Evidence of meeting #37 for Health in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was agency.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:15 p.m.
Professor, As an Individual
I'll offer two comments.
I consider myself a relatively strong and capable woman. The last face-to-face board meeting that I participated in, and I did not know it would be my last face-to-face board meeting when I left, I can honestly tell you that I left there almost in shock. I picked up my computer, I packed my stuff away, and I removed myself from the environment, because I had raised a point that I thought was a reasonable point for discussion, the tone of voice in response was raised, there was hand-waving, and I was being spoken to, I felt--it's my perception--as though I was a belligerent child.
As I said, I chose at that moment to pick up my stuff and to just leave the meeting. I did participate in a teleconference after that, and I continued to try to work with the board.
I will share with you why I finally left. The day I decided to leave the board was actually initiated indirectly. Again, I could not have anticipated that this is where it would go. You've already heard Irene say that she sent a--
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
Ms. Baylis, your time is up. You're going to have to wind it up very quickly. I'll give you—
12:15 p.m.
Professor, As an Individual
I can't do that. It's a complicated but important story.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Dhalla Liberal Brampton—Springdale, ON
I'm going back to your story, but I want to touch upon a couple of things.
I had the fortunate opportunity to work with the Infertility Awareness Association of Canada, which was founded, as you know, in 1990 to help many individuals and couples who were having challenges with infertility. When the board was appointed in 2007, there was a great deal of concern amongst that particular support group--many other couples that had been impacted and affected.
We actually had a press conference. We were joined by the executive director at the time of the Infertility Awareness Association, Beverly Hanck; Arthur Leader, who was a fertility expert; and Danny Roth, who was there representing patients. Both I and Dr. Carolyn Bennett were there at that press conference.
There was a great deal of trouble amongst many individuals by the fact that the board itself was announced on the eve before a holiday weekend, and also included many members who had spoken out against...their particular views on abortion, on embryonic stem cell research, and also the fact that there wasn't a lot of expertise with some of the board members with regard to the research component of it.
I'm going to read for you a quote that was actually done by Michael Rudnicki, who stated at that time, in a press release, the fact that the board members could steer them all “in a very conservative way, and maybe that's what the federal government wants”; that we will all have to wait and see “whether the function of this board will be politicized” and whether there is a particular “agenda” that the government is trying to promote; and that this could mean a great deal of difficulty for individuals who were trying to conceive.
I bring up this quote and go down memory lane here because I want to know from your experience, now that you've had an opportunity to serve on the board, was that a particular factor in your decision? Did you see that when you were at your board meetings?
12:20 p.m.
As an Individual
In terms of the particular board members, we certainly had different views on different subjects. It was never an issue. We respected each other's viewpoints and were able to discuss it.
That was absolutely not an issue from my perspective at all.
12:20 p.m.
Professor, As an Individual
I would say the same thing. There were people there with different views along a spectrum. We were never at the point where we were debating in great detail any matter of substance. We didn't get to the point of doing that kind of hard work.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Dhalla Liberal Brampton—Springdale, ON
My colleague Ms. Davidson brought up an interesting question.
Building on this, Ms. Baylis, you went through some of the board members who currently exist. Do you think there is a void right now within the board, and the directors who currently exist not being able to address some of these concerns?
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Dhalla Liberal Brampton—Springdale, ON
The other question I wanted to get back to was Ms. Slater, during her questioning, I think, was being asked whether or not some of the concerns she had were being brought up. I believe your quote was that it was an atmosphere of intimidation. Can you please describe to the committee what that atmosphere was like, how and why you felt intimidated?
12:20 p.m.
As an Individual
I can point to one example. When I was actually asking about the contract that we were talking about on the feasibility of altruistic embryo donation, at the time the president was making all these negative body language things. I had to ask her to please stop making all that negative body language--rolling her eyes, tsking when I was trying to ask questions--i.e., what happens if it turns out in the study that it's not feasible to have altruistic donation? I was asking because I didn't understand why AHRC would contract to do something on this.
First of all, it's in the legislation that we can only have altruistic embryo donation, so why were we looking at the feasibility of it? I asked, “So if it's not feasible, are we going to mount a public education campaign?” I was told no. I was honestly not understanding why we would undertake this kind of research, and I was made to feel stupid for asking the question.
This is just one example.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Again, like my colleague, I was hopeful that we would have some of the other witnesses because if we do have other questions, it is kind of nice to go back and forth and get perceptions.
That's my question, Madam Slater: you did mention, and my colleague mentioned, that you did have instances where you did feel somewhat intimidated. Was this the feeling of all board members?
I believe, Madam Ryll, you mentioned, too, in your opening statements some eye-rolling and some tsking.
Is this something that all board members felt, or was it your own individual perception of things?
12:20 p.m.
As an Individual
I can only speak for myself. I can't say that everybody in the room felt like that. I said it publicly in a board meeting. I asked the president to stop using negative body language. But I can't speak for other people.
12:20 p.m.
As an Individual
Actually, at that particular meeting, I know that I was shocked, and at the end of meeting I asked the chair, “Are we not all, as board members, supposed to be on the same level? We're not supposed to be treating each other like that.”
In terms of an intimidating atmosphere, there was a board meeting--I mentioned it in my statement--where a disparaging comment was made to the users of the technology. It was a comment that was totally shocking when it was mentioned. I could not believe that the president had called this group of individuals by that particular name. All of us who are here today, both current and former board members, were in that room when that comment was made.
You know, I'm ashamed that the comment was made. When it was made, it was unbelievable; I didn't know what to do with that type of a comment.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
I'm curious to find out if these were generally perceptual things of different personalities or..... Earlier you were asked how you found working with the different members of the board, and I think it was stated that you found it very respectful. There were people on the board with different viewpoints, different perceptions.
So is this a specific instance or is this the general demeanour of the board, Madam Ryll? We heard respectful in one comment, and this sounds like a different perception in another meeting.
12:25 p.m.
As an Individual
I will speak to my last meeting with the board. It was a conference call. I had repeatedly tried to obtain the minutes, as a board member, to review them, because there were issues that the chair and I were going to discuss. I had repeatedly tried to get these minutes to review them. I was blocked from doing so.
As a matter of fact, in my opinion, according to the chart we were given at a board meeting on how the minutes are written, who reviews them, and when they go to translation.... The chair mentioned that he had not seen them, and yet the president, in that phone call, said they were in translation. I immediately asked how that could be if the chair had not seen them. Then the president immediately backtracked and said, oh, they were being reviewed.
So I was in an environment where I was not supported. I felt that I was not being told the truth. And if I felt that way, that I was not being told the truth, I could no longer be a part of that environment.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
Well, Madam Chair, I'm very interested; as I said, we are going to have some other witnesses, I believe, from the board. I'm looking forward to seeing how they discuss these different issues as well.
I'm aware that my time's up.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joy Smith
You actually have a little more time, but if you're finished, that's fine.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
12:25 p.m.
As an Individual
I just want to clarify one thing.
It was from the president, unfortunately, that I didn't feel respect; it wasn't from other board members. I just wanted to clarify that for you.