Evidence of meeting #15 for Veterans Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was ontario.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
I'm splitting my time. I still have four minutes left in what is typically Conservative time. So Mr. Sweet is the first up, and then maybe Mrs. Hinton.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
David Sweet Conservative Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON
There's one thing I don't know whether you'll be able to articulate an answer on, which is, because of the magnitude and nature of the sacrifice and investment that veterans make, how their sacrifice and that of their colleagues of other conflicts or initiatives are portrayed in history.
I've had calls and letters regarding things in the media as well as even in museums on how their activities have been portrayed. Do you see a role that the ombudsman could play there in making sure that those kinds of things that have played out in history are set straight?
4:50 p.m.
Ombudsman of Ontario
My advice for the jurisdiction of the ombudsman is to keep it simple. I ran into this in my other job when we were defining our mandate in 1998. You shouldn't have a list from A to Z of what the ombudsman shall do and try to define everything, because every time you have a case someone will say, “Well, this falls between B and C, so technically....” Then all the lawyers get involved and you're tearing your hair out for days and weeks. So you shouldn't have a list of what you can do and a list of what you can't do, because that's just inviting legal quagmire. It's not the way to go. It should be simple.
If the government wants an ombudsman it should make it simple, all-encompassing, and that's it--or don't have one. The competence should be simple. “The ombudsman of Veterans Affairs shall oversee all Veterans Affairs initiatives, decisions, policies, and decision-making to ensure that decisions, policies, and practices are fair, just, and reasonable.” That's simple. That's the way to do it. “The ombudsman shall not review decisions of the minister as part of the executive.” That's it. Have a good time. It's simple. You get away from all the lawyer stuff.
Philosophically and legally there's absolutely nothing preventing you from doing that. It's very simple. “Every public servant shall be compelled to cooperate with the ombudsman in a prompt, full, and complete fashion. The ombudsman may compel the appearance of any public servant to advance the case. The ombudsman shall publish reports as necessary to advance the public interest.” There you go--a one-page act.
The objections you will hear as a committee, when you dig deeper through the surface of them, will be because people are reluctant to relinquish control. If you were to write a mandate like that you wouldn't have control of your ombudsman. But either you want an ombudsman who has the independence to do the job, or you don't have one.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Ombudsman of Ontario
I'm a member of the Ontario Bar. That's why I can talk like that.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Betty Hinton Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
There are a number of veterans who are frustrated by the difficulty of obtaining a disability pension or award, or by their lack of success in winning a favourable decision through the Veterans Review and Appeal Board when they appealed the initial decision.
Do you see an ombudsman position as a way to streamline cases by setting a precedent? “Here's how we handled Mr. X's problem, and here's what was wrong. Here are 25 more that have exactly the same thing.” Bang--here's the answer every time.
4:50 p.m.
Bloc
Gilles-A. Perron Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Marin, I think they did not read your résumé before the meeting. Besides referring to you as counsel, we could also call you professor, because you have also taught.
Mr. Marin, political appointments are a problem for me. How do we ensure it’s not a political appointment? In Quebec, the National Assembly found a way to do it, I think. The ombudsman is proposed by the Premier but accepted by a two-thirds vote in the National Assembly, to which he or she is accountable.
How does Ontario proceed to avoid a political appointment?
4:55 p.m.
Ombudsman of Ontario
When the position in Ontario became available, an ad was published in the Globe and Mail. A committee made up of an MLA from each political party and chaired by the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, not the Premier, reviewed the applications and called candidates for an interview. I was selected unanimously by the committee made up of a Liberal, a Conservative and a New Democrat. Each member of the committee had one vote. The Speaker of the Legislative Assembly did not vote; he chaired the committee and organized the meetings. That’s how I was selected.
Once I was selected by the committee, my name was submitted to the Legislative Assembly. There was a vote, and the result was unanimous because three MLAs—one from each party—had participated in the selection process. That is one way of doing it. The way you suggested is also a good way.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
4:55 p.m.
Ombudsman of Ontario
It works. For me, the appointment experience was positive. All of these methods ensure the non-partisan selection of a candidate.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Gilles-A. Perron Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
I think there is a risk that the era of minority governments in Ottawa will last for a while. I foresee most future governments as being minorities.
Tell me if my reasoning is right or not. I won’t be offended if you tell me it isn't right. The House could always remove the incumbent from the position, but I would recommend an appointment for a term of six years, to allow the incumbent to remain for at least two governments. If the term of the mandate is five years and the governments are only in power for two years... However, if they are in power for five years, that may change things.
So, if possible, I would like the term of the mandate to be six or seven years. I wouldn’t want it to be for 10 years: that's too long. But I would recommend an appointment for a term of six or seven years rather than five years.
I would like to hear your comments.
4:55 p.m.
Ombudsman of Ontario
I think it's an excellent position; it's very logical.
I am in favour of a renewable mandate; however, I think a term of six years is an excellent suggestion.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Gilles-A. Perron Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
In Quebec, it's five years. Yours is also for five years, I think. Therefore given the problem of minority governments we’re experiencing here in Ottawa, it seems to me it would be a good idea to extend the mandate by a year or two in order to try to protect the position of someone who is doing a good job.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Gilles-A. Perron Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Did you say a minute? I'm going to use it, you know.
Thank you very much for being here. I think you have been very informative. I am proud to have had the opportunity to ask you questions in a much more worthwhile context for both you and me. My best wishes to your family.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative