MR. CHAIRMAN: Ladies and gentlemen, we will start this meeting of the Standing Committee on Human Resources. My apologies for being late. Maybe we could start with Mr. Chisholm and go around the table and introduce ourselves.
[The committee members introduced themselves.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: With that, we will get on to the order of business, which is appointments to agencies, boards and commissions.
MR. GRAHAM STEELE: Before we start, Mr. Chairman, I was just wondering if I could ask whether the members from the government caucus present today are the permanent replacements for the members who have gone on to greater glory or whether these are just interim replacements?
MR. CHAIRMAN: These are interim replacements. We don't have a finalized list yet, but we will have it to everyone prior to the next meeting, hopefully.
DR. JAMES SMITH: Will you be staying on as chairman, because I think you have been a very good chairman and we would like you to continue. (Laughter) If it's going to come to a vote, I would like to announce early in the campaign. I don't mind the double-dipping. (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: We are not sure of that at this time. There's certainly a possibility that I will no longer be chairman, but I do appreciate that vote of confidence.
1
MR. STEELE: I would like to see who the other candidates are. (Laughter)
DR. SMITH: I think we caucus chairs have to stick together. That's my theory.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Maybe you could give me some pointers.
DR. SMITH: Don't go there.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Chisholm, maybe we could start with you.
MR. RONALD CHISHOLM: Mr. Chairman, Department of Environment and Labour, the Labour Standards Tribunal of Nova Scotia, I so move Sharon R. Richard as an alternate member.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So moved. Is there any discussion? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, can we do these appointments individually, please?
MR. CHAIRMAN: We can, yes, if you would like to do that.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: I would like to do that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We will ask Mrs. Baillie to move those names individually, if she wouldn't mind.
MRS. MURIEL BAILLIE: Mr. Chairman, Department of Justice, Human Rights Commission of Nova Scotia, I so move Louis A. Gannon, Jr. as a commissioner.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So moved. Is there any discussion? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
MRS. BAILLIE: Mr. Chairman, Department of Justice, Human Rights Commission of Nova Scotia, I so move Lance R. Hale as a commissioner.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So moved. Is there any discussion? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
MRS. BAILLIE: Mr. Chairman, Department of Justice, Human Rights Commission of Nova Scotia, I so move Marion Millett as a commissioner.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So moved. Is there any discussion? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
MRS. BAILLIE: Mr. Chairman, Department of Justice, Human Rights Commission of Nova Scotia, I so move Sister Dorothy Moore as a commissioner.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So moved. Is there any discussion? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
MRS. BAILLIE: And for the same department, I so move Narayana Swamy.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So moved. Is there any discussion? Ms. MacDonald.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, I was really very disappointed when I saw this recommendation from government to the Human Rights Commission. I think this particular candidate has, in fact, been a PC candidate, as we all know, on two occasions. It's ironic, you know, that this person is being recommended for the commission that is there to protect Nova Scotians from discrimination on the basis of political affiliation. It seems to me that the government is thumbing its nose at the Kaiser decision in making this recommendation. The Human Rights Commission not only has to operate without political bias, it has to have the appearance of operating without political bias and surely by appointing former candidates for the government Party to the Human Rights Commission so shortly after the Kaiser decision is just not acceptable and I won't be supporting this appointment.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there any further discussion? Mr. Steele.
MR. STEELE: Maybe I will add a more general comment and that is we are now almost six months after the Kaiser decision was released. The government was committed to a new process for appointing people to these adjudicative tribunals and I would include the Human Rights Commission as one of them. Six months later, we still have no idea what process is underway, who's doing it, what the criteria are, what their mandate is, when they're going to report and who they're going to report to. The government said that it would
take a year to put the new process in place, but in the meantime it's clearly just business as usual and that's very unfortunate.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing no other discussion, I will call for the question. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
MRS. BAILLIE: For the Law Reform Commission of Nova Scotia, I so move Professor Diana Ginn as commissioner.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So moved. Is there any discussion? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
MRS. BAILLIE: Mr. Chairman, I so move for the Review Board under the Criminal Code, J. Walter Thompson, Q.C., as a member.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So moved. Is there any discussion? Mr. Steele.
MR. STEELE: Just if I may, Mr. Chairman, this Review Board under the Criminal Code, of course, was one of the tribunals that was the subject matter of the Kaiser complaint. Normally, I would say that the time has come for the government to let everybody know what this new process is that they're supposed to be implementing. It's time to take the Kaiser settlement seriously and start changing the way things are done. Normally I would say that, but Mr. Thompson has served this particular tribunal with distinction in the past and I'm sure will continue to do so in the future. So I have no objection to Mr. Thompson, but I think the general point needs to be made that it's about time the government started showing it was taking the Kaiser settlement seriously and demonstrating that people are being chosen in a different way than they have in the past.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there any further discussion? Dr. Smith.
DR. SMITH: I would like to be a little more clear when it comes to this particular committee and what Mr. Steele means. I don't mean to bring this up as a negative, because I would just like to have a little, again, capsule, maybe if you could take the time of the committee, to say how appointments such as this should be reviewed because it is very important. I think it demonstrates that the Kaiser issue was a separate issue and that the reason Mr. Kaiser wasn't appointed was not because of patronage. That's my opinion and I've expressed that opinion here before.
[9:15 a.m.]
Here you have a situation of a gentleman who is a well-known Progressive Conservative identified and then appointed by the previous Liberal Government because he is a person who is very interested in the rights of people, but he balances it also with the personal safety of other Nova Scotians and he's been a good appointment. I know him personally. I worked with him on a youth committee back many years ago. But, in all fairness, I would like this to go through a better process, if that's what Mr. Steele is working toward. I think I've read some things that he's said, but in a capsule form, how would you sort of go about this appointment to make this more fair with Mr. Thompson?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Dr. Smith.
DR. SMITH: I'm getting at the professional advice that the people get. I mean, that was the problem with the Kaiser appointment. There was professional advice that he would not be a proper person for that committee. That was the reason he was not appointed to a committee such as this. How do you get around that? Do you ignore professional advice or should that be more formalized like Mr. Steele's complaint that that advice is maybe not formalized, because sometimes professional people don't want to go public with the reasons they won't support an appointment such as this.
These two committees are very important committees. The committee has agreed on that before. I don't want to take too much time here, but it has come up and continues to come up. It is festering. This is an excellent appointment and I don't want to see, well, this is a good appointment but the rest are not so good, or something like that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you for your comments. Mr. Steele.
MR. STEELE: I would just like to respond briefly to what Dr. Smith said. I continue to be taken aback at the way the Liberal Party seems to want to re-fight the Kaiser case.
DR. SMITH: You brought it up, it was brought up by your Party here this morning.
MR. STEELE: The Kaiser case is over. It's done with. It's been settled. The Government of Nova Scotia has acknowledged in the settlement agreement that things happened that shouldn't have happened. I think what I would like to know as a Nova Scotian is whether the view expressed by Dr. Smith is one shared by the new Leader of the Liberal Party. Is Danny Graham for patronage or is he against it? Does he accept the Kaiser settlement or does he want to continue to fight it?
Now, as far as what I think needs to be done, I've been clear on it in the past and I've said the three essential elements for getting rid of patronage in Nova Scotia are public advertising designed to reach the audience where qualified people are likely to see it, a
statement in advance of what the qualifications for the job are, and some form of external audit to make sure that proper procedures or the policies laid down by this Human Resources Committee are followed so that, in fact, Nova Scotians can have confidence that the process has produced the very best person available. Those are the conditions that I've said are essential to getting rid of patronage in Nova Scotia.
The government has a secret process underway right now. They said it's going to take them a year to do it. We have no idea what the process is. I said that before, earlier today. I don't know what criteria the government has established to try to deal with the issues raised in the Kaiser settlement, but as I said, Mr. Thompson is a well-known Tory, as Dr. Smith has said. But notwithstanding that, I will say again, he served this particular tribunal with distinction in the past and I'm sure he will do so in the future. So I'm definitely not opposed to Mr. Thompson's name going forward, but what I am opposed to is the continuation of business as usual. I am just taken aback, again, at the way the Liberal Party seems to want to re-fight the Kaiser case.
MR. CHAIRMAN: For fear of neglecting Mr. Thompson, perhaps we will get back to the motion that's on the floor.
DR. SMITH: If I could just comment, Mr. Chairman. I think the three qualifications then, or criteria that Mr. Steele has mentioned - public advertising, knowledge of qualifications, I think, and the external audit - the professional body that gave us, as a Liberal Government, the recommendation not to appoint Mr. Kaiser in some way was an external audit; they were outside of government, they weren't within Cabinet or within the bureaucracy per se.
Do I agree with what the government did in the Kaiser case? No, of course I don't. I don't think the decision was right. It wasn't a question of patronage, I will stick to my guns on that one forever because I was there, I had the information as to what other professional people were saying. To me that was not formalized, but it was a type of external audit.
I don't want to prolong that this morning. I think that two of the three criteria have been met. Maybe we should look as a committee at some form of external audit, particularly with these committees. I agree with Mr. Steele that these two committees - the Review Board under the Criminal Code and the second one - are important and need special attention.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
We're at Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations.
MR. JOHN CHATAWAY: Mr. Chairman, I would like to move for the Real Estate Appraisers Association Board of Directors, Douglas C. McNeil and A. Martin Smith.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So moved, thank you. Mr. Steele.
MR. STEELE: Very briefly, I would just like to note that Douglas C. McNeil is a constituent of mine. He's made an enormous contribution to his community over, literally, decades. In fact, he's been honoured many times in his community. Just last night the member for Halifax Bedford Basin and I were at another event where his community was honouring him for his contribution specifically to the Centennial Arena on Vimy Avenue.
In the course of that event, I talked to "Dugger", as he's known, and said, I see your name's coming forward for this board tomorrow, and he expressed surprise. He wasn't aware that his name was coming forward for this, but I note that because of the particular way that people are being appointed to this agency, the Board of Directors of the Real Estate Appraisers Association, that really the names are generated and brought forward by the association itself. Maybe the association has a slight internal issue in the way they let their proposed nominees know that their names are in fact being put forward. But Mr. McNeil is a fine person and I'm happy to support him for this or anything else his name would be put forward for.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, I certainly appreciate those kind words. Any further discussion? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
MR. CHATAWAY: For the Regional Assessment Appeal Courts in the Central Region, I would like to put forward the name Robert G. Cragg.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So moved. Any discussion? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
MS. MARY ANN MCGRATH: Mr. Chairman, under the Department of Tourism and Culture, the Shubenacadie Canal Commission, I so move the appointments of Doug English; John O'Connor, MD; and Vivien Srivastava, Ph.D.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So moved. Any discussion?
DR. SMITH: I would just like to say it's not necessarily a first, but all three are residents of Dartmouth East and I would like to add my voice.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So noted. Any further discussion? Hearing none, I will call for the question. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
DR. SMITH: The only thing that bothers me on this, Mr. Chairman, is the government cut the funding and now they're appointing Liberals. (Laughter) Two of these people were at the Liberal convention - I don't think they would mind me saying because they were fairly prominent there. It just caused me to wonder, but it's interesting that sooner or later you find out why, but right now I'm not quite sure why.
Seriously, they're actually excellent people, excellent choices. They live in the area near the Shubie Canal, or the Dartmouth component of that, and these are all excellent people and really it's a pleasure to support them.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That concludes our business of appointments to agencies, boards and commissions. Is there any other business or any new business? Hearing none, we will just cover the next meeting date which is July 30th from 9:00 a.m. until 11:00 a.m. We look forward to seeing you then.
We are adjourned.
[The committee adjourned at 9:26 p.m.]