CONTENTS
Tuesday 4 December 1990
Organization
Adjournment
STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
Chair: Caplan, Elinor (Oriole L)
Vice-Chair: Cordiano, Joseph (Lawrence L)
Beer, Charles (York North L)
Haeck, Christel (St. Catharines-Brock NDP)
Hope, Randy R. (Chatham-Kent NDP)
Malkowski, Gary (York East NDP)
Martin, Tony (Sault Ste Marie NDP)
McLeod, Lyn (Fort William L)
Owens, Stephen (Scarborough Centre NDP)
Silipo, Tony (Dovercourt NDP)
Wilson, Jim (Simcoe West PC)
Witmer, Elizabeth (Waterloo North PC)
Clerk: Mellor, Lynn
Staff: Drummond, Alison, Research Officer, Legislative Research Service
The committee met at 1610 in room 151.
ORGANIZATION
The Chair: We have a quorum. The subcommittee met to consider requests by two of the caucus, and gave direction to the clerk, who will have two reports very shortly. The suggestion is that we might want to have a cup of coffee and reconvene in half an hour to consider the two reports that the clerk will table on the approach to dealing with the two items that have been presented, one by Mr Wilson and Mrs Witmer and one by Mr Beer, Mrs McLeod and Mr Cordiano. Agreed?
The committee recessed at 1611.
1653
The Chair: I call the meeting to order. I have just received from the clerk reports which are being distributed. I have been asked to read the reports into the record. I will read the first one, then discussion, if there is any, then I will read the second one, if that is agreeable.
Report I of the subcommittee, standing committee on social development:
"The subcommittee met on Tuesday 4 December 1990 pursuant to standing order 123 to consider a report to the committee on the following matter designated by Mr Wilson (Simcoe West), for Mrs Witmer, for consideration by the committee:
"The funding, availability, accessibility, adequacy and quality of children's mental health services in Ontario and the need to improve these services. This matter to be considered for a period of 12 hours.
"It was agreed:
"That the proposal by Mrs Witmer be considered by the committee as follows:
"That the public hearings be conducted the week of 14 January 1991; if there is government legislation referred to the committee, then this matter should be considered at the first possible date upon completion of the government legislation;
"That the committee invite the following to appear:
"Alex Thomson, president, Ontario Association of Children's Mental Health Centres; Dorothy Easton, executive director of Kinark Child and Family Services; Peter F. Cassel, superintendent of special education, Lambton County Board of Education; Burt Vanden Heuvel, superintendent of special education, Lambton County Roman Catholic School Board; a representative of the Canadian Mental Health Association; Philip Ogden, director, Beechgrove Regional Children's Centre, Kingston; Mary Lou Moir, co-ordinator, Mary McGill Community Mental Health Centre, Alliston; Barry Falls, co-ordinator, Robert Thompson Youth and Family Centre, Cookstown; Mike O'Brien, director, Collingwood branch of the Simcoe County Children's Aid Society; Vic Graham, Waterloo County Board of Education;
"And authority be given to the subcommittee to make any necessary changes to this list and to allocate the time for each appointment of each witness as may be required, and to ensure the schedule allows time for the committee to consider the final draft of the report;
"That the subcommittee be authorized to give direction to the research officer writing the report and to give its approval to the final draft of that report;
"That the Chair be authorized to table the report in the House upon receipt of the final approved draft; and
"That the Chair may table the report in one language and when the translation is available the Chair will then table the supplementary document in the second language."
Mr Silipo: Madam Chair, I know authority has been requested for the subcommittee to make any necessary changes. Does that also include any additions or changes to the list of people?
The Chair: Changes include additions and deletions.
Mr J. Wilson: I am just a little confused about the approval of the report. Does it mean the subcommittee gives final approval to the draft?
The Chair: Yes.
Mr J. Wilson: It does not quite say that, but I would assume that.
The Chair: The paragraph says, "authority be given to the subcommittee to make any necessary changes to the list and to allocate the time for each appointment of each witness as may be required, and to ensure the schedule allows time for the committee to consider the final draft of the report." That is after it has been approved by the subcommittee. I have had clarification from the clerk. Do you want that to be clearer?
Mr J. Wilson: Well, I think we would all agree that this is the way it is going to happen. I was just worried about the next paragraph which says, "and to give their approval to the final draft of that report," referring to --
The Chair: That is following the final draft.
Clerk of the Committee: What would happen here is that the subcommittee would approve the final draft, then it would go to the full committee for final approval.
Mr J. Wilson: Okay. I am not quite sure that is what this says, though. I appreciate that it was written up very quickly.
Mr Beer: Excuse me, Madam Chair. Perhaps "after the final draft of that report which would then be submitted to the committee."
The Chair: That should clarify it.
Mr Owens: Further to Jim's question: At which point would dissent to a committee report be entertained and how would it be recorded?
The Chair: At which point would --
Mr Owens: If Jim, for instance, dissented on the whole committee report on the issue submitted by Elizabeth Witmer, how would that dissent be registered? What kind of opportunity would Jim or any other member of this committee be given to prepare a report on that dissent? Would it be tabled along with the report?
The Chair: I am going to ask the clerk to clarify the specific procedure for dissent.
Clerk of the Committee: If there is a dissenting opinion to a report when it is written, the dissenting opinion is appended to the report when the report is tabled. Therefore, the people submitting the dissenting opinion must make sure it is available to the clerk of the committee in time, when the report itself is being printed, so that it can be incorporated into the report.
1700
Mr Beer: That is the standard way of doing that in all of our reports, to make sure that the dissenting report, if there is one, is printed as part of the record.
The Chair: Any further questions?
Mr Malkowski: Just a point of clarification, if I might. Is the list of names for speakers open? For example, is it open to individuals?
The Chair: I am not clear on what you mean by "open." The subcommittee --
Mr Malkowski: Is it limited to those individuals only who are listed in this report or --
The Chair: No, the authority is there for the subcommittee to change, add or delete. This is not a comprehensive list.
Mr Owens: I just wanted to add to your comments, Madam Chair, that it would be up to Gary or anybody else to approach their respective caucus to add to that list if they have individuals or groups that are interested in appearing before this committee.
The Chair: Yes. This committee has struck a subcommittee, and each of the whips were appointed as members of the subcommittee along with the chair. Members of the individual caucuses will meet with their whip and decide on instructions to the whip, or the other thing that is very common is substitution back and forth on to these committees as agreed to by the caucus. Any other questions on procedural matters?
Mr Silipo: I was just looking at the other report we are going to be dealing with and wondering if during the time that the House does not sit does this committee sit only on the two days that are assigned to it, Monday and Tuesday afternoons, or are there additional days on which we can also sit?
The Chair: When the House is in session the two days which are allotted time to the committees are Monday and Tuesday, as you know, in the procedures agreed upon by the House leaders. When the House is not in session, it is determined by the amount of business that is referred to the committee by the House leaders and it is upon agreement of the House leaders. What will often happen is that the subcommittee, that is, the business subcommittee that was struck, will recommend to the House leaders how much time it feels it needs and when it would like to sit and then the House leaders will agree. I believe that is the correct procedure. Is that clear?
Mr Owens: In terms of co-ordinating our committee responsibilities, will that be done through the House leaders, or is it up to us to say, "Okay, my other committee is Legislative Assembly." We can be going backwards and forwards for a long time trying to determine dates.
The Chair: What will happen, according to past practice, is that the House leaders will agree what work is assigned to the committees. The subcommittee will then sit to order its work, decide how much time is needed and report back to the House leaders. This affects the budget that has to be approved by the Board of Internal Economy as well. I have asked the clerk to prepare a standard budget in anticipation of what would be considered a normal workload for the intersession period, but that will be discussed by the subcommittee when we see what work comes before us. These are the first two pieces of business the committee has decided to deal with, but government bills always take precedence. Are there any questions?
Mr Martin: Yes. I am just wondering -- probably for all of them, it would be the same question -- about northern Ontario and getting representation from there on these things so that we hear from them, because certainly children's mental health is even more acute in some of the concerns up there. Are there intentions to bring people down or to go up there? Are there any resources available to bring folks in?
The Chair: At present, the committee has no budget. That is one of the matters the subcommittee will have to discuss and ultimately the Board of Internal Economy would have to approve. One of the opportunities you have as a member of the caucus is to discuss issues such as that with your member of the subcommittee who can then raise that at subcommittee meetings when the business is ordered.
Mr Beer: If I might, just to make very clear that when we were setting out names, the ones that are there should really be seen as examples. They were in no way to exclude others. In the normal course of events, we would have had time to work all of that out before coming back with our report, but because we have to get agreement before Thursday, that is why we have said that the subcommittee, having heard each of the whips going back to his own caucus, will then be able to get other names and we will be able to meet in terms of setting our budget to make a proposal.
Your point is well taken, that we would want to hear from some groups, individuals from the north, and strike a budget that does have to go to the Board of Internal Economy, which makes the final determination. I think that is something we would all feel we would want to make sure of, that that voice was heard.
Any of those things, even perhaps some other points, may come to mind after we finish this afternoon. Would you transmit those to Steve? Then we, the whips, are meeting next Tuesday to try to finalize the list of names and times and that sort of thing. We have basically a week to try to do that, because we want to give people notice so they can prepare whatever it is they are going to present. There will be about a month. With Christmas and everything, it will be tight to the 14th and the 21st.
The Chair: On the list of requests to speak, I have Mrs McLeod, Mr Owens, Mr Malkowski and Mr Hope.
Mrs McLeod: I had actually just raised the same point Mr Martin raised with our own members of the committee, because I do think it is important that we find some way of recognizing that the problems relating to children's mental health in northern Ontario take on quite a different form in terms of the ability to provide service to northern communities.
The other group of people who may have some unique needs that the committee might want to understand are francophone people. I think that might be another group, that we try and determine the adequacy of children's mental health services for Franco-Ontarians.
It is such a complex and widespread area that we may need to take a focus, but if we do that I hope we recognize that we are focusing to the exclusion of some other concerns that should be identified and addressed at a later point.
Mr Owens: As a general question, to try and allay some of the concerns of Tony and Lyn, has it been the practice of this committee to be a travelling committee?
The Chair: This is a relatively new standing order, 123, and the clerk informs me that no committee has travelled during the 12-hour standing order 123. However, it is the practice of the committee to schedule travelling time during the intersession. That is something the subcommittee can discuss on whatever work is before it.
Mr Owens: Has it been the practice of the committee to provide interpreters for francophone appearances?
The Chair: Yes, in designated areas translation services are provided.
Mr Owens: By way of Bill 8 or by designation of the committee?
The Chair: Under Bill 8, under the provisions of the legislation.
Mr Beer: I just want to note that here, of course, it is all done automatically.
Mr Malkowski: Do you have a system of informing individuals who may wish to have their issues made known to the committee? What would your form be? For example, if an individual could not attend, would it be possible for them to send perhaps a videotape, an audio tape or some written materials? Would those options be available to them, not only attending at the scheduled time, but those other options as well?
The Chair: The committee, through the subcommittee, can determine what kind of representation and presentations they are prepared to accept. In the past, videotapes have been received by the committee and have been made available to individual members for viewing. As well, written briefs and so forth have been submitted to committee and shared.
1710
Mr Hope: I just want to point out something. When I was listening to Mr Beer talk, you were talking about finalizing a list before Thursday, and in here it says that alterations to a list through the discretion of the committee will be able to change from time from time. I just wanted some clarity when you were saying that by Thursday you wanted to finalize the list.
Mr Beer: What I said was that in order for us to have these hearings we have to have agreed as a committee to do that by Thursday. In the normal course of events, we might have had several weeks in which to then plan who the witnesses and so on would be. We do not have that. That is why we have directed that the subcommittee would sit down next week and try to finalize the list of people who would come before the committee, or whether we would travel and what other kinds of material we would receive. This is just to give us flexibility so that on the one side we have approval for these two hearings, and the flexibility to ensure that we have before us the people we feel we need to have.
The Chair: Just to clarify for all members -- I do not think everyone was here yesterday -- we were informed that in order to be able to deal with these matters in the calendar year of 1990, consideration had to be made and reports received by this committee before Thursday. These are the two reports that we are considering today, which will allow this committee to consider these matters under the calendar year of 1990.
Mr Hope: Just to put my question directly then, after Thursday can we alter the list?
Mr Beer: Absolutely.
Mr Hope: Okay.
The Chair: This report empowers the subcommittee to have the flexibility to amend the list as required. That is exactly what the wording of this report does.
Mr Martin: "As required" does not mean necessarily before Thursday.
The Chair: No; ongoing.
Mr Cordiano: I simply want to make the point that consideration should be given as well, when adding to the list in both of these reports, to groups where we perhaps need to be more culturally sensitive. For example, in the city of Toronto there are a great number of children of immigrant parents and there are difficulties associated with those individuals and those groups. I think that a great more has to be done in that area. I think we have to keep that in mind. I do not see that in the two reports here by the subcommittee, so I would like to support that initiative, if possible, when you are deliberating on your subcommittee.
The Chair: All right. The committee has received report 1. Committee report 2 -- I will read that out for the committee:
"The subcommittee met Tuesday 4 December 1990 pursuant to standing order 123 to consider a report to the committee on the following matter designated by Mrs McLeod, for Mr Beer, for consideration by the committee:
"An evaluation of the service mandate for individuals with developmental handicaps, developed by the Ministry of Community and Social Services, to determine: if the intent of the multi-year plan is being met; the adequacy of the existing plan; and barriers to future implementation.
"For the committee's reference, the ministry's new mandate for services to people with developmental disabilities in Ontario states:
"` -- retain, wherever possible, a developmentally disabled child with his or her family,
"` -- develop community-based support programs and residential programs,
"` -- encourage the development of a developmentally disabled adult's full occupational potential; and
"` -- phase down large institutions.'
"This matter to be considered for a period of 12 hours.
"It was agreed that the proposal by Mr Beer be considered by the committee as follows:
"That the public hearings be conducted the week of 21 January 1991 following the completion of the first report of this subcommittee; if there is government legislation referred to the committee, then this matter should be considered at the first possible date upon completion of the government legislation;
"That the committee invite the following to appear:
"Peter Cluterbuck, independent consultant; Beth French, National People First/Canadian Association for Community Living. Marg Price, Home Again; Doug Carton, executive director, Brockville Association for Community Involvement; Bill Allerton, Community Living, Mississauga; Linda Till; Patrick Worth, People First; Ray Rempel, Ontario Head Injured Association;
"And authority be given to the subcommittee to make any necessary changes to this list and to allocate the time for each appointment of each witness as may be required, and to ensure the schedule allows time for the committee to consider the final draft of the report;
"That the subcommittee be authorized to give direction to the research officer writing the report and to give their report and to give their approval to the final draft of that report;
"That the Chair be authorized to table the report in the House upon receipt of the final approved draft; and
"That the Chair may table the report in one language, and when the translation is available, the Chair will then table the supplementary document in the second language."
And for clarity, we agreed to add at the end:
"That the subcommittee be authorized to give direction to the research officer writing the report and to give its approval to the final draft of that report, which would then be submitted to the full committee."
The Chair: Any further discussion? The committee has received both reports. Would any member like to raise another matter of business at this time?
Mr Hope: Just the point that was made yesterday by Lyn McLeod about us using first names in these hearings. Has any clarity come out on that?
The Chair: For the purpose of Hansard, we generally recognize the member formally, but then in discussion, informality is a practice of most committees.
Mr Hope: Why I ask is so that I do not be offensive to the females of the committee, whether they are married or not married. I would not like to make a false gesture of calling Ms or Miss. I think it would be appropriate that we have some kind of indication, because that is why I just hesitated on saying the member across. I think it would be appropriate that we have, whether married or not married, last names.
Mr Cordiano: Why do we not just use the generic term of Ms?
The Chair: The clerk informs me that to change all of the name plates for all the members of the Legislature for committee purposes would cost about $3,000. It might be easier if we just let you know that we would be happier with Miss or Ms individually. That should solve the problem.
Mr Owens: I thought we had agreed that if I wanted to speak to Lyn, I could address her as Lyn. For the purposes of Hansard, when you identify Mr Owens or whatever, that is how we do it.
The Chair: I thought that was what I said in response to Randy's question, that is, that for the purposes of Hansard I would identify the speaker by the formal name, but for the purposes of discussion we would be informal. Ms Witmer?
Mrs Witmer: Mrs Witmer is fine. I am wondering why this is such a significant issue. When I have sat on other committees or boards, we usually referred to one another as Mr and Mrs.
The Chair: Could I suggest that perhaps you discuss that with Randy later and work it out?
The committee adjourned at 1719.