybody I'm greatly honoured to be here today as a nominee
for the position of chair of TVOntario. I want to take a few
minutes to point out what I feel are my qualifications for the
job of taking TVOntario into the 21st century.
As many of you may know who
have known me, I have had, and I certainly continue to have, a
deep interest in broadcasting, education, and culture. But I also
have had other experience in leadership positions, both on boards
and in government, that will help me, I feel, in leading the
board of TVO.
To appreciate this, let me
give a brief thumbnail sketch of the task ahead for TVO. Those of
you who are familiar with TVO's history will know that its
original mandate was to use the latest technology for educational
purposes. Back in 1970, the latest technology was broadcasting
and, for the most part, learning was aimed mostly at school-aged
children. But in the year 2000, learning should focus not only on
school-children but on people of all ages and at all stages of
their lives and careers. Broadcast-and I'm adding this to the
script-is only one of many new learning technologies on the
horizon and already here. For TVO, this means adding to its
broadcast tradition to include a whole host of technologies to
enhance education.
The Advisory Committee on
Technology in Learning recommended in its report last summer the
creation of a new, non-broadcast division called the Ontario
Centre for Advanced Technology in Learning, or OCATL for short.
OCATL will have a mandate to bring overall direction and
coordination to integrating the use of a broad range of
technologies in support of lifelong learning for all Ontarians. I
feel my background and experience will help me guide this
outstanding institution into this new area while appreciating and
preserving the strong educational aspect of TVO's existing
broadcast division.
I've had first-hand knowledge
of the importance of a quality education system. I started my
career as an educator,
teaching high school at Humberside Collegiate in the west end of
Toronto. A good educator recognizes the value of being a good
communicator, and that's something I picked up very early on in
my career, especially when I became a newspaper reporter focusing
on education in schools.
As the television industry
began to boom in Toronto, I moved into broadcasting, where I
spent a significant part of my professional career as a reporter
and a documentary producer. Although I was working within the
then new field of broadcasting, I was still very much an
educator, having traded the classroom for broadcasting as a way
of telling a story to the public about social and political
issues. I also learned a tremendous amount about the impact and
importance of quality broadcasting, and the need to deliver it
effectively and efficiently.
During this time, I also
learned about the importance of contributing to one's community.
My roots in education led to my involvement with the then Ryerson
Polytechnical Institute, where I served on the board of governors
for several years, ending up as chair of the board. Subsequently,
I returned to Ryerson to serve on its newly formed university
foundation. I recognized the need then for Ryerson to keep
abreast of change and competition, and I worked with the
government to help the organization obtain university status,
which it did after I had left.
In addition to my work with
Ryerson, I also served as national co-chair for the James
Robinson Johnston Chair in Black Canadian Studies at Dalhousie
University, which is the first chair in black studies at any
university in Canada; as a director of Trinity College School;
and as a committee member of the senior advisory council for the
Alliance for Ontario Universities.
My interests have not been
solely limited to broadcasting and television and education. Any
enterprise that is going to thrive and prosper has to make a good
business case. My experience in business has been as an MPP,
serving both as parliamentary assistant to the Minister of
Finance and as Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation,
and as a board member of Brascan Ltd.
This has provided me with a
strong background in business planning and it's also shown me the
value of strategic linkages between private and public sectors,
and the need to work together with people to move forward into
new areas.
This government has
identified the need to have a centre for the latest technologies
in learning, OCATL, to make these technologies accessible for all
Ontarians and to deliver them to provide for our lifelong
learning through workplace training and leading-edge
technologies.
As chair of TVOntario, I look
forward to drawing upon my experiences to work with this
government; with the Minister of Training, Colleges and
Universities, Dianne Cunningham; and with the TVO board to
implement the new lifelong learning vision for TVOntario.
Mr Chair, I am honoured to
have been nominated for this important role at this turning point
in the history of our public broadcaster. I'd be happy now to
respond to questions.
The Chair:
Thank you very much, Ms Bassett. I'll go to the official
opposition.
Ms Caroline Di Cocco
(Sarnia-Lambton): Ms Bassett, what is your position on
privatization of TVOntario?
Ms Bassett:
My position is that I agree with the direction that the
government has stated in the report published by the advisory
committee on technology in education, I think it's called, that
states very clearly, as the then Minister of Privatization Rob
Sampson pointed out, that we are going to keep TVOntario. The
government is going to continue to be involved. It is going to
have its traditional broadcast division, but it is going to add a
new division, the new media division, which involves latest
technology. In terms of that, the decision has already been made:
TVOntario is not going to be privatized.
Ms Di Cocco:
I was listening intently and one of the comments of course is
this new educational mandate that it has been given. Can you tell
me exactly what that means? Lifelong learning has been something
in the education system; it's a continuum in education. But when
you say you're in the process of changing TVOntario to have this
"educational mandate," could you explain what you mean by
that?
Ms Bassett:
What's happened over the years is that TVOntario has moved in
some directions maybe away from what might be seen as pure
education, although anything you see can be seen as education.
But if you look at things such as the curriculum and you look at
areas of Ontario that maybe aren't party to the same kinds of
opportunities as you have in major centres in Ontario, we have to
be sure that the TV system, however it's set up with the new
media, is taking programs that impact on the curriculum to
everybody in Ontario. That's exactly what I'm talking about.
We're talking about linking as much as we can up to the
curriculum for school-age children. Second, in terms of lifelong
learning, when I started out you mostly thought of formal
education as stopping when you got through university, if you
went to university. Now people are thinking of having a career
for so long, then maybe changing to another career. If you look
at TVO now, they have programs on that talk about becoming
caregivers, all the different careers that people need to study
up on. This kind of education and training can be delivered on
TVOntario.
Ms Di Cocco:
It's becoming an arm of the education system. Is that what
you're-
Ms Bassett:
Yes, it's already there to a degree. But we're going to focus on
it more, mostly because the change in the times demands that
whether you use our TV system or go out and take courses
somewhere else, as most of my friends might be doing to get
another job-we're helping. This is what the mandate of this
institution was originally, to be an education. It's just that
the needs of education are changing.
Ms Di Cocco: TVOntario has evolved
and it provides, I believe, valued and unique service. It's a
balance of quality broadcasting, different types of broadcasting.
There are public affairs programs such as Studio 2. Is that type
of program then going to be eliminated because it's not qualified
under this so-called educational mandate?
1020
Ms Bassett:
I don't know whether it's qualified under the so-called
educational mandate. I would think, from my point of view, that
it probably does serve a huge purpose in terms of education. But
that will be determined by the board. I haven't got there yet.
That's the purpose of this hearing, to approve the appointment.
So when I get there, we will sit with the board and together
we'll make a decision.
But if you look at five years
ago, there were a whole number of public affairs shows maybe
talking about the kind of thing that TVO is doing now. I think
now, because of the cost of delivering that kind of program,
there are very few, if any. I would think the kind of program
that Steve Paikin is doing is highly useful to the curriculum
that this government has brought out that enhances civics.
All of you around the table
are politicians. You know what it's like to knock on a door and
somebody says, "We don't vote." We're trying to change it so that
people in the school system begin to learn-for whatever party;
we're not pushing one thing-that you know what the system is
about, how government works. In the education ministry we have
enhanced that curriculum. I think Steve Paikin's program could be
seen to add to that.
With the new media, if I can
just add, we will be able to maybe call that show up on demand.
Often Friday nights, if I don't get home on time, I don't get it.
With the new technologies, you'll be able to push a button like
you can in a hotel and watch it at your own convenience.
Ms Di Cocco:
My biggest concern, I guess, has to do with the subjective nature
of what you call "educational mandate." "Educational" is very
subjective in qualifying what it is. In your role of setting the
goals and objectives for the agency, how are you going to qualify
the subjective nature of what the educational mandate is?
Ms Bassett:
As a former teacher and a lecturer at York, I think you weigh how
many hours of broadcast time you have and you weigh the costs and
you decide what a program can deliver and how useful it is to the
overall curriculum. I'm the first to say that anything you look
at is going to add to your intelligence, or most things. But one
program might add a huge amount more than another program in
terms of what we're trying to deliver in our education system.
For example-I don't want to use up all your time.
Ms Di Cocco:
One of the other questions I would like to ask is, you've said
that this is not going to be privatized and you also suggested
that it's going to be a venue to educate people on what the
government is doing with regard to education, I presume. Is there
not some type of conflict here in programming what you consider
educational? Could it possibly have a conflict in bringing, let's
say, what had happened prior to our election of this year, and
that is to use that venue as an arm of educating people on what
the government is doing? Could that not be a conflict?
Ms Bassett:
I don't see that as a conflict at all. For example, you raised
the question of Studio 2. In terms of the exchange of ideas,
there are certainly many days when they're not particularly
flattering towards our government. You want a venue for ideas and
that kind of thing. If you're saying, are we going to use TVO to
have a track, like, "This is what you might think," I would think
not at all. I'm not looking at it that way. I'm talking about the
Ministry of Education curriculum, and because you were talking
about Studio 2, I talked about our enhanced civics program in
high schools, which most people believe is highly necessary.
That's why I used that particular one, but you could take
history, you could take botany, algebra, anything.
The great thing is, if you
look at what's happening in the BBC, where they're on the cutting
edge of some of this stuff, they use the traditional broadcast
system and then in the new media, after the show is over, they'll
say something like, "Tune in to" this, this, this, online or
off-line, various places, "for more information." Kids, who often
relate much better to that kind of thing, are picking up and
enhancing their education that way. That's the kind of thing
we're saying. I think we'll go much further.
If you hang out in video
arcades with all the kids who drop out of school-they beat me all
the time on games, that kind of thing. They're really smart at
that, so why are they dropping out? Why don't we use those games,
educators are asking, as a way of captivating a young person's
mind, to teach him or her something so they don't fall behind?
That's what the new education is trying to do.
Ms Di Cocco:
In light of the French-language broadcasting that is on
TVOntario, how does it fit into this part of this educational
mandate you're going to be promoting and implementing?
Ms Bassett:
I think it'll fit in exactly the same as TFO has always fitted
in. TVO has a mandate to deliver services to all Ontarians.
The Chair:
Thank you very much. I hate to interrupt in the middle of the
answer, but it's Mr Martin's turn.
Mr Tony Martin (Sault
Ste Marie): Thank you very much for coming before us
today and for this opportunity.
Ms Bassett:
Thank you.
Mr Martin:
There certainly are some concerns out there re your appointment
to this job, and one of them is the obvious partisan nature of
the appointment. There's no doubt but that you were a member of
this government, have some strong connections to this government
and bring with you some both publicly and privately stated plans,
certainly your support of the whole privatization initiative.
Ms Bassett:
We're not privatizing; sorry to interrupt you.
Mr Martin: That's what you say
today and we hear you, and actually those of us who are concerned
about that are certainly relieved that you're saying that here
today.
What I am wondering is, how
much influence-that's you saying that. You are obviously a very
partisan appointment. We've had a number of them over the last
four to six months since this government has been elected, as
they try to shift Ontario in a particular direction and to
enhance their potential in doing that. Is this not a concern for
you? Should we not be concerned about the very partisan nature of
your appointment?
Ms Bassett:
No. You have your own feelings. Obviously I feel I'm a
well-qualified person for the appointment, for many reasons. One,
I feel I've got a love-I come from a whole background of people
who are committed to education. I believe in providing a good
education to everybody. Second, I believe strongly in the power
of television as a means of being an educator, or the latest
technologies, as I mentioned before.
Maybe I can argue, knowing
the government's desire to move TVO forward, that moving it
forward doesn't mean to say it's threatened. Every single
broadcaster in this country, and look at the States or England,
has had to change to keep abreast of the times. Just because you
change or move forward or add, as we are going to do in this
case, doesn't mean to say you neglect or leave behind something
else. You make them work together.
Mr Martin:
It's my view-you can tell me if I'm wrong here-that you're not
really moving TVO forward, that you're in fact moving TVO
backward.
Ms Bassett:
Why?
Mr Martin:
You're taking them back to their original mandate. TVO has
evolved as a vehicle in this province to do a number of what I
consider to be very valuable things. What you want to do is take
it back to its original mandate, which is actually taking it
backward in my view.
Ms Bassett:
What, education?
Mr Martin:
And your narrow definition of education, because we've seen what
you've done to the education system in this province and the move
in education to privatize a whole lot of that operation.
What's to make us comfortable
that with your connections and the obvious influence this
government will have on you because of where you come from and
who you hang out with, you won't in the end submit to their
desire to privatize everything that moves in this province?
Ms Bassett:
Let me just talk about privatizing. In terms of the former
minister of privatization, Rob Sampson said that TVO was going
to-you've seen the press release; that's what he said last year.
So now, if you look at what TVO is already doing, they already
have, which Peter Herrndorf set up: deals with other companies.
They co-produce. They have in effect, without privatizing the
system, made deals. They co-produce, they buy shows, they don't
produce everything. There are a whole variety of ways. They work
with the business sector to get them to produce.
I saw, looking at Imprint the
other night, which is one of the things I try to look at
frequently, that Indigo Books sponsors it. They've already moved
in that direction.
1030
What I'm saying is I'm going
to use my connections in the business community and my know-how
around how government works-and God knows you need to know how
government works if you want to move something forward-to help
keep TVO as strong as it has been in the past.
Mr Martin:
Which adds another piece to this whole thing, and this is the
question of the possible conflict of interest that you might have
in terms of your own private interests. What is your connection
with CTV?
Ms Bassett:
That's a fair question. I have no connection with CTV. As you
know, my late husband was chair of the board of Baton. He never
was at CTV. Because I knew that you would be concerned about
that-I have no shares in CTV-I have gone to the Integrity
Commissioner and I do have a letter that I can leave with the
clerk or the Chair, whatever the process is, and you're entitled
to take one away. My holdings do not conflict in any way with
what TVO is involved in.
Mr Martin:
My colleague would like to ask a question.
The Chair:
Mr Marchese.
Mr Rosario Marchese
(Trinity-Spadina): Thank you. I'm sorry that I couldn't
be here earlier to hear your answers to the other questions.
Ms Bassett:
How are you?
Mr Marchese:
I hope you're keeping well. I imagine you are.
Ms Bassett:
I am.
Mr Marchese:
Some people are very concerned-I imagine my colleague Mr Martin
might have pointed that out-in terms of your appointment. Some
are happy, of course, and some are not. I'm worried. You've cut
$20 million from TVO. That's a big concern of mine.
The other big concern is what
you did when you were the minister, that is, to split up TVO into
two parts, which I saw as the incremental destruction of TVO.
Obviously, you wouldn't categorize it that way.
Ms Bassett:
What do you mean, two parts?
Mr Marchese:
I favour keeping TVO the way it was and you've split it into two
components.
Ms Bassett:
You mean the new media, the latest technology?
Mr Marchese:
Yes. I saw that as the beginning of the destruction of TVO
because you couldn't privatize immediately.
Ms Bassett:
Let me tell you how it works.
Mr Marchese:
No, I'm not concerned about how it works so much as what you're
trying to do with TVO.
The $20-million cut is
already, for me, the biggest part of the destruction of TVO, and
the second part is how you could get to privatizing it. I believe
you've begun doing that by the way you've divided TVO into its
various functions.
My concern is-and it's the
concern of people like Mr Vanderburgh, the head of television and
video in Ryerson School
of Radio and Television Arts, who says, "You have to wonder why
the government would appoint somebody who advocated selling
it."
Ms Bassett:
I didn't advocate selling it.
Mr Marchese:
Have you ever advocated privatizing it?
Ms
Bassett: No, I've never advocated privatizing it. I
think what you're alluding to is, in case you're too shy to bring
it up, Mr Marchese, during the election somebody at the door
said, "Are you going to privatize TVO?" Rather than lie, which I
wasn't going to do, I said, "I'm not in favour of the status
quo." Nobody in broadcasting or any company is in favour of the
status quo. You die. I'm in favour of moving forward; I'm not in
favour of privatizing. The government, Minister Rob Sampson, the
minister in charge of privatization, made a statement when he was
advocating the creation of OCATL that we would be adding a new
division. They're complementary, and your children would know how
useful all these technologies are.
Mr
Marchese: Absolutely. For sure.
Ms
Bassett: For example, if you have a show-you missed it,
so I've got to tell you-say, on submarines and it was on the
traditional broadcast system, at the end of the show you could
then say, "Tune in for more information," and your child then
would go and find out how the system works, the dynamics, the
physics, everything, on games that are all interactive that are
terrific learning experiences.
Mr
Marchese: Fair enough and I agree with that.
Ms
Bassett: That's what we're going to do.
Mr
Marchese: Do you think that the $20-million cut has
injured TVO in some way or other?
Ms
Bassett: I think TVO is a wonderful place. It wins all
sorts of awards.
Mr
Marchese: I understand that and I agree.
Ms
Bassett: No, I don't think it-
Mr
Marchese: So the $20-million cut hasn't hurt them in any
way?
Ms
Bassett: They've gone to the private sector and got the
money through their fundraising, and they've probably brought
more people into it to be aware of the importance of this kind of
television station. I think it's probably been a good thing.
Mr
Marchese: Ian McPhail, interim TVO chair, said he's
delighted with your appointment. He said, "Her background and
education in broadcasting and politics is ideal for the
position." He's got a lot of hopes for you, obviously. What is it
again, for my benefit, that you will bring to TVO as part of your
political experience in connection to them and part of that
background?
Ms
Bassett: First of all, I bring a love of what I'm going
to be doing and a knowledge of it, but secondly, I will bring a
knowledge of how government works. I think it's very important,
if you want to get anything through and get a board onside and
then move your agenda forward, to know who the right people are
to talk to, how to get the business community-
The Chair:
Thank you very much, Ms Bassett. I have to go now to the
government party; Mr Newman.
Mr Newman:
Chair, how much time do we have left?
The Chair:
Three minutes was used for the opening statement; you have seven
minutes.
Mr Newman:
I want to welcome Isabel to the committee today.
I want to begin by stating
that the four government members here will be supporting your
intended appointment as the chair of TVO. We feel that your
experience as a teacher, as a broadcaster, as an MPP who served
in the 36th Parliament and as a minister of the crown will
definitely serve TVO and the people of Ontario well. So we'll be
pleased to support that.
I simply want to put on the
record-the issue of partisanship came up. I want to say to Mr
Martin today that I don't believe the intended appointment of
Isabel Bassett is any more a partisan appointment than the
appointments of Marion Boyd, Tony Silipo, Floyd Laughren and
David Cooke, who were all former members of your NDP caucus.
The Chair:
Do any other government members have comments or questions?
Mr Joseph Spina
(Brampton Centre): Ms Bassett, welcome, thank you, and I
trust after today we'll be able to extend congratulations.
I just wanted to position a
question. With the seemingly increased value of programming that
we have seen with TVOntario recently, one of things we have seen
an increase in is contributions from the public and the private
sector. Do you think that's a testimonial to the quality of
programming? Is it an indication of the private sector finally
acknowledging that this is a valuable asset to our educational
community?
Ms
Bassett: Yes, I do. Anytime you can get the public
involved, whether the private sector, the corporate sector or
individuals, I think it benefits an institution. There's no
question that the outpouring of support for TVOntario-which isn't
surprising at all for any of us who have watched it all our
lives. I think it just shows that it's a valuable institution and
it has great people working for it. It has first-rate shows. I
think the corporate support of that shows that we can make it
thrive if we keep moving it forward and don't stay mired in the
past totally; you'll have to move ahead, adding on, as we're
planning to do.
Mr Spina:
You also indicated that you have, obviously, by your CV and by
your comments, a substantial network of corporate associates,
acquaintances and contacts. Do you see that as something you
could perhaps utilize or, dare I say, exploit, to support the
advancement of a program like OCATL?
Ms
Bassett: I'd give them opportunities to support this
valuable institution, of course. It's like raising money for the
chair of Black Canadian studies. If you know places that have an
interest in supporting a certain thing, you can say how it
connects and how it will benefit them, as Indigo Books-obviously
the administration of TVO now got them onside for Imprint, which
is a show on writing.
Mr Spina: The program that you
instituted on Black studies I found very interesting, because it
clearly resulted in an honorary doctor of laws from Dalhousie.
Can you expand on that a little bit? Because I think that's
really a success program of note.
1040
Ms
Bassett: It is a success program, because what we did
was-there was no chair, whether it was Jewish studies, women's
studies, Asian studies, no chair in Black studies. We decided
that in Canada there was only one place you could do it. Since
the oldest indigenous Black population is Dalhousie, we did it at
Dalhousie, which is in Halifax.
I raised, I think, $2
million or $3 million-it's still coming in-for the chair. Lincoln
Alexander helped. We went around the country and got the Black
populations from different islands in the Caribbean, as well as
the indigenous Black population, onside to unite, which five or
six years ago wasn't so easy to do.
I went right out to
Vancouver, talking with various members of the Black community.
Together, it was something that all Canadians felt was very
important. I got major contributors-banks, everybody else-to give
money. I would hope for TVOntario, if they're not already
supporting, we can do something along the same lines to support
various programs in education.
Mr Spina:
That's marvellous. Thank you.
Unquestionably, the talents
and experience of this individual are unparalleled. I would fully
endorse the appointment of Ms Bassett to this position.
The Chair:
There's a minute left for the Conservatives, the governing party,
if they wish to utilize it.
Mr Bert Johnson
(Perth-Middlesex): I just wanted to remark on the vast
difference between a politician and an educator. The look on Ms
Bassett's face today has changed from the last time I would have
seen her. A lot of us think there might be pressures on
politicians.
Isabel, you have the
remarkable presence to show us that getting into your heart's
work will do you a world of good, and those that you touch.
Ms
Bassett: Thank you so much.
The Chair:
Thank you very much, Ms Bassett, for appearing before the
committee.
The committee, subsequent
to this, will make a decision concerning your appointment. You
are welcome to stay for that debate and discussion and decision,
should you see fit, or to depart, whatever is your choice. Thank
you very much for coming before the committee today.
Mr John Gerretsen
(Kingston and the Islands): On a point of order, Mr
Chair: Since Ms Bassett is here and there are so many questions
that need to be answered, I would move unanimous consent that
each caucus be given a further 10 minutes to examine this very
prominent witness.
Mr Newman:
Actually, Mr Gerretsen, last week at the committee this was
discussed. It's standard practice for a committee for intended
appointments to appear for 30 minutes. We've already debated this
issue.
Mr
Gerretsen: OK. I realize that. There were just so many
wonderful things that I was going to say about Ms Bassett at this
stage, as part of our presentation here, which I guess we'll just
have to forgo for now. It's always nice to see you, Isabel.
Mr Martin:
I would like to second the motion. I still have a whack of
questions that I need to ask.
The Chair:
I did not hear an official motion before the committee.
Mr Martin:
It's not even 11 o'clock.
If you could put the
unanimous consent-
Mr
Gerretsen: The rules can be changed.
The Chair:
Are you moving a motion?
Mr
Gerretsen: I'm moving unanimous consent that each caucus
be given another 10 minutes.
The Chair:
Is Mr Gerretsen officially a member of the committee? He is not.
Mr Martin is.
Mr Martin:
I move a motion, that we sit for at least an extra 20 minutes.
The government side doesn't seem to be interested in another 10
minutes.
The Chair:
I just need the motion, not whether the government side is
interested or not. If you have a motion, would you state it
clearly, please.
Mr Martin:
I move that each caucus be given another 10 minutes.
Ms Di
Cocco: I'll second it.
The Chair:
Doesn't need a seconder.
There are only three voting
members on this side, four voting members on that side. I should
say Mr Gerretsen is not a voting member of this committee. I
don't think there's any need for discussion. All in favour?
Mr Martin:
Recorded vote.
The Chair:
A recorded vote. OK.
AYES
Di Cocco, Dombrowsky,
Martin.
NAYS
Johnson, Kells, Newman,
Spina.
The Chair:
The motion is defeated.
Mr
Gerretsen: Could I be recorded as opposing the results
of the vote at this point in time?
The Chair:
No, you cannot be recorded as opposed.
Mr Newman:
I move concurrence of the intended appointment of Isabel Bassett
as member and chair of the Ontario Educational Communications
Authority.
The Chair:
Mr Newman has moved his motion. Any discussion of the motion?
Mr Martin:
I have to say that to some small degree my fears about the public
pronouncement of the appointee have been allayed, that she's not
going to privatize TVO. However, as I suggested in my
questioning, who knows what influence will come upon her once she
takes on the role and begins to operate and actually takes
control of the levers? I'm worried.
There were some public
statements by herself, and there are some folks who infer that
she did, off the record, suggest that privatization was the way
to go. She did, in her
comments, mention that she believes that to some degree that
perhaps has already happened. It worries me that a vehicle set up
by a previous Conservative government, and given the track record
of this government in terms of turning things over-education,
health care and the list goes on-to the private sector, to the
detriment of those particular functions-I think the Provincial
Auditor was very clear in his report this year that a number of
these privatization schemes are not panning out quite the way
they had projected. There are financial concerns; there are
safety concerns; there are quality concerns about all of those
things. I suggest to you that we should all have the same
concerns if TVO goes down that road as well and ends up being
privatized-not to speak of the fact that Ms Bassett does still
have some, however indirect, personal interest in the private
sector broadcasting industry. That worries me and that concerns
me.
Even though we've got a
letter here from the Office of the Integrity Commissioner that
was handed out to all of us, that suggests there's no problem
with her appointment in respect to the Members' Integrity Act of
1994, it goes on to say that an exemption has been made in this
instance which falls under the heading of "Further duties in the
service of the crown." That certainly doesn't make me any more
comfortable, that we have here a circumstance where a member of
the executive council, some short time after losing her position,
has now been appointed to a position where she will obviously
further her own interests and those of the government. Those are
two concerns that I have: the political, partisan nature of this
appointment-the government caucus can make the point that yes,
they've made a few token appointments of Liberals and New
Democrats over the last period of time. A couple of the people
they mentioned go back a lot further than the last election.
They've obviously reached down deep into the barrel to find some
names that they could bring forward. Yes, there have been a
few.
I would suggest to you that
anybody looking at that would recognize that appointing people
from other political persuasions is probably a good thing. A
government that was interested in integrity and actually doing
what it said it was going to do and changing government and the
way government operates shouldn't be so readily willing to make
these very partisan appointments which, in my view, sends the
wrong message out to the people of Ontario: If you're a good and
faithful servant, if you buy into the program and belong to the
right crowd, under this government you'll get the good
appointments. That seems to be what we have here.
The other thing I want to
put on the record is that-considering that we're not only talking
about TVO here; we're talking about TFO-this is the very first
time a government has made an appointment to this board of a
chair who is not bilingual. That has to be a concern.
Mr Spina:
You don't know that. You didn't ask her.
1050
Mr Martin:
I believe that's true. I'm putting on the record here that we
have a person appointed to chair this board who is not bilingual
and who does not have, from what I can gather from looking at her
background and biography-
Interjections.
The Chair:
Heckling is out of order, I'm told. I'm certainly looking forward
to the comments of the government members in just a moment.
Continue, Mr Martin.
Mr Martin:
-who is not bilingual and who has no significant track record of
involvement with the francophone community in Ontario and in
Canada. I think that has to be a concern to the francophone
community.
This government has shown
over the last few days here in this place that they're not
interested or concerned or sensitive at all to the issue of
bilingualism. They've amalgamated two of the biggest municipal
areas in our province, Ottawa and Sudbury, which were, previous
to this amalgamation, officially bilingual, and there's no
reference to that whatsoever. If the government is wanting to
move away from a track record of recognizing the duality of the
nature of this country and the efforts that have been made by
previous governments of all stripes to make sure our francophone
partners in this endeavour get services and are understood, and
that there are sensitivities around their issues-we haven't seen
that here.
Over the last couple of
weeks we've had legislation introduced to this House that has
been totally insensitive to the francophone factor. We have
somebody being appointed here this morning to an organization
that has both an English and a francophone component who is not
bilingual and who has no track record, that I can see, of
involvement with the francophone community. I think that should
run up all kinds of red flags for all of us.
With that in mind, I have
to say that I won't be supporting this appointment this
morning.
The Chair:
I have Ms Di Cocco, Mr Spina, Mr Kells and Mrs Dombrowsky so far
on the list. Any others? Mr Newman as well. OK.
Ms Di
Cocco: I also will not support this appointment. I do so
not because of qualifications-because her CV is quite
extensive-but because of the tremendously partisan nature of this
appointment. When we're talking about TVOntario, we're talking
about a broadcasting entity that, from what I have heard this
morning, is going to be another top-down dictum of what is best
for the people of Ontario. I find that offensive, because I
believe TVOntario has provided a valued and unique balance of
broadcasting. We're now going to take it and qualify it under
this very subjective "educational mandate." Education, if one
understands the concept of education, is all-encompassing. It
isn't to be qualified by a board, what education means or does
not mean and how it fits into TVOntario.
The other reason I will not
be supporting this appointment is because of the potential
conflict that is there. Although I have not worked with Ms
Bassett, nonetheless I find that the linkage to government is so
blatant and so evident. When it comes to her responsibility of
setting the goals and objectives of the agency and recommending
them to the minister, the question is, whose interests is she going to be forwarding,
or which one is she going to be advocating? Is it going to be the
interests of TVOntario and good broadcasting and education, or is
it going to be the interests of the Progressive Conservative
government? This is why I asked the question whether or not they
were going to use this vehicle as a way to move forward some of
the partisan agenda on the television screen.
One more comment that I
will make on this: As I said, I do find extremely inappropriate
and very blatant the fact that again-what about the people who
actually do the programming and the people who actually work and
give their commitment and dedication to providing great
broadcasting and good programming? I believe they are another
sector that is going to be dictated to as to what exactly is
going to take place.
I find that the partisan
nature of this appointment does not sit well when it comes to an
agency such as TVOntario. If we're going to move forward, I
believe these types of appointments do not give credibility to
what we are doing as a government in trying to provide a medium.
We want to call it education. If we're going to not only give a
mandate that has changed completely according to a top-down
dictum, are we also going to shape to that degree what is going
to be presented on TV now for students? As I said, I do not have
any assurance and I don't feel confident that this vehicle isn't
going to be used for partisan education.
Again, maybe I'm
naïve-
Mr Morley Kells
(Etobicoke-Lakeshore): You are.
Ms Di
Cocco: Yes, maybe I am naïve, but I don't believe
it's appropriate. Anything this blatant, as far as I'm concerned,
is very questionable at the least. But of course I have to say
that what I have been hearing on my side of the House, if you'd
like, if I had not been witnessing it, I would not have believed
it if somebody had told me. I'm very new to the world of
politics, but I find that this appointment, in my estimation, is
offensive to the people of Ontario.
Mr Spina:
I find it amazing. We went through this over the years, about
partisan appointments, and I said it last year and the year
before, as I sat on this committee, to members of the Liberal
caucus, the Liberals wrote the book on patronage, so don't give
me a lecture on partisan appointments, madam.
The reality is that I was
very disappointed in your comment ignoring, in fact, Ms Bassett's
qualifications and focusing only on the fact that you felt this
was partisan in nature, when clearly a CV such as this is
outstanding and very few people would be in a position to be able
to bring that forward in terms of their experience, knowledge and
breadth of contribution to the position.
Mr Martin, you indicated
that the appointments of former NDP members were token. Then you
also, two sentences later, indicated that-and we can check
Hansard for the accuracy of this-clearly we only like to make
appointments of people that will think in the way that the
government wants them to think. I can only assume, therefore,
that your former NDP ministers, some of them, have suddenly
bought into the Conservative mindset. That's the only question I
can ask, Mr Martin.
The integrity exemption
puzzles me. If you read the letter from the Integrity
Commissioner, it says that the exemption is only a time frame,
which means that it's 12 months from the time that the individual
ceases to be a member of office of the executive council.
"However ... provides for an exemption with respect to `further
duties in the service of the crown.'" That's the reason why that
exemption was exercised. But they ignore the subsequent
paragraphs, so your personal opinion, in my perspective, holds no
weight about her personal financial investment holdings because,
clearly, all of the financial holdings in the first paragraph
were submitted to the Integrity Commissioner. On the bottom of
the front page Mr Justice Rutherford says: " ... it is my opinion
that your present financial holdings do not place you in a
conflict of interest should you accept the appointment as chair
of TVOntario." I think that if you challenge that, you clearly
are challenging the integrity of Mr Justice Rutherford
himself.
1100
With regard to the
bilingual issue, with all due respect to the member from Sault
Ste Marie, check the CV. This lady was a qualified French teacher
and is in fact relatively fluent in French. So I don't think the
fact that this was a non-bilingual appointment carries any water,
carries any weight with your particular criticism in that regard.
However, there are other areas where you may choose to attack
this government. I don't think the impunity of Ms Bassett's skill
sets is really what's under attack here; there are other
motives.
I just want to make those
comments on the opposition comments. Further, I think this person
is without question one of the best candidates we could possibly
entertain for this particular position of chair and CEO of
TVOntario.
The Chair:
Just for clarification, and perhaps our research officer can help
us out, is it both chair and CEO?
Mr David
Pond: Yes.
The Chair:
It is both. Thank you. I had heard somebody say something about
it was separate. I didn't know whether it was or not. So thank
you for that clarification.
Mr Kells:
I won't take much time, but I have been listening for the last
two or three weeks to the member from Sault Ste Marie as he has
expressed over and over his concern about appointments and, if I
may paraphrase, patronage elements that he feels are in the
system.
I had planned on doing this
some other day, but I'll do it today. I wonder, if the member
from Sault Ste Marie had been unfortunate enough to lose the
election last time around and this government had appointed him
to the Ontario lottery commission, would he have considered
taking the position? I wonder, if he should be unfortunate to
lose next time around and we be fortunate enough to win and that
same potential appointment came up, would he consider it at
all?
I don't expect him to
answer that today, but I would like to have that on the record,
because somewhere along the line we have to get down to the business of
evaluating these people without necessarily bringing in the
so-called bias or patronage factor each time. I can say that with
some experience because I was fortunate enough when I lost in
1985 to be appointed by the Liberal government of the day to the
Rent Review Hearings Board.
I must say I enjoyed that
work, although I thought it was the most barbaric piece of
legislation to ever pass in this House. It served to cause the
tenants in Ontario irreparable damage. I had difficulty from time
to time while serving, trying to arrive at decisions that gave
huge increases to landlords, knowing full well that that same
legislation was not intended to do that, but it was so badly
written with the co-operation of the Liberal-NDP government of
the day that we were forced to deal with it. So I have an
understanding of what ex-politicians face when they take these
board appointments.
Finally, if I may make a
small comment on Isabel Bassett, I had the pleasure of working at
the Toronto Telegram back in the late 1950s and early 1960s when
Isabel and I were there. One of my duties was to run the student
trains to Stratford to the Shakespearean festival. My wife and I
both worked on those trains and spent many hours on the way to
Stratford discussing education with Isabel, because she was the
education reporter for the Telegram at the time. My wife actually
wanted me today, but I didn't get time to get it in, to bring her
congratulations to Isabel. I fondly recall those days with
students and that experience at Stratford on a regular basis.
As you can see from her CV,
she not only has that kind of experience, hands-on, dedicated,
detailed, but she has continued over the years to add to that
illustrious background. In all due respect, I understand it's the
first duty of the opposition to oppose, but I felt that possibly
we might see a little charity today in regard to the obviously
outstanding abilities of Isabel.
Mrs Leona
Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington):
Here's some opposition charity. I think the credentials of Ms
Bassett are quite outstanding; truly I do. I was most impressed
when I read her CV. I also had the opportunity to meet her
personally before we began. I'd not done that before and she
truly is a charming lady. From that perspective, I would never
present an argument that she would not be qualified for this very
important role at all.
However, I do have
significant concerns about a number of things related to her
appointment: the fact that she is appointed as both the chair and
the CEO. I come from school board experience, a former chair of
the board, so I'm using that experience. I'm making the
connection that it would be like having the director and the
chair of the board being the same person. From my own life
experience, I think that would present significant problems if
you had one person functioning in both of those roles. Would it
not be more appropriate to have Ms Bassett as the CEO with an
elected chair?
Like my colleague, I'm new
to this role, but this is a question that came to my mind
immediately. I think it is most unusual to have one individual
serve in those two key roles. In the corporate world, how
regularly does that happen? Usually they are different people.
One is accountable to the other. The administrative body is
accountable to the governing body. In my opinion you cannot serve
two masters. You're either an administrator or you're a governor,
and I don't think you can do both and do them both well. So I
have very serious concerns about the nature of that part of the
appointment.
There are some statements
made in the document that Ms Bassett circulated today and also
some statements that she made during her conversation with us
that have alarmed me. On page 2 of her document she has
indicated, "Any enterprise that is going to thrive and prosper
has to make a good business case." She talks about her government
experience basically. It has provided her with "a strong
background in business planning," and it has also shown her "the
value of strategic linkages between private and public sectors,
and the need to work together with people to move forward into
new areas."
I think we know that the
pattern of the government which she participated in was to cut,
to withdraw support; in fact $20 million was taken away from
TVOntario. Ms Bassett said today she thought it has possibly made
TVO better. That's a very easy statement to make. I think it
would be much more difficult to prove how an organization could
be better after $20 million had been taken from it. The concern I
have of course is that the government, with its penchant-and very
clearly there are going to be more cuts, and very possibly cuts
to TVO. I see the CEO and chair with a very biased perspective
that this is going to make TVO better. I don't believe that will
be the case. I do believe, though, that there is a person now in
the chair and CEO who will go to the wall with that mindset, that
yes, it'll be better, that we can cut and still do things
better.
I don't think that if you
were to talk to people who actually work at TVO, they would say
that cuts are good, that you can improve programming. I have a
serious question about the kind of representation we will see
from the person of the chair and CEO. If it is the government's
decision and direction to in fact make reductions to this very
important educational venue in Ontario, I would feel much more
comfortable if there was someone who would not have had
experience with a former government that has a significant record
in distributing cuts.
1110
Again, I would like to
emphasize that I do believe that in the area of broadcasting, the
candidate is very well qualified, but that in her past political
associations she has demonstrated very strongly that she supports
the idea of reducing support to educational agencies in this
province concerns me greatly. She has said she is not in favour
of privatization. She did not tell me or this committee today
that if the Premier were to announce the privatization, she would
not effect it.
Those are my concerns, and
for these reasons I would not be able to support this
candidate.
The Chair: I have Mr Newman as the
next speaker.
Mr Newman:
The opposition members have given me so much to comment on today,
but I'll try to be as brief as possible.
With respect to Mr Martin's
comments about Ms Bassett's ability in French, I think it's
important to note, as has been stated, that she does have a
teaching certificate in French and English, that she does have a
basic working capacity in the French language. I would not have
thought that was such a priority for him because the previous
chair who was appointed under the NPD was actually unilingual, so
it didn't seem to be an issue then. Now you have someone who's
qualified, who can speak and has a basic working capacity in
French, so I think that will definitely help with TVO.
With respect to the
comments from the Liberal members, I know they are new and I know
they've been sent here to oppose it.
Mr Martin:
That's really patronizing.
Mr Newman:
Ms Di Cocco's comments that somehow this-
Mr Martin:
On a point of order, Mr Chair: I would ask the Chair to ask the
members opposite to withdraw the comments about naiveté and
"new" and all that to the members who are here. I think it's
insulting and demeaning and patronizing.
Ms Di
Cocco: On a point of order, Mr Chair: I actually object
to the being "sent to oppose." I object to that statement.
The Chair:
Mr Newman, can you please-
Mr Newman:
Ms Di Cocco's comments were that somehow if someone was an MPP,
they should somehow not be considered for an appointment. In the
previous Parliament, there were Liberal members like Gilles Morin
and Bernard Grandmaître who now serve on agencies, boards
and commissions in this province. So I guess somehow you would
oppose the appointment of those two individuals.
People who have served as
members of provincial Parliament and who are no longer in office
obviously have the interests of the people of Ontario at heart
and they can serve the province in various capacities. I think
that should be kept in mind.
Also, concerning Mrs
Dombrowsky's comments with respect to the chair and CEO positions
and one person having those positions, when the NDP appointed
Peter Herrndorf back in 1992, that individual served as chair and
CEO. I know that you like to see the chair and CEO positions
severed, that they would be separate positions-
Mrs
Dombrowsky: Most corporations do.
Mr Newman:
That's what Bill 11, the red tape bill, does. If you look at Bill
11, have a read through it, you'll see that the chair and CEO
positions now become separate.
Mrs
Dombrowsky: Not here.
Mr Newman:
In Bill 11, the red tape bill that's before the House, you will
see that it actually severs the two positions, chair and CEO.
Given that, I trust you will support Bill 1l, the Red Tape
Reduction Act, when it does appear before the House for third
reading.
Mr Kells:
On a point of order, Mr Chair: The member referred to something
about being sent here to oppose. For clarification, I said I
understand it's the first duty of the loyal opposition to oppose.
That came from Lord Randolph Churchill's famous quote that the
first priority of the loyal opposition is to oppose. It's a
standard, well-known axiom of politics in the British
parliamentary system and has nothing to do with an individual
here at the committee level.
The Chair:
Thank you, Mr Kells. I don't know if the objection was to your
words or someone else's, but anyway we've heard the objections
and we've heard the responses to the objections. I'll leave it at
that. You've expressed your opinions.
If there are no other
speakers, we're going to then consider a motion to concur in the
intended appointment of Ms Bassett. That was your motion, Mr
Newman, and I'll read it again: to concur in the intended
appointment of Ms Bassett as Ontario Educational Communications
Authority, TVO, member and chair.
Mr
Johnson: Can I request a recorded vote?
The Chair:
You may, sir. We have a recorded vote.
Ayes
Johnson, Kells, Newman,
Spina.
Nays
Di Cocco, Dombrowsky,
Martin.
The Chair:
The motion is carried.
Mr Martin, you have
something you wish to say?
Mr Martin:
I want to raise the possibility of a subcommittee meeting to
discuss further business of this committee. Is that going to
happen today, next week, or when?
The Chair:
It would likely be better if we were to do so next week, unless
there are members today who are prepared to do so. Mr Newman is
nodding yes, which I presume means that next week would be
appropriate for him.
Mr Martin:
Just as a heads-up, some of what I want to speak about, Mr
Newman, is the calling before this committee of some commissions
and boards during the intersession.
Mr Newman:
That will be something to take to the House leaders.
Mr Martin:
Yes, it would have to eventually go to them if we chose to do
that. They ultimately give the green light or the red light. So
yes, I understand that.
Mr Newman:
I think also the regular committee member from our side will be
back. He's just at another committee today.
The Chair:
Any other comments, observations, statements?
