Well, one thing you can guarantee, knowing human nature—as we all do—every individual will bill the maximum amount. That's just natural.
Again, I go back to other members of other boards that I'm aware of, and one person in particular whom I called directly. There are no such things as administrative costs, so I think this is somewhat out of line.
People are appointed to these boards. They're prestigious appointments. They have a lot of influence on this significant designation of “historic site”, which means so much to many communities. To me, it is indeed an honour to serve on one of these boards. A per diem is fine. Reasonable travel expenses are fine. Do you know what? They should be doing this research and thinking on their own, on their own time, and just be thankful that they're on this particular board.
In terms of meetings, on the first page, proposed subsection 5(2) reads: The Board shall meet at least once in every calendar year at the call of the Chair, but the time and place of each meeting is subject to the approval of the Minister.
I find that very strange. Either this board is independent or it isn't. The act sets how many times the board meets, at least once a year. It could say it meets four times a year, but I question why each meeting is subject to the approval of the minister. That implies, to me, that the minister's going to have a say in the designation of a historic site, and so politics will clearly enter in; politics and partisanship will clearly enter into the designation of these sites. Why isn't the board completely independent?