MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to welcome you to this meeting of the Human Resources Committee. Thank you very much for allowing me to be absent at the last meeting. I was down in Bolivia teaching a course on religion and politics. (Interruption) Well, it is an interesting mix. I thought we had it tough here. They have 53 official Parties in Bolivia with 8 million people. (Interruption) You would trade for the NDP? (Laughter) No, I think we will stick with what we have. Anyway, I want to welcome you. I am sorry I wasn't here last meeting.
I also want to welcome Russell MacKinnon who is sitting in for Don Downe, Jim Smith who is sitting in for Wayne Gaudet and Bill Estabrooks who is sitting in for Eileen O'Connell. So welcome to the three of you.
We have some procedural things to discuss before we get into the bulk of the names but before we get into that, it came to my attention - I didn't see the news report last night - that this booklet, which is marked confidential, somehow ended up in the hands of the press before the names had become public. Now the reason it is marked confidential, I understand, is because up until the last minute, people can withdraw their name from consideration of a committee and they have the right to have that sort of privacy. They are told that by this meeting the name becomes public and at this stage if they let their name go forward, it is fair game for it to be discussed publicly. Up until this meeting they have the right to withdraw their name if, for one reason or another, they don't want their name to go forward. That is why these books are marked confidential.
We obviously have a problem on the committee. We are either going to abide by the rules or we are going to have to change the rule if this confidentiality is something that should be changed, but as it stands now, the rule is to protect people whose names have come forward. So we have some sort of problem and I didn't know what to do about it and so I would like to ask the wisdom of the committee, what should be done about it?
MR. BARRY BARNET: No wisdom, I guess.
DR. JAMES SMITH: Mr. Chairman, I wasn't going to comment, as a new member, just sit and listen for a while. I think you are referring to CBC Television.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, I didn't see the show myself.
DR. SMITH: Paul Withers came to my constituency office yesterday and I want to comment, just to categorically say to the committee that I have no knowledge of anything being released to the CBC yesterday. When Paul Withers arrived in my office between 1:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m., I guess, he said he had the list with him at that time. Where it came from, I have no idea. I just want to say to the committee that to my knowledge, our caucus did not release it and I certainly, personally, did not release it. I was told that certain people were on there, Mr. McLaughlin I think, but he didn't have the copy with him at that time. Those would be my comments. It is not the first time it has been released and it is not going to be the last.
MR. DARRELL DEXTER: I could probably comment, if you want.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I just want you to know, I am not blaming anyone or pointing the finger at anyone, I am just saying obviously procedure was broken, what do we do about it? Is the procedure a wrong procedure? Should the confidentiality be changed or if it is broken, is there some way of dealing with it so that it doesn't happen in the future?
MR. DEXTER: The problem is a bit wider than that because when these things come forward to us, we research these people and we ask questions about them. We go out and try to find information about them and I think just when you go through that process, what is going to happen inevitably, is that the names are going to get out, one way or another.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I understand that and I think that is fair. The names are given out seven days in advance so that the researchers can research them. I understand that this wasn't a case of an isolated name, though, but somehow the media had a copy of this booklet and were showing it on camera. I did not see the news report but that is a different case than a name getting out because you are right, Darrell, a name inevitably will get out because people are researching them. That is why you have them seven days in advance but the book itself is stamped confidential and supposedly this was shown on camera. I didn't see it but this is the situation. I think that is a different story.
MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, I caught part of that newscast and having sat on this committee for several years before we formed the government, I tend to disagree with the honourable member for Dartmouth East that this happens from time to time. I don't actually recollect it happening before - now it may have and I stand to be corrected - that names have been leaked out in the fashion they were last night.
It seemed as if last night, you are quite correct, Mr. Chairman, that Mr. Withers had the whole book. Yes, Darrell, from time to time people will be contacted or communicated with. We have seen that happen, kind of on an individual basis, but last night it definitely showed the DHAs, the district health authorities. The camera went up and down the list so Mr. Withers obviously saw - I can't say the entire book - the district health authorities.
Anyway, just for what it is worth, you are looking for some direction and counsel as to how to handle this. I don't know in whose jurisdiction it would be to decide just when the books are handed out. They are still passed out, I believe, approximately seven days previous to the committee or a week before the committee meetings. If that is a problem, maybe you might consider, Mr. Chairman, looking at or making a recommendation on the number of days that these things are in the hands of members of this committee. That is just a possible suggestion.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Does anyone have any response to that suggestion or any other ideas?
MR. DEXTER: I would be opposed to having less time to look at the information that is coming forward. Even as it is now, it is sometimes difficult, given all of our schedules, when we get a book this size, to be able to go through and adequately look at all of the applicants.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I don't want to prolong this. You had a comment, Mr. MacKinnon?
MR. RUSSELL MACKINNON: I was just going to suggest, Mr. Chairman, perhaps the committee should get a legal opinion on the issue of confidentiality.
MR. CHAIRMAN: If that is agreed, we will get a legal opinion on the issue of confidentiality.
MR. DEXTER: Mr. Chairman, what do we need a legal opinion on? (Interruptions) It is confidential or not confidential.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, we have legal counsel on staff. That is what we pay them for. We don't necessarily have to accept their opinion. I could certainly secure Mr. Dexter's legal opinion but I don't necessarily have to abide by it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Perhaps you could sharpen up the focus of what you are asking for, then.
MR. MACKINNON: I think it would be helpful, Mr. Chairman, if you, as Chairman of the committee, were to ask our legal counsel for the committee what their thoughts are on the issue of confidentiality. It is there for a purpose. I don't know all the dynamics of it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I explained to you the purpose. Is there any other purpose besides that?
MS. MORA STEVENS (Legislative Committees Coordinator): The reason the books are actually confidential is because there are résumés that are attached and those are, under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, never allowed to go out. The list, itself, becomes public once this meeting starts. These names, there is always a list, a copy, and it is faxed to some of the media once the meeting is over but the reason the book was actually deemed confidential, and that came from Cabinet, was an opinion from the FOIPOP officer, Darce Fardy, because of the résumés being attached.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I could get legal opinion as to whether it would be, to protect confidentiality, wise to change the amount of time that the names are in the public domain, if that is what you are asking for.
MR. MACKINNON: No, Mr. Chairman. One final comment. I, too, don't want to delay the process but you suggested at the beginning to just do away with the issue of confidentiality altogether.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, there is another option, too, if you want.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, if I just might go back in history a little bit. There was a subcommittee struck of this Human Resources Committee in 1998 that established the guidelines that we have today before us. Representing the NDP was Eileen O'Connell, representing the Liberal Party was Keith Colwell from the Eastern Shore and I represented our caucus. We felt that privacy and confidentiality should be maintained for the nominees because they are only nominees until they come before this committee. Résumés can be disclosed, I believe, if the remuneration is over $100 per day. We felt that in the interest of attracting good quality candidates, not everybody would want their name out in the public domain. That was another consideration.
I guess what I am saying is, we didn't feel we had to go out and seek a legal opinion. We felt, as MLAs representing our respective Parties, that that was a decision that most people would support and so far, at least up until today, there hadn't been any breeches, to my knowledge. Dr. Smith said there had been in he past but I don't recollect that there had been.
DR. SMITH: Maybe what I meant is not to the media but it is discussed freely among other members, other than the committee members.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to be clear. When I made my comments, I commented because number one, I was involved in the TV last evening and I felt that I should explain my actions. I have no knowledge of anyone releasing anything, and I don't agree with that. I think what Brooke has just said is important, that people are coming forward, they are baring their soul and some of their interests in other matters, and that should be private until they are declared.
I certainly support the confidentiality. I don't mean to be flippant about it and minimize it in any way. This is a severe breech. It could happen anywhere. I don't know if it has happened in a caucus, if it has happened in the committee, or a secretary, or someone who has access to this has leaked this to the media, but it has been leaked.
I think, as Chairman, you are perfectly right in saying, what can we do about it? We have a responsibility as a committee to do something about that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: What should I do then? I don't want to prolong this. We have a busy meeting.
MR. DEXTER: I think the point is made. We all understand our responsibilities in this regard.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, we will move on. Hopefully I won't have to bring this up again. If I do, then we will have to change the way in which things are done.
The subcommittee report - none of the subcommittee members are here - I want to apologize that it took so long to write it. But it is written and the copies are there to take to the various people who are members of the subcommittee. I was hoping to ask subcommittee members to stay behind afterwards so we could get a meeting to go over it. Perhaps you could ask Eileen and you could ask Don to give me a phone call, because we would like to move on that as quickly as possible to make sure that there is unanimity on the subcommittee on that report. It is, at this stage, just a draft report but I am quite excited about it and hope that it will get unanimous support. That is it in the manila envelope.
MR. MACKINNON: I wasn't sure. It is marked "confidential".
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes. I did that deliberately. (Laughter)
MR. MACKINNON: I rest my case.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a long list of names in front of us. I thank you for being willing to extend the time from 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. There are some procedural or process issues that I have already picked up. I have queried the various departments about it and I have letters. You should all have letters. I just want to make this clear. There is one letter you should have concerning the Acadia appointments, signed by Dennis Cochrane. This did not follow our usual procedure and so the precedent that has been established in the past with all these things, where we don't follow our guidelines, is that we can bring the names forward but it needs unanimous support by the committee. That has been our precedent. So that is why we ask for these letters and if the committee unanimously wants, in that specific instance, due to the information that is contained in the letter, to allow the names to go forward, we can do that. That is the precedent that we followed.
There is a list, an explanation that you have. I apologize that you just got it this morning. I had asked that it go out to everybody before that, so my apologies. I don't know if you have had a chance to read it yet?
The next letter that you have, dealing with process, has the names for the Art Gallery of Nova Scotia, Board of Governors. In the Acadia list, the problem was, they weren't properly advertised, or applications were not asked for through the proper procedure. In the Art Gallery case, some of the names did not go through the screening panel. You have a letter explaining that.
Again, our procedure is that on issues where we break our own guidelines, it has to be by unanimous consent. I am not going to call for a vote in the regular fashion on those two departments and those two agencies, boards and commissions because our precedent is unanimous consent. Am I right?
MS. STEVENS: Yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The third one is not really a process one because the process was followed in terms of the Department of Health. What it is, is further explanation just to make clear to everybody, we have the listing of all the names on each of the district health authorities. Some of them come from community health boards and they are there just for our information. The chairs are listed there just for our information. The names that we will actually be voting on are the ones that are ministerial appointments. You also received a list that came out - and again, I am sorry, it came out just at the last minute - indicating the terms that these individuals are being put on, since they have to, with these new committees, have turnover on the boards - some have three years, some have two years and some have one year terms - so you should have that as well.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, the two-thirds appointed by the minister from among the nominated people by the community health boards are also included?
MR. CHAIRMAN: They are included but my understanding - and I wish Mr. Spurr was here - is that we cannot override those names.
MR. TAYLOR: I am not suggesting that we can or cannot, but they are included in our books.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, they are included in our books.
MR. TAYLOR: So I would think (Interruption)
MR. CHAIRMAN: But they are there for information purposes I understand. Is that not true, Mora?
MR. DEXTER: This is what the letter from Minister Muir says. "The individuals identified with 'C,' . . .", and he is referring to his list, ". . . do not require the approval of the Human Resource Committee."
MR. CHAIRMAN: I don't know if we can overrule that. Do you want some discussion on that? My understanding is that those names are just there for our information and we are only going to be voting on the names that are put forward by the minister himself this morning.
MR. DEXTER: As I understand it, the process is set out in legislation?
MR. MACKINNON: Yes.
MR. DEXTER: It says that it does not require.
MR. MACKINNON: That is correct.
MR. DEXTER: It sets out the process by which they are appointed and doesn't include this committee, so there is no need for us to vote on those members?
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's my understanding.
MR. TAYLOR: Just perhaps in future, Mr. Chairman, the respective ministers, if the situation arises, might make that clear on the yellow pages, so if we take an opportunity as a committee to move some names en bloc we don't have to make the distinction, it has already been made for us instead of having additional correspondence come in during the course of the meeting.
MR. CHAIRMAN: A point well taken.
MR. DEXTER: As they aren't here when we get to one of the boards I have some comments I would like to make with respect to the appointment of the community health board members but only for the information of the committee and perhaps . . .
MR. TAYLOR: Is that the NDP candidate for Antigonish?
MR. DEXTER: . . . that should be brought to the attention of the minister. I am sorry, I didn't hear what Mr. Taylor had to say. I am sure it was enlightening but I missed it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So we are clear then on the three issues on the Art Gallery nominees, the four names - are the four names listed there?
MS. STEVENS: Yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: On those four names, the other ones went through the screening panels, I will not call for a vote, it will have to be unanimous consent and on the Acadia Board of Governors, again I will not call for a vote, it will have to be unanimous consent because both of those did not follow the guidelines that our committee had set down. On the district health boards, we will be voting only on the candidates put forward by the minister, the others are there for our information. We can comment on them if we want but we will not be voting on them. Is everyone clear?
With that being said, let's get into the booklet now. You may have noticed that one of the pages was turned around, but it was fairly clear because they are listed in order, and we will go in numerical order for the district health boards. So we will start with the Department of Agriculture and Marketing. As usual, our procedure again is to vote them en bloc, although we give freedom to discuss individual names. I assume that you are happy with that, with the long list in front of us that we will vote them en bloc but you will have to freedom to discuss individual names. If there is a list that you don't want to do en bloc, then you better speak out before someone makes a motion and ask for us to look at them individually.
Please give us the department and the agency, board or commission for the record when you are moving them. We will start first with the Department of Agriculture and Marketing.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I move the appointments for the Dairy Commission of Nova Scotia, Enid Cooper and Hattie Dyck.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion on the names? I still want to register a little protest. I think the résumés from the Department of Agriculture are too skimpy. I know we have allowed them to do that but I will make my point again.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, just for general information, these appointments are for one year terms and usually they are for three years. The reason they are for one year is, as I understand it, a consequence of the new Farm Act that is being employed. These two people have had extensive experience in the agricultural community.
MR. CHAIRMAN: These are actually both reappointments.
MR. TAYLOR: Yes, just for one year.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
The motion is carried.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I so move the name of Gabrielle Morrison to the Certified General Accountants Association of Nova Scotia under the Department of Business and Consumer Services.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have had the motion. Is there any discussion?
MR. DEXTER: My understanding is that there are currently no members on this board, so this will be the only member. This person can't convene a meeting, I assume they must have quorum requirements of some kind. Maybe it is just of the appointed members, in which case they would have 100 per cent membership. (Interruption) It seems odd that they would only bring forward one person.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you want me to write a letter asking why? I would be happy to do that because it does seem odd, as you say.
MR. DEXTER: Sure.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Could we write a letter just asking what the rationale is for that?
MR. MACKINNON: We could have this newly appointed member write a letter to the committee or the government asking that sufficient members be put on the committee.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Again, under the Department of Business and Consumer Services.
MR. WILLIAM DOOKS: Mr. Chairman, I move under Embalmers and Funeral Directors, Board of Registration, to appoint H. David Brown as a member.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Again, under the Department of Business and Consumer Services, the next block of names.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I move the names of Charles R. Lorway, Kent L. Noseworthy and Judith A. Patterson as members of the Real Estate Commission of Nova Scotia.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion? Again I will make my hobby-horse point that they are all from Halifax-Dartmouth. Is there any reason why? Is this committee Halifax centered?
MR. BARNET: They are not all from Halifax.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, two from Halifax and one from Dartmouth.
MR. BARNET: No, the first one is from Sydney.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, I take back by objection. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The next block we are not voting on in the usual fashion, it will have to be by consensus. You have the letter in front of you by Dennis Cochrane. It should have been sent to me, not to Jim but anyway, the information is there for you. The advertising didn't go out because of the bill before the Legislature. They are asking for permission to put these names on for six months only and then they will follow the procedure. Is there any discussion at this stage?
Mr. Estabrooks.
MR. WILLIAM ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, I am interested in the term bulk advertising, particularly with this controversial, at times, process - let's face it - that we went through during the last session of the House. Does bulk advertising include in the Acadia Alumni News, or whatever, or is bulk advertising strictly this sort of thing in our daily newspapers? I think it is of some consequence and I have received a number of calls from
Acadia alumni on the matter with regard to advertising. So, I would like clarification please or is it possible, I suppose I should ask, that an ad actually be run in the Acadia Alumni News?
[9:30 a.m.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: You have two questions, one is a point of information and my understanding is the bulk advertising is The Halifax Chronicle-Herald, The Daily News and The Cape Breton Post, and that was decided by the committee. It did not go out in that bulk advertising. We have had instances before where, because of timing, there have been separate ads placed in those three papers and we, as a committee, allowed that to happen. Whether you want to extend the advertising to other media is a question that we could discuss. At present, that is not the procedure of the committee, because I imagine it is a cost factor. Mora can explain it a bit further and then we will continue.
MS. STEVENS: One of the reasons the bulk ad that the subcommittee decided upon was put together, was because people couldn't pick up on the individual ads all of the time, so it was put in one big ad. That has never deterred the departments from advertising on their own if they do not get enough applicants from the bulk ad, or they can do it in any of the local papers. The Department of Agriculture and Marketing does it all the time, they put it out in their newsletters and feel that it gives a better quality of candidate because it gets circulated. As a committee, to do it for one particular board, to say you must advertise here, would be highly irregular, but it could certainly be suggested to the Department of Education that they might want to do this because of the situation. It is not really something we have determined that you can do for one individual board. That was the whole idea behind the bulk advertising, to get it out to the public.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Thank you for that.
MR. DEXTER: I notice that two of the proposed members are reappointments and two are new appointments. I guess the question is if there was no advertising, where did the new names come from and who recommended them?
MR. CHAIRMAN: It should state in the letter, I think. Well, it doesn't really state very clearly where it comes from, does it?
MR. DEXTER: I would understand if they were simply asking for a reappointment for an interim period, while you are attempting to generate names. Given the controversial nature of the board, when you are appointing new members who haven't been tested through the screening panel nor have come through a public application process, one of the ironies for me is I know one of the proposed members and they would seem to me to be an excellent selection for the board. At the same time . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: I am trying to quickly read the letter and I can only assume - it is just an assumption - that these names were in the file already, because it states that in all other respects due process was followed, that applications were received and screened. So, it can't be applications for any bulk ad, it must have been applications received last year and those are the names they were working on. I don't know if you have any further information, Mora?
MS. STEVENS: I know the Acadia University Foundation was certainly advertised in the bulk ad but I know the board of governors was not.
MR. CHAIRMAN: When people apply, how long are those names held in the computers? It is up to four years, isn't it?
MS. STEVENS: Oh yes, at least. Some of the departments have hung onto the applications since 1993.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So I assume that is where the names came from but it is a point well taken, it doesn't really say in the letter.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, if I could enlighten you, there are letters included in our packages of the nominees, and the dates are quite self-explanatory.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Could you draw that out for me, please?
MR. TAYLOR: For example, Mr. A. William Cox, his letter is dated February 21, 2000, if that is any help to you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: But how were they solicited? That doesn't answer the questions. (Interruptions) As in all institutions, I assume the board of governors are asked to provide names. Usually it is a procedure where we just accept what the university asked for and that has been the procedure. I assume that is one of them as well but I don't know, the letter does not specify.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, as you know, the guideline questions are attached to each name. If you were to look at Guidelines 9, 10 and 11, you would perhaps find the answer to your questions.
MR. CHAIRMAN: It would be nice if we could page reference these things; I know, it is impossible to do.
MR. DEXTER: That is rather cryptically explained, what you are saying. I have read through the sheet and they say that they weren't put forward by the Governor in Council, they weren't nominated by an organization but they still don't say where the nominations are coming from.
MR. TAYLOR: I think we heard earlier that these positions were advertised in the six month block advertising that went out. The letter is dated . . .
MS. STEVENS: No, this wasn't.
MR. TAYLOR: This wasn't advertised?
MR. ESTABROOKS: No, this one is not.
MR. CHAIRMAN: It really doesn't answer the question because it just says, "If a candidate for appointment has been nominated by an organization", not applicable is the code there. Any further discussion on these names?
MR. ESTABROOKS: I want to go back to the process, please, because I think it is of some concern, considering the controversy we were embroiled in and the lobby directed towards us, as individual MLAs, from Acadia alumni. Is it true that we can ask the Department of Education to place a special advertisement for these vacancies requiring interested applicants in the Acadia Alumni News?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, we could do that.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Is it necessary to make a motion to that effect?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would think it would be, since that is not normal procedure but before you go into that, that is slightly different than the list of names. Are you saying we pass these names for six months but in the six month period, we demand that an ad be placed in the alumni newspaper? Is that what you are asking or are you just asking that whenever the next ad goes out it goes in the alumni bulletin? I am not quite clear.
MR. ESTABROOKS: If I may, speaking on behalf of my partner, we certainly will support the six month appointments. However, in the interim we believe that the Department of Education should be instructed to do this special advertisement in the alumni bulletin.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. So we will make that a condition of supporting the names. I am clear on that now, I just wasn't clear exactly what you meant. Any further discussion on this matter? We will need a motion on that, I would think, just to make sure we have it on record.
MR. MACKINNON: We have a motion on the floor.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We don't have a motion because, if you remember, I said we weren't voting on these in the regular fashion because we are breaking procedure. We would
have to have unanimity so we don't go by motion at that stage, we have unanimous consent. So the only motion we have would be the one Mr. Estabrooks is about to put forward.
MR. MACKINNON: Wait now, you didn't get my consent on it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That is why I am allowing you to speak to it.
MR. MACKINNON: How can you put it to a motion if you didn't get unanimous consent?
MR. CHAIRMAN: We haven't gone to the motion yet. You would like to speak to the issue?
MR. MACKINNON: I thought you were asking . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: No, the two are tied together, that is what I was trying to clarify. We are not going to that motion yet, so you have the opportunity to speak.
MR. MACKINNON: I oppose it.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, in an attempt to be helpful, in a sense we felt that perhaps it would be procedural, as Chairman, to ask the members if you have unanimity to proceed, yes or no, so it can be documented and it should be recorded.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, good suggestion, we will record that. Is there anything further you want to say to that, Mr. MacKinnon?
MR. MACKINNON: No, I believe Mr. Taylor is correct on that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We will call for the question of whether we have unanimity. I don't know what the procedure is, do we actually list at this stage, or . . .
MS. STEVENS: You can do it visually, or it doesn't have to be recorded.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you want it recorded?
MR. TAYLOR: No.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. We will just do it visually. Do we have unanimity on passing this slate of names?
I hear several Noes.
MR. DEXTER: In the absence of unanimity, then you would still recommend the motion that in this case there be an ad placed in the Alumni News to solicit applications.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So we will ask the department to advertise these names according to the proper procedure and, in addition, to put an advertisement in the Acadia Alumni News.
So that is the motion on the floor. Any discussion on that motion?
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: On to the next group. Again under the Department of Education.
MR. BARNET: Mr. Chairman, I so move for the Barbers Act, Board of Examiners, Donald J. Abbass and Mauro Franco Montani.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion? The question is called for. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. BARNET: For the Nova Scotia Council on Higher Education, Russell C. MacKinnon as member.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: No. (Laughter)
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a motion for Russell C. MacKinnon. Any discussion on this? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The next is again under the Department of Education.
MR. BARNET: I so move for the Women in Engineering Scholarship Selection Committee, Donna Morykot as member.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The next is under the Department of the Environment.
MR. DOOKS: For the Department of the Environment, Well Construction Advisory Board: S. Wayne Chisholm, H.T. (Herb) Doane and Jamie McDonald; I so move, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion on these names? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The next is the Department of Health in nine different districts.
MR. BARNET: Mr. Chairman, I so move for Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, all of the names listed. (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: If you would like to move them as a whole, Mr. Barnet, you would have to read each name.
MR. BARNET: Thanks, somebody else could do that.
All right, I would like to do it as a whole. For District 1 [Lunenburg/Queens] I so move Roxanna F. Smith, Christopher Clarke, George Cook, Gordon Crouse, Dr. David Evans, George A. Ferrier, Douglas H. Shinyei, James A. Smith, Jim Smith, Dr. Alexander L. Steeves, Jan O. Sundin and Ken Wilkinson.
For District 2 [Digby/Clare/Yarmouth/Shelburne] I so move Ronald Horrocks, Linda Blades, Donald C. Bower, Hubert M. d'Entremont, Dr. James W. Goodwin, Darlene Z. Lawrence, Barrie MacGregor, Gerald A. Pottier, Anne Smith, Pearl Maria Theriault, Beverley Thibodeau and Bonnie Van Tassell.
For District 3 [Kings/Annapolis] I so move David Logie, Jane Farquharson, J. Stephenson Hemenway, Preston Ilsley, David A. Hovell, Barbara Kaiser, R. Douglas Macdonald, Steven Michael Menzies . . .
MR. DEXTER: Pardon me, Mr. Chairman, we had this discussion before we started that the only names we were going to be dealing with were the names put forward by the minister. It seems to me that the appropriate procedure would be to go district authority by district authority on the minister's names only. We don't have to discuss those . . .
MR. BARNET: You could have stopped me at one if you had a problem.
MR. DEXTER: I was trying to but unfortunately . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: Sorry, I was off getting coffee. Mr. Dexter is right about the only names you need to read into the record are the ones by ministerial appointment. However, I understood that you wanted to move them en bloc, all districts.
MR. BARNET: That's right.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Maybe we should move back to that, with your permission, Mr. Barnet, and have a motion on accepting them en bloc, all the districts together, and if that passes then we will read the four names and if it doesn't we will go back to district by district. What's your advice, Ms. Stevens?
MS. STEVENS: We certainly can table the motion that has been moved even though it is sort of in the middle of being moved. We can go back. The problem is every time we have had names before us that have come whether or not we need to approve them, we have always put them in the record and voted on them. It was decided by the subcommittee back in 1998 that we didn't need to see certain ones that were brought forward - actually it was from universities, they had a discussion on Dalhousie and things like that - if the minister just accepts the recommendation, they didn't need to come forward and we didn't even need to see them. Now, these have been put before us for information but we never had a case where we haven't had a form that we haven't voted on and a name.
Now, Jim Spurr isn't present but when I called him, because we were wondering about processing the forms, he advised me back on Thursday or Friday, before we actually processed these forms, that we would be processing all of the forms. I would assume, naturally, that means we are voting on all of the forms, because if we wouldn't have had to see them then we wouldn't have had to put them in the book, to be perfectly honest.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We need to be back to our earlier discussion then. I thought we were fairly clear that we were voting just on the ministerial appointments as according to the legislation.
MR. TAYLOR: Just a helpful suggestion. We have all the names before this committee and perhaps the mover would agree, or perhaps the committee would agree, that we would go through them en bloc but district by district, which has been the usual process. Could we do that without reading individual names, do you think, Ms. Stevens?
MS. STEVENS: Any names voted on have to be read into the record, because we have to have that record that they were the ones voted upon.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Can we go back to the letter from Mr. Muir. This is where it would be very helpful to have Mr. Spurr here. He is in Pittsburgh. "The individuals identified with 'C', representing two thirds of the membership, were put forward by the Nominating Committees established by the Community Health Boards. I have accepted the nominations
exactly as recommended. They, therefore, do not require the approval of the Human Resource Committee." I assume that Mr. Muir got legal counsel on that but I am not sure. Do you have any insight into that?
MS. STEVENS: All I know is that I contacted Jim Spurr. He is the one who actually brings them forward from Cabinet and decides whether or not they come here. On September 14th and September 15th he said they all needed to come here to be approved because if they didn't, we wouldn't have seen them. Now this is a letter dated September 22nd and it is from the Minister of Health. I haven't talked to Jim Spurr about this, I have no idea. All I know is that the names were forwarded to us because we needed to vote on them and if we wouldn't have needed to vote on them, he has never sent ones that we haven't needed to vote on and that is all I can go by.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there any insight, Dr. Smith, as former Minister of Health? Would you have any insight into that?
DR. SMITH: I had nothing to do with this bill. (Laughter) I voted against it and I don't want to be identified with it, really. No, seriously, I am confused. We have a letter where the minister is more or less saying one thing and then we have a verbal transmission from legal counsel saying something else.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Spurr is saying something else.
DR. SMITH: I would like to help but I can't.
MR. TAYLOR: I think we all agree that the names that have been put forward by the community health boards are not going to be rejected here. Darrell indicated, on behalf of his caucus, he would like to speak, maybe, about a name or two and maybe the Liberals would, too. So, Mr. Chairman, I would make a motion that we deal with these district by district, as a committee, and name by name, which has been the protocol. I would suggest we get on with it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is everyone agreed with that? (Interruption)
MR. TAYLOR: All the names that are before us today, the protocol has been either to approve, reject or stand or whatever. Let's get on with it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That will cover our bases in case we do have to approve the names, then they would be covered.
MS. STEVENS: Jim wouldn't have brought them to us if we didn't need to approve them. I talked to him the previous week to get an idea of how many forms would be coming because in that case there would have only been four or five from each of the boards, which
we would have been grateful for. That is one of the reasons I just wanted to know and he told me they were all coming forward for approval. That is the last I spoke to Jim on that and it was on September 14th or September 15th, I can't remember.
DR. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if you could clarify for me which ones are in there?
MR. CHAIRMAN: On the back page it has a "C" or an "M"; "C" is community health board.
DR. SMITH: I got you. That is what the minister's letter means, thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: In order to cover ourselves, because we have a difference of opinion here, we will read all the names into the record, we will vote on them. We are agreed, informally, that we allow the community health board names to go forward, although Mr. Dexter has already indicated he wants to speak, in an informational way, to one or two of them. That way we will be covered in case Mr. Spurr is right and we will honour the Minister of Health who wanted to honour the community health boards and their autonomy as well. So we will cover our bases and we will do it district by district, if that is okay.
Sorry, Mr. Barnet, we will go back to you right after we talk to Mr. Dexter.
MR. DEXTER: I just want to say that I consider this to be symbolic of the endemic confusion that exists within the Department of Health and within government, generally. They don't know, from day to day, what it is they are supposed to be doing and I think it is really quite regrettable that at this level they bring forward this kind of information in the fashion that it is being brought forward.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Barnet, I am sorry that . . .
MR. BARNET: Mr. Chairman, I have already read the names for District 1, so I move District 1.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there any discussion?
MR. TAYLOR: I would just like to point out, I notice that Mr. Dexter didn't reference that Alexander Steeves is a financial contributor to Chester-St. Margaret's NDP candidate, Hinrich Bitter-Suermann. He is a ministerial appointment so I think we just want to point out how fair and open this process is. (Laughter) No doubt about it, he is qualified.
MR. MACKINNON: Was that before or after he left the Tories?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there any further discussion? The question has been called for.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
The motion is carried.
MR. BARNET: I have already read the names for District 2, as well.
MR. CHAIRMAN: He has already read the names for District 2 into the record. Is there any discussion?
MR. TAYLOR: I, again, would like to note that Hubert d'Entremont is a financial contributor to the interim Liberal Leader, Wayne Gaudet's campaign in 1999.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, if I may. Aside from the footnotes that the member for the beautiful Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley is making, I looked through these résumés and at no time is it necessary for people to list their political involvement. I am interested in what you are going to say when we get to Karen Willis Duerden or Bruce McLaughlin. Those sort of comments are not necessary.
DR. SMITH: It is a public relations exercise led by Mr. Taylor.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Yes, exactly. I don't understand it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Question. Is there any further discussion on District 2?
MR. DEXTER: It is my understanding, we talked to people in Shelburne about the way in which the community health board members were picked and I understand there are no minutes of that meeting, that the ballots weren't kept, that at least in one instance, the wife of the chairman of the board became a nominee despite the fact that her husband was chairing the meeting. I think there are significant problems when you get those kinds of reports back about the process, despite the fact that that is coming out of the community health board itself. I am not sure, and I guess what I would like to ask you, Mr. Chairman, all we got from the minister was a letter saying that he accepted these. Was there any examination of the way in which the community health board members were picked, whether the meetings were held in accordance with proper procedure or whether or not there was some kind of a quorum decided, whether or not the elections were open, whether or not the balloting was carried out in the proper procedure?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I can only answer for my particular district. My understanding was that each health board put forward two names. I assume that in different districts it would be done in a different way but I cannot answer that question, Mr. Dexter, in terms of the community health board appointments. If anyone can enlighten us, please do so.
Is there any further discussion?
MR. TAYLOR: Just for the record, Mr. Chairman, the rejection connection opposite seems to take exception to members of the government pointing out the political affiliation of some of these members but perhaps they could go back to the CBC supper hour newscast last night if they wanted to see an exercise in so-called public relations. So just to be fair, this isn't the first time that different members have pointed out how well connected some members are. So let's not just try to portray it as being something that government does from time to time. What is fair for the goose is fair for the gander.
MR. DEXTER: I don't think what I said dealt with that at all.
MR. CHAIRMAN: No, he was responding to Mr. Estabrooks.
MR. DEXTER: What I wanted to ask, Mr. Chairman, in relation to this, were you contacted directly by any members requesting an appointment to this board?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I don't appoint people to the board.
MR. MACKINNON: That wasn't the question.
MR. DEXTER: The question was whether or not you were contacted by any of the people who appear on this list and asked to support the . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, as I assume every MLA was contacted by various individuals.
MR. DEXTER: I don't think so.
MR. MACKINNON: I wasn't.
MR. DEXTER: My point is this. There is an irregularity in the process by which community health board members are being forwarded and it seems to be clear that there was a lobbying effort put in place at least for Mrs. Blades, who I understand, if she was the person who contacted you, her husband was the chairman of the community health board. They went through a process which, by all accounts, was perhaps not as procedurally correct as it might have been and it raises questions. I guess that was in part why, if we are dealing with the ministerial appointments, when we know what the process is, it is set out, they are supposed to go through a particular procedure laid out by the departments. I don't have a problem dealing with the end product, I think there are lots of holes in it and we have talked about those before. But now we are being asked to approve people who are appointed through a process that we have no information about, we don't know what procedure was followed, we don't know whether or not it was an exercise in the proper appointment process.
[10:00 a.m.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: It is a good point. The question goes back to prior discussions. I thought we had agreed that while we would speak to the community health board nominees, that we would approve them and we would reserve the vote for ministerial appointments. I thought that was the agreement we had. Did we not agree with that?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: No.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Because this is a community health board appointment, isn't it? Linda Blades?
MR. DEXTER: These are members who were put forward by the community health boards.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That is what you are speaking to right now.
MR. DEXTER: What I am speaking to is the fact that we have two sets of nominees in these groups, we have community health board nominees and we have the minister's nominees. My understanding when I read the letter from the minister was what we were going to be voting on today was the ministerial appointments. What you decided, on the basis of representations from Mr. Taylor, was that we would, in fact, deal with all of the nominees. The process that is set in place for the ministerial nominees is known to us, we know what it is. The process for the members who come through the community health board, we do not have the same mechanism in place . . .
MR. TAYLOR: On a point of order, that member knows full well that many times names come forward to different ABCs from organizations whether it is a community health board or whatever. We deal with the names in the same fashion, regardless of the letter we had before from the minister that did, by everyone's admission, come in today, a little bit late so to speak. What we agreed to as a committee - and let's get on with it - is passing the names here.
Look, there are Liberals, Tories and NDP, yes, we all know that. Hattie Dyck, for example, President of the Colchester North Liberal Association, we just pass the names. No, let's be fair and honest here, let's deal with all the names and let's get on with it, either accept or reject them.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I could be wrong, but I thought the decision was we would go through the list of each of the names so they go into the record, in case Mr. Spurr is right, but we would honour the Minister of Health's request, who is honouring the autonomy of the community health board, whether it should be honoured or not, Mr. Dexter, that the
community health board names, that we would not vote against them. Did we agree to that, or not?
MR. DEXTER: That was not my understanding.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order. Are you suggesting that there is a difference of opinion between the Minister of Health and Mr. Spurr?
MR. CHAIRMAN: No, I am not suggesting that at all. I am suggesting that there are two categories of names and I am not clear whether we have to vote on all of them or not.
MR. BARNET: Mr. Chairman, the motion is simple and to the point. It is all of the names in the District 2 and we vote on those names. Those who don't want to vote on those names can vote opposed to it if they like.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, Mr. Dexter, is there anything further you want to add to this?
MR. DEXTER: No, I think my point was amply made.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any further discussion on District 2? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
Two abstentions for District 2.
[The motion is carried.]
MR. BARNET: Mr. Chairman, we left off on the list from District 3 with James C. Mosher, John (Jack) H. Phinney, Ralph W. Phinney and Beth Stewart. I so move District 3 with the additions.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there any discussion on these names?
MR. DEXTER: I know that Mr. Taylor was taking the opportunity to point out all of these appointments and I wonder if he could tell us what he knows about Mr. Hovell because I seem to recall him speaking on behalf of the Kings South Progressive Conservative Association during numerous broadcasts, I think with CBC and other places. He would be a prominent Conservative being appointed to this board, wouldn't he?
MR. TAYLOR: I would just like to repeat, there are Tories, there are Liberals, there are NDP, there are people on here of all political stripes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any further discussion?
MR. MACKINNON: I have a question with regard to John (Jack) H. Phinney and Ralph W. Phinney. Are they connected to each other? Are they related? Are they brothers, father/son?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I have no idea. Did you look in the résumés for them?
MR. MACKINNON: They live in two different adjoining communities.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I am sorry, I can't answer that question. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Before we get into District 4, there are only 11 names in District 4, will there be a 12th one added later?
MS. STEVENS: I am not sure. They can appoint up to 12 and this is the only board that has forwarded only 11 names so they could forward a name in the future.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I noticed the applications for this board were quite small, so they didn't have a lot to choose from. Okay, I will entertain a motion for District 4, please.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, I so move for District 4, Colchester County: Ted F. Jordan, Krista Canning, Lloyd Gibbs, Armand G. Goodick, Joan Jamieson, Brian A. Knox, Ancel Langille, James LeFresne, David E. Mason, Vernon A. McCully and Irene C. Wotherspoon.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion on this motion?
DR. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, I would just like to point out that there are two members there, one is elected to a municipal council and the other a school board; Lloyd Gibbs and James LeFresne. Is there a conflict under these appointments? I know the Act was changed to allow for a board of directors, which I thought was a good change and we supported it in the House.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, I believe he said Lloyd Gibbs was a school board member . . .
DR. SMITH: No, Lloyd Gibbs is a council member, I believe.
MR. TAYLOR: No, he is . . .
DR. SMITH: No, he is school board, yes.
MR. TAYLOR: No, he isn't. I don't know where you are getting your information, maybe it is in his résumé, but Lloyd Gibbs resigned his post with the Chignecto Regional School Board in July.
DR. SMITH: So he has resigned. Okay, I stand corrected.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any further comments, Dr. Smith?
DR. SMITH: The person who is running for council in Tatamagouche, James LeFresne.
MR. CHAIRMAN: This is a name put forward by the community health board. Okay, the other information item is that you will note in the letter from the minister that Mr. Jordan will be a member but not the chairman, the chairman will be picked later for that district. Any further discussion?
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The next district, please and thank you.
MR. DOOKS: Mr. Chairman, I move for District 5, Cumberland County: Bruce R. Saunders, Jacqueline Beal, Dora Fuller, Ruth Main, Beryl A. MacDonald, Doug Marshall, Nancy McLelan, Veronica Richards, Ronald E. Scott, Doris Soley, Howard Spence and Dr. Krystian M. Szczesny.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion on these names?
MR. DEXTER: You raised a question about the appointment of the chairs to these boards. I know that Mr. Saunders is a contributor to Ernie Fage's campaign and Vice President of the Cumberland-Colchester Association but over and above that, how was it that the minister decided on the chairs?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I have no idea.
MR. DEXTER: In many cases, you get the opportunity to compare these résumés with other résumés of the people who are being appointed. To be frank, there seems that there would be certainly more experienced people who have come forward in the application process and have a legitimate call on chairing these committees. I am just wondering, why is it we have no information on how the chairs were selected? (Interruption)
MR. RONALD CHISHOLM: Mr. Chairman, we haven't gotten to District 7, the one for Antigonish/Guysborough yet, but when you are talking about financial contributors, Colleen Cameron, who is going to be the chairperson for the Antigonish/Guysborough/Strait-Richmond authority, was a financial contributor to the NDP, Charlene Long's campaign, so what are we talking about here?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Chisholm, if we could confine our comments to District 5.
MR. BARNET: This is now becoming a contest of who contributed to who?
MR. RONALD CHISHOLM: Who contributed the most, I guess.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I am looking at the legislation, which you all have copies of, and it simply states in the legislation, in Clause 12, "The chair of a board of directors shall be appointed by the Minister from among the voting members of the board." So they would have to be voting members of the board and among those voting members, the minister, according to the legislation, will pick the chair. That is what it says in Bill No. 34. Any further discussion on these names?
MR. ESTABROOKS: Hold it, I want to go back to the chair for a minute. Are you telling me that when I apply for one of these ABCs, I don't apply to be the chair?
MR. CHAIRMAN: There is one letter where the person applied to be chair that I noticed. I have no information on that, the only information I have, Mr. Estabrooks, is what the bill states, that the minister will choose among voting members of the board to be chair.
MR. ESTABROOKS: When we did District 4 did you say the chair would be picked by the district or . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: No, I just referenced the letter we have from Mr. Muir that Mr. Jordan has declined Mr. Muir's invitation to serve as chair but will stay on as a member of the board, so a chair will have to be picked later. That was all I was referencing, by the minister according to the legislation.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: We will move on to District 6. Does someone wish to move these names?
MR. BARNET: Mr. Chairman, for District 6 [Pictou County] I so move Harry Inder, Nancy M. Clarke, Nancy Fraser, Janine Hagan, Norman Lord, James MacArthur, J. Arthur MacDonald, Kenneth P. Maclean, Linda Muir, William J. Palmer, Robert E. Priske and Richard B. Shaver.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion on the District 6 names?
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: On to District 7.
MR. RONALD CHISHOLM: Mr. Chairman, for District 7, Antigonish/Guysborough/
Strait-Richmond we have Colleen Cameron as chair; the Honourable N. Robert Anderson as a member, who was a former candidate for the Liberal Party, I believe, at one time . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: If you could just read the names from the start and then you can make comments.
MR. RONALD CHISHOLM: Patricia M. Bates, A. Kevin Beaton, Wayne Boudreau, Donald Dunbar, Robert Humphrey, Ann Gottschall, Magdalen Lowe, Sharon MacInnis, William MacNeil and Wendy Panagopoulos.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion on these names for District 7?
MR. RONALD CHISHOLM: I might point out that William MacNeil was also a candidate at a previous point in his life for the PC Party, so we do have three candidates for three different Parties on these health boards.
MR. TAYLOR: While we are at it, I wouldn't want to miss the opportunity to point out that retired Judge N. Robert Anderson was a financial contributor to the 1999 campaign of former Guysborough-Port Hawkesbury Liberal, Ray White. As you know, Mr. Chairman, that information is available for public consumption.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there any further political trivia that people want to add?
DR. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, I brought this up before but I wasn't clear on the ruling. There is a person here running for municipal council, I believe; is that a conflict should that person be elected? That was my earlier intervention and I guess I just let it go.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I am sorry I didn't answer you, Dr. Smith, but my understanding would be that that is not allowed by the legislation. If the person wins the election then they would have to resign from the health board and a new person would have to be put in.
On District 7, any further discussion? The question is called for. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: District 8, Cape Breton.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I move the name of Donald J. Ferguson as Chair and member of the District 8 board; also the names of Norman R. Connors, Mildred V. Evans, M. Brenda Gillis, Yvon J. LeBlanc, Wayne J. MacAulay, Dawn MacKeigan, Paula McMullen, Catherine Power, Carolyn Toomey, Dan Yakimchuk and Jon Yipp.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussions on these names?
MR. DEXTER: Just one. I realize the applications go in and they are vetted through the process and selections are made but when the minister decides that they are going to put forward the name to this committee, do they contact the individual and say to them, look, we are intending to put your name forward?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I understand that that is the case.
MR. DEXTER: In contacting some of the potential members, the first notice they had that they were on the list to come forward was when they spoke to us.
MR. CHAIRMAN: It would seem to me that the proper procedure would be to indicate to the member that yes, their name is to go forward.
Any further discussion? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: On to District 9.
MR. BARNET: Mr. Chairman, I so move for District 9 [Capital Region] Bruce V. McLaughlin as Chair and member, Katherine Aucoin, Anthony (Tony) Benson, Linda M. Best, Garnet Burns, Elizabeth Cameron, Joeanne Coffey, Pamela Dean, Karen Willis Duerden, Peter M. Hart, Dr. Ed Kinley, James A. McAllister, Dr. Mary F. Moriarty, R. Blaine Pemberton and Eve Wickwire.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussions on these names?
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, I have looked very carefully at the résumés, particularly for this board. I have in front of me Bruce V. McLaughlin - and I agree with what you said earlier, it would be really nice to have these paged so I could refer to them - who says under his letterhead, Russell Piggott Jones, in the second paragraph, "Although I have never been directly involved in the delivery of Health Care Services . . . ", and then he outlines some of his other experiences, all very impressive and involving a lot of legal commitments and various other things; he is applying to serve as a member for District 9.
Then I look at Karen Willis Duerden, for example, who has previous experience; she is, for example, a Nova Scotia Teachers Union Past President, she has experience here on the Board of Directors of the Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, but let's look at a couple of the medical doctors that are here. Let's look at Dr. Ed Kinley, aside from the fact that he was - here's a good fact for you - a former QEH football team captain, now there is an impressive thing. My point is this. (Interruption) It went right over your head and between your legs, I will explain it later.
Mr. Chairman, my concern comes down again to the fact that someone such as Karen Willis Duerden doesn't become the chair, she is a member. I know it is at the minister's discretion but it concerns me that this particular gentleman has applied to be a member, he admits that he has no experience at all in the health care services business, if we can call it a business. There are other people there who have this experience. This is an important position, as the chair, not just as the member, and it concerns me that the minister would not appoint some of these other people.
Now, we can get to the politics of this because I have been given the information also, but I am looking at it particularly in terms of the fact of the background of someone I personally know, am a friend of - Karen Willis Duerden - yet the chair is an applicant, with a strong legal background who says he has no experience in working in the health care system but he is the chair. Give me the consistency here if you would, please?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I won't attempt to give you the consistency because it wasn't my decision.
MR. BARNET: Mr. Chairman, it is not a matter for this committee, it is a matter for the minister to decide. If the member has a problem with who the minister decides . . .
MR. ESTABROOKS: I do and I will vote against it.
MR. BARNET: Mr. Chairman, if the member has a problem he can take that up with the minister and let's vote on the issue. Thank you.
MR. ESTABROOKS: But, Mr. Chairman, could members opposite understand the fact that there are some medical doctors on this board? A couple of these medical doctors would probably be just as suitable a chair of this as this particular Mr. McLaughlin from Dartmouth.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, I would just point out to the honourable member, all members around this table and probably all people in this room have sat on committees from time to time and I don't think a chair should be placed on any higher pedestal, with all respect, Mr. Chairman, than anybody else. I think all people are qualified when they sit around the table, contribute in a democratic forum and I take exception to somebody suggesting that one person out of all of these names should be the chair. If you feel strongly, honourable member, about this person who I think ran for the Liberals in your riding or something, if you feel strongly about her, perhaps you suggest that she take it up with the minister.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any further discussion on this? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Now, we have gone through the district health authorities. I am at your good pleasure. Do you want a five minute break or would you rather keep plowing on?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: No, keep going.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We will continue with the next section, the Department of Housing and Municipal Affairs.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I so move the name of Mr. Arthur C. MacKenzie as a member of the Metropolitan Housing Authority.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The Department of Justice.
MR. RONALD CHISHOLM: Mr. Chairman, I would so move for the Securities Commission of Nova Scotia: R. Daren Baxter, Kenneth E. MacAulay, R. Kirk MacRae and Darren S. Nantes as members.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The Department of Labour.
MR. DOOKS: Mr. Chairman, I move for the Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Council: Rick Clarke, Michael A. Lowe, Archie MacKeigan, Gary Slauenwhite, Phil Veinotte and Rob Wells.
MR. MACKINNON: The only two names that I would oppose on there, Mr. Chairman, are Mr. Rick Clarke and Mr. Rob Wells. I have already expressed quite clearly my objection and concerns about Mr. Wells and my concerns about Mr. Clarke are already documented, but I would certainly support all the other names.
MR. TAYLOR: At a previous committee meeting, I had an opportunity to express some concern, not so much about these individuals, but about the fact that the composition of the Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Council is essentially to be 50 per cent employer and 50 per cent employee. My concern is that there are just simply, matter of factly, not enough non-union members on the safety advisory council. That is a concern that I still have.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, if I could add to that particular point, 70 per cent of the labour force in this province is non-unionized and I certainly concur with the honourable member. If you go into the agricultural community, if you go into the forestry community, the trucking community and so on and so forth, you will find that, certainly during my tenure as minister, we tried to balance it off, the interest of organized labour and these various other labour components. I really feel that we are going back to the process that helped to contribute to some of the problems prior to Westray. I am speaking from experience from my tenure there and I will certainly defend that right until the day I leave public life. This process is going backwards, not ahead.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are there any further comments? Do you want to write a letter to that effect or do you want to just note it for the record?
MR. DEXTER: I am not going to let this just die with what Mr. MacKinnon has just said. It is not only preposterous, it is offensive to suggest that the appointment of people of the calibre of Rick Clarke and Rob Wells somehow is a step backwards towards situations like Westray, that is outright offensive. I think he should rethink that and he should apologize for raising that kind of a suggestion in this kind of a forum.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there any further discussion?
MR. TAYLOR: I do feel strongly, and I don't question, as Mr. Dexter said, that these people are certainly qualified, and I am not questioning that, in fact I am going to support these names to the council, but I would like to see a better balance and perhaps, Mr. Chairman, you could, if other committee members feel that way, and I am not sure all do but perhaps we could deal with the motion we have before us that Mr. Dooks placed and then I could possibly make a motion that you would send a missive off to the Minister of Labour.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would all those in favour of this block of names please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions? One Nay.
[The motion is carried.]
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, I would make a motion that you, on behalf of this committee, send a missive to the Minister of Labour asking him to take a look at the composition of the employer/employee make-up on the Occupational Health & Safety Advisory Council and, if warranted, provide better balance between union and non-union memberships.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a motion on the floor. Is there any discussion on the motion?
MR. ESTABROOKS: So is the mover suggesting that the Minister of Labour now designates - because this bulk ad goes out there and people apply. Are you saying that special attention should be drawn to the fact that of the seats on this board one should be a non-union member of the workforce? How do you attract attention to that issue?
MR. TAYLOR: Is it okay to respond, Mr. Chairman?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, please do, Mr. Taylor.
MR. TAYLOR: I guess, as has been pointed out earlier, there are different sectors out there, namely non-union industries that are not represented and I would like to see some more balance and it is no more than that. I am not questioning the ability of the members we appointed today to perform the necessary functions that are required but what I am saying is I would like to see some balance. I frankly don't believe that there are enough non-union employees on that advisory council and it is no more than that, honourable member.
MR. DEXTER: Are you suggesting the interests of non-union employees are different than the interests of unionized employees in the area of occupational health and safety?
MR. TAYLOR: No, but I have to wonder if you are.
MR. DEXTER: You are the one making the suggestion.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. MacKinnon, did you have your hand up for a comment?
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, again in response to my colleague to my right, it has nothing to do with the credentials of Mr. Clarke or Mr. Wells or any other member per se, as distorted as the honourable member for Dartmouth-Cole Harbour would like to make it look. It has nothing to do with that. It is understanding the process and the flaw within the process that has contributed to some problems from the past.
[10:30 a.m.]
I found this from experience. The Federation of Labour would make the recommendation to the minister as to what representations labour would have on the board. Now, any individual rank-and-file, organized-labour employee who would like to make an application has to be screened through that central office (Interruption) I am speaking from experience. Now, with all due respect, I do have the floor. If somebody else wants to take issue, that's fine, but I am speaking as I know.
Unless that person is recommended through that central office, they are going nowhere. There is a tremendous amount of talent within organized labour that will never see the light of day at a board such as this, that has as good and refreshing points of view, and talents to offer, but because of the process within that structure, will never see the light of day. I tried to grapple with that.
There is also the fact that there is a tremendous amount of talent and expertise in various issues, such as I mentioned - in forestry, fishing, trucking, you name it - representing over 70 per cent of the entire labour force in the Province of Nova Scotia that will never see the light of day because of the way this structure is set up. That is the issue at hand.
So long as the recommendations come from Mr. Clarke, who also not only sits because of his dual position as president of the Federation of Labour and the executive director - he has two positions under the definition of the Act. He is both an employer and employee. He is sitting with two hats. That is the flaw in the process. That is a problem that I dealt with, with the deputy minister, the senior staff, the Director of Occupational Health and Safety and, indeed, with the council. I could go on and on but that is just an example. I am not speaking from partisan politics, as much as my colleagues would like to draw it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a motion on the floor.
MR. MACKINNON: It is a much bigger issue.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Does anyone want to speak to the motion?
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, in support of the motion, perhaps I could just offer this one example. I am not coming from the same corner as the member for Cape Breton West is, although, I, perhaps, understand what he is saying. I just want to throw this example out. The trucking industry in Nova Scotia is one of the largest employers in this province and right across Canada. But the trucking industry, especially the employees, have expressed to me that they would like an opportunity to gain some confidence and feel comfortable, that the different occupational health and safety laws - they don't disbelieve in workplace safety but they would like to have an opportunity to consult and an opportunity to provide input to this committee.
There is not even an employer representing that industry on this advisory council. There is a member of the agriculture industry, I believe Mr. Keddy, representing the agriculture industry. All we are saying is, let's provide greater balance. Yes, these people are qualified and I support their names going on the board.
There are different industries out there. You can't have everybody on there but, for Pete's sake, one of the largest industries in Nova Scotia, and probably the largest in this country, is not represented. Then I have some difficulty with that. Whether they are union or non-union, that is immaterial but in this case, for the most part, they are non-unionized workers. That is just an example.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Taylor. I want to move on. Mr. Dexter, you are speaking to the motion?
MR. DEXTER: Yes, and specifically to the point that was just made by Mr. Taylor. He knows his industry far better than I do but are not many of those people independent contractors who would qualify as being self-employed and, therefore, able to be appointed at the direction of the minister?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you wish to respond to that, Mr. Taylor?
MR. TAYLOR: I could just say, in Nova Scotia, for example, we have two associations; the Atlantic Provinces Truckers' Association and the Truckers Association of Nova Scotia and, although some of them are deemed to be self-employed, they also are employees of any given contractor on any given day. For income tax purposes they are self-employed but out in the general workforce they are, in fact, employees.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any further discussion on the motion? Are you clear on the motion that is before us?
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
The motion is carried. We will write that letter.
DR. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, before we go on, I missed a spot here and I want to make a point. I just have a question, if I could. On the previous ones, relative to the Securities Commission, I had meant to ask at that juncture, there are 38 applications, how many of those are females? I noticed that all those appointments are males and I was wondering if that is satisfactory to the committee. I am sorry I missed it because I was still back with the district health authorities. I don't want to take the time of the committee, but I want to go on record as asking that question. This is a position that does pay $28,000 per year, I believe; all we have appointed this morning are males.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. We have passed the names so we cannot revisit the names . . .
DR. SMITH: No, I understand that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: . . . but I would be willing to entertain a motion, if you would like, similar to the one we just entertained, where we ask the Minister of Justice to be cognizant of gender balance on the Securities Commission. If you want to make a motion like that, I would be prepared to entertain it.
DR. SMITH: Could we ask for information as to how many women had applied for that?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay.
DR. SMITH: If there had been no applications, would they consider - I suppose it is a full board now, isn't it? We have just closed the door.
MR. CHAIRMAN: But there will be future . . .
DR. SMITH: Yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Now, do you want a letter of information or do you want a motion that the minister adhere to gender balance? What are you asking for?
DR. SMITH: I would like the information as to of 38 applicants, how many were female. Then we can answer that later, perhaps, with our other recommendations.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. So we are just asking in a letter how many were female who applied to the Securities Commission, of the 38 names. Everyone agreed that I write this letter on behalf of the committee?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.
DR. SMITH: We have the son of a previous member of government there and I am concerned. It is a $28,000 a year job and I think, just in case it has not been an open process, I would like to have some documentation on it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: It is agreed I will write the letter. Any opposition to that?
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, perhaps you could tell me, or perhaps I could ask the question to Mora. Does it not say in the résumé how many people are on the committee and whether gender balance and affirmative action, all that sort of good stuff, have been adhered to?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, it does.
MS. STEVENS: If you look at Guideline 5, "Does the ABC currently meet the affirmative action and gender equality policies of the government?", they actually state on each one, not since the expiration of the female member on June 3, 2000. But then they go on to say, for each of the candidates, that the experience and stature is desirable, in any event, for the person who is being appointed to be appointed. But they freely admit that they have not met their own gender equity guidelines.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So the question is, how many applicants were females and we want to ask that.
DR. SMITH: Thank you. I appreciate that and thanks for the time of the committee.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Oh, you are welcome.
We have passed the Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Council; we have passed the motion. Have we passed the motion? Yes, we have passed the motion that Mr. Taylor put on the floor. We are on to the panel. Could someone move those three names, please.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order. Do we need a motion for Dr. Smith's request?
MR. CHAIRMAN: No, he didn't make a motion. He just asked if I would write a letter and I asked if there was agreement on it, and people agreed.
MR. TAYLOR: Okay, fine.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Occupational Health and Safety Appeal Panel. Could someone move these names, please.
MR. BARNET: I so move Gerardette M. Brown, Kelly Marchand, Kenneth J. Stevens to the Occupational Health and Safety Appeal Panel.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The next block, we have a letter and I just want to make clear what my ruling is on this. The names of Peter Christmas, Camilla Farrell, Don A. MacVicar and Robert Ojolick, we will not be voting on in the regular manner because the procedure was not followed. We will be voting on those through consensus. If you accept the explanation that you got from the Deputy Minister of Tourism, then we are happy with that.
Let's leave those and let's just concentrate on Darby, Laufer, LeBrun, McKenzie, Pink and Hammond. Could someone move those names, please, to the Art Gallery of Nova Scotia, Board of Governors.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I move the names of Constance M. Darby; Dr. Srul T. Laufer; Janet A. LeBrun; Lauchlin C. McKenzie; Martin J. Pink, Q.C.; and Charlotte Wilson-Hammond.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion on those names? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Peter Christmas, M. Camilla Farrell, Don A. MacVicar and Robert J. Ojolick, you have a letter and again, this will take unanimous consent. Is there any discussion? If not I ask if we have unanimous consent to put these names on as well.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Could someone read those four names into the record, please.
MR. RONALD CHISHOLM: M. Camilla Farrell, Peter Christmas, Don A. MacVicar and Robert J. Ojolick.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have agreed through unanimous consent that they will go on.
The next group, again under the Department of Tourism and Culture, would someone move these names.
MR. TAYLOR: I move these names to the Gaelic College Foundation Board of Governors: Mary Jane Lamond, G. Joseph MacNeil, Geoffrey May and Jim Watson.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion on these names?
MR. MACKINNON: At first glance I have a bit of a problem. I recognize that there will still be two vacant positions, but given the fact that the Gaelic College is in Victoria County and none of these appointees are from Victoria County, it raises a little bit of concern. Secondly, we have a gentleman by the name of Geoffrey May being appointed to the board. As we know the Gaelic College has this gift shop on site and Mr. May also runs a large gift shop which is a competing entity. I am not sure if that would create a potential conflict of interest or not. I realize there are other members.
I remember as a young lad people being so concerned when R.B. Cameron was appointed President of Sydney Steel and he had his own steel company in New Glasgow. Everybody was saying, why are they closing the bar mill and the rail mill and the nail mill and moving the stuff out of Sydney? I am not sure if there is a comparison there or not, that is probably unfair, but these thoughts do go through your head, the potential for conflict. So I just raise this and perhaps that can be addressed in some form.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That is duly noted for the record. Any other comments on the Gaelic College Foundation Board of Governors names?
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, there are two vacancies remaining, is that what I heard?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes.
MR. ESTABROOKS: So that implies that we didn't get enough applications to even fill the positions?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Near the back you will see how many people applied; eight responses came from the advertisements that were put out.
MR. MACKINNON: I do know, Mr. Chairman, Mary Jane Lamond would be a welcome entity to this particular board with her background in music, a very prominent fiddler who is well known.
MR. CHAIRMAN: It may well have been that some of the names didn't get through the screening panel. Eight applications came in so there were enough applications, but not all of them may have been deemed by the screening panel and/or the minister to be worthy of appointment to this board. That is the only answer I can give to that.
MR. MACKINNON: Were any of them from Victoria County, do we know?
MR. CHAIRMAN: You have noted for the record that you would like to see better geographical representation. Do you want to make a motion to that effect or are you happy just to have it on the record?
MR. MACKINNON: A motion isn't going to make much of a difference. It is just that the Gaelic College is right in the heart of the Celtic community and that was the reason for putting it in that particular jurisdiction.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I have looked at that legislation and the legislation makes no reference to that but the point is well made. Do you want to pursue it any further?
MR. MACKINNON: Perhaps if you could send a letter off to the minister just raising concern about it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is it agreed to send a letter asking them to be sensitive to geographic representation?
It is agreed.
Any further discussion on this block of names?
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mary Jane Lamond certainly would be an appropriate choice to the board, but I noticed the question in Guideline 11, "Was this person solicited to apply for this position?" Who does the soliciting, the minister?
MR. CHAIRMAN: No, usually that would be, for example, the Gaelic College or Acadia. When they are solicited it is because they represent certain communities. In this case it would be the Gaelic College, I would assume.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I hope that is a safe assumption that the minister isn't doing the soliciting, although I certainly don't want to point to Mary Jane Lamond as not being appropriate. It says yes, the person was solicited. The caveat could be, by whom?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you want me to ask that question, as well?
MR. ESTABROOKS: Yes, please.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are we agreed that I ask that question also?
MR. BARNET: If the member has a question he can ask the minister himself, I suppose. Why do we have to do everything as a committee?
MR. CHAIRMAN: We don't have to, I am asking the question whether you want me to or not.
MR. BARNET: No.
MR. MACKINNON: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman. We have to be sensitive. We are already well aware of the memo that was circulated from your own constituency assistant to yourself on the solicitation of several appointees to some boards earlier this year. That certainly raises the question of independence, objectivity and fairness to this particular process. I think the honourable member's question is well taken. We all recognize that there are individuals here who are well qualified, irrespective of their political stripes and there are individuals appointed from all different political stripes and some have no stripes at all. If it is just going to be some kind of façade just to go through this process, it has been referenced previously that this is some kind of a smokescreen to placate public opinion. It really doesn't do much if the honourable member's question can't be answered.
MR. CHAIRMAN: My understanding of the precedent, Mr. MacKinnon, is that on the form they are not supposed to just indicate yes but to tell us where the solicitation was from. So I will query the minister and we will make sure they follow the precedence that we have established. You are not supposed to just have a yes, and usually Mora follows up on that and asks for further information. I will query the minister on that if the committee is agreed. That is our precedent and our procedure.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The final group of names, again under the Department of Tourism and Culture.
MR. BARNET: Mr. Chairman, I so move for the Heritage Property Advisory Council: Peter Crowell, Janet Maltby, Gordon L. Graham, Allen Robertson, Mark Sajatovich, Peter Sheehan and Wanda Szubielski.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion on this block of names?
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
[The motion is carried.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have gone through the names and thank you very much. We went through them faster than we expected so I appreciate the cooperation of the committee.
I would ask the members who have given the forms for the draft of the subcommittee report to please get it as quickly as possible to the subcommittee members. I would like to have that meeting right away.
You remember that, at the suggestion of members of the NDP caucus, we agreed that we would, on our alternate meetings, look at the role of Culture. So that will be starting up and we have a list of witnesses that we have agreed upon. That should be starting soon. Any comments or questions about that?
MR. DEXTER: I received a call from Rob Cowen whose name, I think, was on that list. He was wondering when he might be called. Would that be known now? Is he on the next . . .
MS. STEVENS: He is on the list. There was another group ahead of him on that list. What I want to do is shore up for either October 10th or October 17th, one of those days.
MR. DEXTER: Would you mind contacting him and letting him know where he is in the process?
MS. STEVENS: Sure.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So our next meeting then would be on October 17th?
MS. STEVENS: Either October 10th or October 17th.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We can't have it on October 10th, the PCs have a caucus retreat, so we will not be here. It will have to be October 17th. Does October 17th fit with the members of the Liberal and NDP Parties?
Our next meeting will be on October 17th at 9:00 a.m. We will be looking at issues of Culture at that time. Thank you very much.
We are adjourned.
[The committee adjourned at 10:53 p.m.]
