Now that the minister is no longer appointing the board chair, though, which we just voted in favour of, why are we limiting the board's ability to appoint a chairperson for.... Why are we saying “90 days” now? Why have we now limited what a board can do to a 90-day period? It will simply go back to the board to...what?
This would seem to be a 90-day recurring cycle. How could the board appoint a permanent replacement? It would be 90-day terms one after the other, if proposed section 17.1 remains.
I stand to be corrected, but that's my reading of it. If the board is back to selecting its own chair, does the 90-day limit not make these short-term, three-month appointments in perpetuity?