Scroll down, past the welcome message, to find full list of links for POSTINGS on this website

Scroll down, past the welcome message, to find full list of links for POSTINGS on this website
Scroll down, past the welcome message, to find full list of links for POSTINGS on this website (in the sidebar to the left)


Search This Blog - Results shown BELOW Welcome Message


Scroll down past message to view posted topics

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” - Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

“‘Tis strange – but true; for truth is always strange; Stranger than fiction.” - British poet Lord Byron (George Gordon Byron)

A lot of evidence concerning abuse and corruption connected with Children's Aid/Children Services/CPS and the various related government departments and non-government organizations (NGOs) has surfaced in both the U.S. and Canada - yet, over the years, nothing changed.

This indicated that there was a larger more powerful connection at play. It did not take long to find this bigger connection. However, in the early years, there were few people who would accept the reality of these larger global connections.

Most people do not want to believe that corruption and abuse against innocent families and children exists in Canada and the U.S.. They need to feel a sense of security in the society they live in, and that need is so great that most people will prefer to believe a lie rather than face the truth. They want to believe that such things only exist in third world countries !

Understanding that even the basics of the wickedness in Nova Scotia, Canada was hard for most people to accept, we originally limited the information we posted to local concerns. This way, at least, we hoped that we could begin educating Nova Scotians about the reality of abuse and corruption connected with Children's Aid/Children Services/CPS.

However, it broke our hearts to find testimonies from parent groups throughout North America and beyond who had worked years to inform the public and had attemped to change the system, as we had, with no success. They were frustrated and did not understand why, despite all the evidence that had come forward, nothing was done, nothing changed.

We felt they were owed an explanation, so, hopefully, now is the time for people to hear and accept the "Bigger Global Picture".

The powerful connections that are responsible for abusing our innocent families and children go to the highest levels that hides behind secrecy and secret organizations.
Countless people will hate the New World Order and will die protesting against it. When we attempt to evaluate its promise, we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful-looking people." ~ H. G. Wells (1939)

Finally alternate media, first hand testimonies from people coming out of these evil organizations, and countless politicians began now declaring openly the plan for a New World Order and a one world government. Because of this, it is hoped that people will accept the evidence we are now posting concerning this evil global connection. Please view topics under "Bigger Picture" , "Agenda 21" , "Democracy Destroyed" etc .

Because of the push to form a One World Government, we are all connected in our struggle. What is being done elsewhere is being, or will be, done to us because it is the same global power which is working towards the destruction of our families and our children worldwide - And the corruption in Children's Aid/Children Services/CPS is is just one of the instruments they use to achieve this goal.

Thus far there are at least 8 powers that are struggling for this one world domination: the Illuminati, Communism, the Vatican, the Masons, the Islam extremists (understand these Islam extremists are killing fellow Islamic people who do not agree with their extreme views) and India, China, and Russia. They all use and manipulate each other but, ultimately, each wants ultimate control.

In the Christian Bible, it is prophesied that an evil Anti-Christ will set up a one World government utilizing a one world religion where all the people of the world will eventually be forced to worship him alone. It is difficult, at this time, to determine, for certain, if this Anti-Christ raises up from any of the 8 powers mentioned above or elsewhere. Please link here if you are interested in learning more about the Anti- Christ.

Over the years, we have seen the voice of the people shut down: Newspapers, and Radio stations, that were willing to write and broadcast critical articles and interviews against Children Services/CPS and government folded. And radio/media personalities, who allowed people to speak out against Children Services/CPS and the government, lost their jobs or were heavily curtailed.

Both the US and Canada have passed laws to remove our right and freedoms, including free speech: the Patriot Act, numerous Executive Orders nullifying the US Constitution. The latest US government grab for power is the NSAA that would allow the US government to put any US citizen in indefinate detention without charges or a trial.

Oath Keepers (military police and sheriffs loyal to the US Constitution - ready to defend the people against enemies "foreign or domestic" ) and some congress people, senators and US States have also taken a stand. Even concerned individuals have gone to the courts to fight the NSAA.

We believe the internet, as we know it, soon will be limited. Eventually internet use will be removed completely from the hands of the people. The time is short. The time to get this information out is now. No one is immune from the abuse of Children Services /New World Order/Agenda 21 etc. The victims can be your family, your children, your grandchildren, your nieces and nephews etc.

You cannot move away from this threat - It is global !You must not put your head in the sand! - There is a global plan to destroy the family unit and physical, sexual and mental abuse is an essential part of Trauma-Based Mind Control, one of the many mind control programs used by this global system to destroy our children. They are also using the more insidious Neuro Linquistic Programing (NLP) to alter people's value system. But the current and planned use of Electronic, Psychotronic Mind Control which can be used on people in mass is the most alarming of all ! Please view the many topics on this site under the title MIND CONTROL.

They want our children to rebel against us. They want the new generation to view the "state" as their parent.

But worse than all this, they want to kill off most of the people on this planet, and all under the guise of environmentally saving the planet. We have been declared the enemy - They openly state that we, and our children must be sacrificed for the greater good.

If this sounds extreme to you then it is because you have not been paying attention to the world events that are unfolding before your very eyes. You have been lulled into ignorance and apathy. The expansion of sports and sports arenas, the addiction to various social networks, the focus on celebraties on so called "news" shows. This has all been designed to placate the masses and to get your focus off politics and the changes that are being done to you and your family. Your attention has also been diverted to worrying about the economy and an "enemy" that shifts and changes to suit the political manipulating whims of a small powerful elite. - and this spell has been caste over you "by design". The people in the highest realm of this global power call us "stupid sheep", and we are being lead to the slaughter !

You must wake up NOW! Time is VERY short ! I suggest you start with the several topics listed under "Agenda 21" :

1. AGENDA 21/ Sustainable Development Explained: North America - US - Canada - Nova Scotia (It is recommended that you read this 1st)

2. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Population Cut/ Cull (kill) Part 1
(They want to kill us, You should question, Vaccines, Fluoride, Water, GMOs, Chemtrails, Morgellons - GMO/Chemtrail desease.

3. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Population Cut/ Cull (kill) Part 2
(Morgellons, Meat, Aspartame, No home gardens, Planned vitamin, mineral and organic food ban, Smart meters, Cancer cures, Pollution free energy and cars, Abortion, After birth abortion, Denying medical care, Killing our own troops, Gun control)

4. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Pushback - People are waking up Part 1
(States, Governors, Sheriffs, )

5. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Pushback - People are waking up Part 2
(Militia, Military, Whistleblowers)

6. Agenda 21/Sustainable Development: The Bigger picture



If we do not WAKE UP, fight back, and win then you need to seriously prepare yourself and your family for, incarceration without trial, torture, persecution, and even death.

Did you know that Obama has declared Christians to be "potential domestic terrorists"? - Especially those who believe in the promised Second Coming of Jesus Christ, who, as it happens, according to the Bible, comes to put a stop to an evil one world government.

Maybe some of these Christians and Messianic Jews know something that is very important for these times and perhaps we should pay attention to what their holy books have to say about the "End Times" "End of the Age" etc. (the 3 1/2 to 7 years just before the return of Yeshua Ha Mashiach/ Jesus the Messiah or Anointed One.

For those who want to check this out, please LINK HERE (scroll down to topic list on the right) . Beautiful pictures, fab songs, great testimonies from ex- satanists, ex-witches, ex-illuminati, ex-islamists, Christ believing Jews, etc, archeological evidence for Biblical events and most important scriptures to help you, encourage you and guide you.

May you find the path to the Creator of the heaven and earth. He foresaw these days (view topics on the "End Times" in the link above) we are living in right now and He has instructed us clearly on what we must do and what we are NOT to do. ( "The Mark of the Beast" View all scriptures on this subject HERE Revelation 13: 11-17, 14: 9-11, 16: 2, 19:20, 20:4 . Acceptance of the mark is not a matter to be taken lightly. The Bible states that anyone who accepts the mark, that one must have to buy or sell, denies Christ in favor of a false god. This decision, once made, is irrevocable, and the consequences are everlasting. - ( LINK HERE to read in context with fab pictures and music)

Get yourselves educated. Get familiar with the law and the illegal and unconstituional actions of your government . Educate yourselves about the New World Order and Agenda 21. Get vocal with the government to protect your family and children. Get into the family court and bear witness to what is going on in the name of "justice".
Above written by - Reverend Niemoeller, a German Lutheran pastor who was arrested by the Gestapo and sent to the concentration camp Dachau in 1938.

Monday, March 03, 2008

30. NS Human Resource Committee - Is it doing it's job?

NS Human Resources Committee - Is it doing it's job?
Check for updates - We are watching- You are reading - Let the politicians know

The problem of power is how to achieve its responsible use rather than its irresponsible and indulgent use — of how to get men of power to live for the public rather than off the public. - Robert F Kennedy

The Nova Scotia Human Resource Committee is a multi-party committee established for the purpose of reviewing and approving or NOT approving candidates for appointment to agencies, boards or commissions (known as the ABCs) .

Two women, Linda Youngson and Marilyn Dey, took the, then, Minister of Community Services, David Morse, to court in December of 2005 when the Minister refused to obey the law under Section 88 of the Children and Family Services Act to appoint a committee to review the Act and its implementation. In fact the Minister had not done this since 1996! They won !

[Ministers] Advisory committee
88 (1) The Minister
shall establish an advisory committee whose function is to review annually the
provisions of this Act and the services relating thereto and to report annually
to the Minister concerning the operation of the Act and whether the principles
and purpose of the Act are being achieved.
(2) The
advisory committee shall be appointed by the Minister, after consultation with
the relevant groups and individuals, and shall include
(a) two persons whose children
have been, are or may be in need of protective services
(b) a representative from an agency;
(c) a representative of the Minister;
(d) a legal aid lawyer;
(e) two persons drawn from the cultural, racial or
linguistic minority communities
(f) such other persons, not exceeding three, as the Minister
may determine.
(3) Appointments to the advisory
committee shall be for one year and may be renewed.
(4) The advisory committee shall choose one of its number to
chair the committee.

After twice requesting this committee be appointed, and the Minister refusing to obey the law, these ladies filed for court action against the Minister in June of 2005. It was only after they filed against the Minister that he reluctantly began making appointments.

We believe it is important that the public have insight into the ongoing shenanigans of the government over these appointments. They have made a farce of the Minister's Advisory committee !

This committee was suppose to be an annual committee - It has now been more than 2 years since the original full committee as mandated by law was finally appointed.
As of April the 1, 2008, there were 4 members on this committee NOT APPOINTED ! (See NDP MLA Trevor Zink's news release) The committe is NOT LEGAL unless all specified members are appointed

Because this committee has rolled on for such a long period of time, numerous people have been on and then off this committee, often leaving this committee for many long months without the legal mandate of specific members.

Most presentations to this committee were done in the first year and no audio or video recordings of the presentations were made. Because of this, the people who are now on the committee, and are now resposible for writing a report for the Minister, were not present to hear the critical and important presentations that were made.

In addition, we were originally promised by the earlier members of this committe that this report would be public, but were told later, by the newbies on the committee, that they had no obligation to make this report public - Well Shame !

If you take the time to read the exerts of the Hansards of the Nova Scotia Human Resource Committee, we have included in this article, you will be enlightened! We urge you to contact your MLA and the MLAs cited and make them aware of the fact that we are watching them and we do care. - Please feel free to cut and paste from this article in e-mails to the various MLAs. Find the contact info here: NDP , Liberals, PC .

Also check out the schedule for the HR Committee and make your physical presence known .
Location: 3rd Floor, Dennis Building1740 Granville Street

Fr Hansard for Human Resources Committee: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

MR. CHAIRMAN: Good morning, everybody. I guess for our agenda we have the appointments to the agencies, boards and commissions. We'll start with the Department of Community Services and I understand one person has withdrawn their name from that committee.

MR. HOWARD EPSTEIN: Who has withdrawn?

MR. CHAIRMAN: One of the members who applied, Chrystal Malay.

MR. EPSTEIN -NDP : Well, in fact, I think that's important information given the context within which we work. I know the usual thing in this committee is to deal with the nominees one by one. This is an unusual committee, however, because there's a statutory framework for it. Section 88 of the Statute requires certain categories to be filled in order to meet the requirements of what it is that the Act contemplates. I think we have to consider the whole range of what it is that we're dealing with here.
That person was in a particular category. It's interesting that she's withdrawn. I wonder if I could speak to this before we start dealing with the other nominees. Is that okay?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, go ahead.

MR. EPSTEIN-NDP: So here's the problem. The problem is with this particular committee, if you look at what we've been given in materials, you will see there is an extract from the Children and Family Services Act, right at the beginning. It includes Section 88 where it describes the advisory committee that has to exist. It gives several categories of people that have to be filled. One's a legal aid lawyer, one's a nominee of the minister and two people are to come from cultural, racial or linguistic minority communities. There are extra positions, but right at the top it says, "two persons whose children have been, are or may be in need of protective services . . ." So it's pretty clear that what's contemplated is an advisory committee that at least takes into account the views of parents as part of the process.
The committee can have 10 people and indeed, we're offered 10 names. Looking at what it is that we have, you'll find that there's something very peculiar that's happened in the names that we've been given. We have a legal aid lawyer and that's fine. We have the minister's representative who, in fact, works in the department and that's fine and to be expected. We have three people in the other category who seem to be okay.
We then are focused on the two other categories. One is the minorities where there are supposed to be two positions and the other is the parents where there are also supposed to be two positions. For the minorities, we have two applicants who have self-identified - one is an Acadian and one is an African-Nova Scotian, so they would certainly fit the overt wording of the Statute.
On the other hand, both of the names of the people who have self-identified as fitting the minority category work for Children's Aid Societies. So, in effect, where the minister has offered the opportunity to have his own nominee, to have others, to have an agency person, he has gone on to give us two people in the minority category, who should be there primarily on behalf of their minority communities, whose jobs are in the system as Children's Aid Society workers.
So, first, that's questionable, and the second problem is with respect to the so-called parents. Now the chairman told us this morning that one of the people in the parents' category has apparently now decided to withdraw her name, but let me point out the problem with both of the people who are in the parents' category, which is that neither of them had said in any of the material that they were parents of children who might fit those criteria. In fact, if you look at the second person [VanZoost] in that category and you read his resumé, it seems extremely unlikely that he's ever likely to have had his children apprehended or be in any kind of position in which that's likely to come up.
The point is though that we don't know; it didn't say. It didn't say in his covering letter. It didn't say in any of the material that was given to us from the department, and the same is true with respect to the person who has withdrawn; in fact, I don't think she had a covering letter, it was just sort of a short resumé. So I think that we're seeing two things. We're seeing an attempt to stack the committee with too many people from the Children's Aid Society, and that's in the minority category, and we certainly don't have parents who would fit the category of Section 88(2)(a), that is, ". . . persons whose children have been, are or may be in need of protective services . . ." So at the very least I don't think we can fill that category, and on the other one I wonder if what we ought not to do is to send back the recommendations for those two positions, the two minority positions, and ask if it's not possible to find people who aren't Children's Aid Society employees, since that doesn't seem to be the thrust of what this committee is all about.
Anyway, there it is, Mr. Chairman, those are the observations I have.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Taylor.

MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: I would just say it seems very obvious that the member has done quite a bit of research on the composition of this committee, and I would apologize to you, Mr. Chairman, and committee members, that I have not. Consequently, I believe that it may be appropriate to give some consideration to the concerns that the member has raised, but I'm not sure of the process that should follow because I think it's a very important committee that the minister is trying to establish - I think it's also important that we do get it right. I'm not sure, in terms of gender balance, what the composition there would be required, but I have some concerns about that myself. So I'm just wondering if possibly the member has a suggestion as to what he feels would be appropriate at this particular stage.

MR. EPSTEIN-NDP: Just to be clear, I think there are six people there we could approve. We've had one withdrawal, one where clearly the person [Van Zoost] either doesn't fit the category or more evidence is needed - it needs a statement from a person that he fits the category - and then we've got these other two where I'm saying we should defer and ask the department if they can't possibly find two people who fit the category who are not Children's Aid Society employees.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Colwell.

MR. KEITH COLWELL-Liberal: I, too, have concerns with this, and of course there's nobody here from the minister's office to answer any questions on this, which is normally the case anyway. The thing is I share some of the concerns that have been stated around the table by both my learned colleagues and the real question is if we did appoint six members - which again, I don't have any objection with, because I think we have very qualified people there - can the committee properly function, and if it can't properly function, why do we approve anyone until the minister comes back with the proper slated candidates?

MR. CHAIRMAN: It's a new committee. There's nobody there now. [we were suppose to have this up and going since 1990!]

MR. EPSTEIN: Some people would know that they are on the committee.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, we have Ms. More.

MS. MARILYN MORE-NDP: Mr. Chairman, I too have several concerns about the process used. If you will notice in the binder, it indicates on the summary page for the guidelines, the information that there was a bulk ad - the process, as I understand it in reviewing is that a bulk ad is sent out to several media sources and if there's not much response, then a single ad can go out and then the department is free to solicit people to submit their applications.
Now, in the summary page, for every candidate, it indicates in Guidelines 9 and 10, the information provided to us that the bulk ad went out in April of this year and then Guideline 10 says, "How many responses came from the advertisement?" Total, 15: five males and 10 females. So one would assume, I mean that says how many came from the advertisements, yet I have information from the Acting Director of Child Welfare and Residential Services for the Department of Community Services, from October 7th, that the response to the ad was inadequate, and the department then proceeded to solicit members by advising various regional and program staff to encourage interested parties to apply to the Executive Council office, which, in other words, is Cabinet.
So why are there two versions of how we got these names? I think it would have been very easy in Guideline 10 to suggest that the initial process failed to elicit the number of qualified candidates and that there was another step in the process, but it's misleading to suggest that all these names came from the ads and that they were freely submitted. Now we don't know. It may be a minor point, but it's just that this whole advisory committee has been a problem from day one. It was mandated back in 1990. The committee has only been called to report to the minister four times [actually 2 times] in those 15 years, although, under the legislation, it's required to meet and report to the minister every single year, and it's only happened four times.
The process is flawed, and this is such a crucial advisory committee, because we're talking about legislation here that actually enables the Minister of Community Services to take children into the protection of the minister, as well as provide other programs and services for children and youth at risk. So it's essential that we have a broadly representative advisory committee, giving the best advice in a timely fashion to the minister. So it's hard to know what the total number of applications really were and how many of them from that first bulk ad are actually showing up on this final list, and how many other people have been recruited [by the government] as individuals and for what reason, we don't know.
It's interesting because two women [Linda Youngson and Marilyn Dey] actually took the minister and the department to court over the fact that this committee was not set up as required under the legislation, and those two women applied for the committee. Their applications went as far as the minister, and we have no idea whether it was stopped at the ministerial level, or if it was stopped at the Cabinet level, but there are two women who have publicly admitted their strong and long-time interest in these issues, who have been impacted personally by the legislation from the department, who are willing to serve on this committee, whose applications and names have not shown up in this binder. So I just question, where are those names, and they would certainly fill one of the categories that we're questioning.
The other concern I have is that in the guidelines and policies, regarding agency, board and commission appointments, it actually says that those policies can be changed by interpretation of the Clerk of the Executive Council. So I'm just wondering, how standard are those policies if their interpretation can be changed by one person, depending on the circumstances? I have a lot of concerns. This committee needs to be fast-tracked, it needs to be set up as quickly as possible because it hasn't met since 2001 [Since 1996] . There are lots of gaps and weaknesses in the legislation. I certainly would support putting the six on as quickly as possible, because I think they would influence the minister to fill the other positions and get the first meeting set up as quickly as possible [Naive ?]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Ms. Streatch.

MS. JUDY STREATCH -PC [Current Minister of Community Services ] : Not to drag the issue on ad nauseam, but I would certainly support the views of my colleagues around the table. I, too, agree that we need to at least get this started, and if we had some names that were put forth that qualified under the guidelines. I do have a bit of a caution, though. We are looking for a linguistic, racial, et cetera, balance, but I wouldn't want to eliminate someone if they did qualify under that guideline simply because they were part of an agency or a society as well. I would just say that though I understand what the member was saying about stacking in one direction, I would just offer my own personal caution that I don't think we should necessarily eliminate them immediately because they tend to double over.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I think more information on the candidates is what Mr. Epstein is looking for. (Interruptions) It was more information on a couple of the candidates that you were looking for?
MR. EPSTEIN-NDP: What I was suggesting was that there are six people I think we can confirm today. There's been one withdrawal, so that doesn't come up. Of the remaining three, I think we have to send the last person on the list back [VanZoost] for more information. I guess what we should try to figure out is what to do about King and Landry. I'm suggesting, not that they be rejected but they not be accepted either [wishy-washy?- Watch for future wishy-washy comments by Epstein] , and the Executive Council be asked whether they can't find two people who might fit the minority category without also being agency employees.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Glavine.

MR. LEO GLAVINE-Liberal : I just wanted to say, I think that sometimes working in a committee like this and having the input of a number of members is so beneficial. What Mr. Epstein has presented, along with Marilyn, I think are excellent points, very critical points. This is a committee whose absence has been a real deficiency for the minister and for the examination of processes that go on. Just within the last two years, there was the potential loss of organizations, like Kings County Family and Children's Services, which has been a leader in this area in the Province of Nova Scotia. There was a move towards centralization and organization of these bodies, and a committee to help examine and rethink those kinds of potential ministerial mandates, in my view, is so necessary to have up and going.

I don't really like the process of splitting, some members are good to go, others we have to reposition them for possible positions. I'd like to see this whole committee appointed at one time, and that it would, however, become active very soon, that there be almost a timeline that we would set down for this. Those are my two thoughts on where we need to go with this.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Taylor.

MR. TAYLOR -PC [the government]: Mr. Chairman, like I said earlier, I think the member for Halifax Chebucto certainly has the wherewithal and has done a lot of research on the composition of this committee. I'm not really interested in somebody holding a hammer over my head or the government's head regarding a court challenge and that type of rhetoric. I really think people around this table are interested in establishing the committee to do its mandate. We're talking about the rights and the freedom of children and their families. That's what we're talking about here today. I want to make sure that we get this thing right. I'm not sure, based on the information I have and some of the comments around this table, that we do have it right at this particular time.
I'm willing to support approving the names, if the member for Halifax Chebucto would like to start. Mr. Chairman, I think we have to bring the committee into some type of being. It has to be engaged. We could come back a month later and there may be some names, once again that we don't like. I think if we're prepared as a committee to go at this one by one, then I think we should start doing that. I think the mandate's clear and we know the history of the committee, or the non-history of the committee, so to speak.
So why don't we get at it, Mr. Chairman?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Colwell.

MR. COLWELL-Liberal: Yes, as I've already stated, this has to be a balanced committee to work properly. If you [the government] pick and choose who you're going to appoint, you're not going to have the balance on that committee. I think I would prefer to see it go back to the minister with some recommendations that have been made, that we have some concerns about particular individuals on here, and let him come back with a full slate so we can go with a full committee, then they can make the proper recommendations on these issues. If you miss one side of an argument on this and one or two individuals are missing, then you're not going to have a balanced approach to this committee and it could be worse than having no committee there at all.
I can't imagine that, I think it's horrible that there hasn't been a committee in place all this time, but I'd prefer to see it go back even if we - as my colleague has said, we need a timeline on this to get this back. It's important to get this up and going. It should be a totally balanced committee, and if it's not balanced, it's not going to work. I'd like to make a motion that we send all these names back to the minister to come back with a full slate with considerations that have been put forward by my colleagues of names that they don't feel are appropriate for the committee and move from there.
[You will see later, that, by slipping in the appointmentment one by one, the HR Committee members lost sight of the bigger picture and lost count and even concern about what catergory was being filled. And the Minister was able to further stack the Advisory Committee with the wild cards " Such other persons, not exceeding three, as the Minister may determine" - Section 88 (2)(f) without hardly a whisper from the MLAs who should have been protesting]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Epstein. There's a motion on the floor, so, on the motion. (Interruptions)

MR. EPSTEIN-NDP: We just had a little huddle in our caucus about this. There seemed to be two possible courses of action: one is the motion which is just to defer the whole committee, the other is to appoint some members.
Our feeling is that we'd like to appoint some members now rather than to defer the whole committee. I understand the point the member makes about - particularly this committee which has about five different categories that have to be filled. On the whole, I think we'd at least like to get some people aware that they're appointed to the committee, even if the committee may not start meeting right away. That's really, I think, what does it for us. We'll be voting against the motion and we're prepared to support six of the nominees individually.

MR. CHAIRMAN: On the motion?

MR. TAYLOR [the government]: Mr. Chairman, I'm certainly going to speak against the motion. Again, I want to emphasize that we're talking about the rights and the freedom of children and their families. I'm confident that if we approve the names of people at the committee level that have already been vetted by the department that, in fact, we're doing a service to the children and families in Nova Scotia that have a profound need for this committee to be up and running. [Who does he think he is fooling] I'm sorry, I can't support the motion.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Any further discussion on the motion? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is defeated.
Okay, so I guess the consensus is that we go with - Mr. Epstein.

MR. EPSTEIN: Okay, I'm happy to take people through this. Mr. Chairman, under the Department of Community Services, the following people to the Children and Family Services Act Advisory Committee. I so move Katherine Briand as a member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.

MR. EPSTEIN: Mr. Chairman, I so move Lynn Cheek as a member. [This lady attempted to do the dirty work for the government by attempting to obstruct people who wanted to make critical presentations to the Advisory committee - Then she suddenly resigned after the media got wind of her shenanigans - Also, as it turned out, she was already working on a secret committee, The Child Welfare Steering Committee, that only came to light, with a published report, to the opposition and the public, shortly after the court forced the Minister to put together the Advisory Committee - Any wonder the government did not need this committte- They already had their own boys and girls working on another one ! ]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.

MR. EPSTEIN: Mr. Chairman, I so move Cheryl Gillett Harawitz as a member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.

MR. EPSTEIN: Mr. Chairman, I so move Richard B. Gruchy as a member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
[9:30 a.m.]

MR. EPSTEIN: Mr. Chairman, I so move Trena Gallant as a member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.

MR. EPSTEIN: Mr. Chairman, I so move Barbara Sowinski as a member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.

MR. EPSTEIN: And refer the three remaining names back for further information.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I guess what we'll do, we'll send a letter to the minister, along with a copy of Hansard, as to the discussion of this around the table. Is that fair? Okay. Ms. Whalen.

MS. DIANA WHALEN-Liberal: Just in that letter, when you're sending it back, if you could emphasize particularly on the representatives who are supposed to be there to represent the viewpoints and concerns of parents, that it be very important.


MS. DIANA WHALEN-Liberal: I think the intent in writing that into the Statute was that it would actually include parents who have had direct contact with children's services so that they can bring that viewpoint. I'm sure that there is a lot that they could say about the efforts as parents when you're trying to reunite your family and so on. I just think that that viewpoint, it was obviously the intention to have it on the committee in the beginning.


MS. WHALEN: And just to try harder perhaps to find somebody who represents it.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The minister will also get a copy of Hansard of everything that has been discussed on this issue.

MR. EPSTEIN-NDP: Yes, make it clear that it doesn't just mean someone who has children.

MS. WHALEN: Yes, right, that's the thing.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Ms. Streatch.

MS. STREATCH [the government- future Minister of Community Service]: Mr. Chairman, just on a final note, I think at closer examination, one of the names [VAN ZOOST] that we did ask the minister to take another look at, I think has extensive service with the Shelburne Youth Centre, the school board, et cetera, so it may be that that individual has had experience, but it's just not evident. As a parent, there may be a misunderstanding there.

MR. EPSTEIN-NDP: He [Van Zoost] has been nominated to the parent category.


MR. EPSTEIN: It may be that he was meant to be nominated in a different category.

MS. STREATCH: Maybe, yes, without stating it directly.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, we'll continue. Mr. Taylor.

Fr Hansard for HR Committee: Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Mr. Ronald Chisholm (Chairman)
Mr. Brooke Taylor
Ms. Judy Streatch
Mr. Frank Corbett
Mr. Howard Epstein
Ms. Joan Massey
Mr. Keith Colwell
Mr. Leo Glavine
Ms. Diana Whalen

MS. STREATCH-the government-future Minister of Community Services: Mr. Chairman, under the Department of Community Services, the Children and Family Services Act Advisory Committee, I so move Tim Van Zoost as a member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Epstein.

MR. HOWARD EPSTEIN-NDP: Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak to this. Members of the committee will recall that when we last met, the composition of this committee was actively discussed and at the time we put aside a number of the nominees. Mr. Van Zoost was one of the nominees we put aside at the time. You will recall that he was put forward in the category of a person whose children have been or are in the care of the department, or at risk of being in the care of the department.
At the time there was nothing in the documentation to indicate that he would fit the category and indeed reading his CV it seemed, on the face of it at least, highly unlikely that he was likely to be in that category. He has since supplied the committee with an additional letter in which he explains that he has two adopted children. One child, he says, was a private adoption, and although the department does home scrutiny, that really doesn't enter into the category of the Statute as we're looking at it. The second child, he says, however, he adopted after the child had been placed in the care of the Department of Community Services. What he's suggesting is that this, therefore, makes him fit the category.
I have to say I don't think it does. I don't intend to vote in favour of Mr. Van Zoost for membership on the committee. I want to make it clear that in wanting to do that I'm not suggesting that the man is not intelligent or likely to be thoughtful or likely to have, as he says about himself, insights about how the department is likely to work. The problem is that I think it really doesn't fit what the section contemplates. What the section contemplates is that the committee should include in it people who are likely, themselves, to have been the subject of scrutiny, as to their parenting skills by the department in the context of considering whether their children should be apprehended. It's deliberately designed in order to take on to the committee people who have been critical of the department, or at least have certainly experienced, first-hand, that kind of scrutiny, where their parenting skills are being examined in a way that puts the apprehension of their children in question.
The department will know that they actually do have applications from people who clearly do fit that category and what it is that's implied by the Statute. I have to say that not only doesn't Mr. Van Zoost meet the spirit, really, of what the section is all about, I think it would be a stretch to say he fits the letter of what that section is all about. I can't really see that there's any point in putting him on the committee, certainly not in that category. If the minister wants him in one of the other categories, he has a category of other, which is a free-floating section, then he can put that man forward and say he ought to be there. But in putting him forward in the category of a parent of someone whose children are at risk because of the faults of their parenting, or the alleged faults of their parenting, which is really what that section is about, I just don't think he fits the category. I think we have to say, again, to the department, they've ignored what the Statute says. So I intend to vote against it. I don't know if there are comments from anyone else, but that's certainly my view.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Ms. Massey.

MS. JOAN MASSEY-NDP: Certainly I agree with everything that my colleague has spoken about this morning. I would just like to add on that in order to make positive changes, you have to be willing to hear the negative things that happen in the department, too. I think that's one of the things we're looking for, somebody who has had maybe not a rosy time of it with that department.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I just wonder how difficult it would be for someone to want to do that.

MR. EPSTEIN-NDP: I have to say that the reason we're thinking about the composition of this committee so much, in our caucus, is because we've been approached by a number of people from different parts of the province who have come to us with their complaints about how the system works. I really want to emphasize that it's from all around the province. It's in Cape Breton; it's in Pictou County; it's in HRM. A number of people have come to us and said, I, or my adult children, have had problems with the system. The problems range from what triggers an investigation by the department, to what criteria are used by the department to decide on apprehension, to the experience of children once they're taken into custody, to access to legal services, to how the court proceedings go ahead.
We've had a number of instances of people coming to tell their stories. Many of these people are in very difficult circumstances and, one can see, are probably not ideal parents. On the other hand, when we talk to them, it's clear that there's something at the heart of almost each of the stories that makes you worry and has aroused our concern, in our caucus, over how the system works as a whole.
Now I want to be very clear to everyone here, we're getting a lot of suggestions from the parents that there should be a public inquiry about how the system works throughout the province. We haven't started to advocate for that, we've instead looked at the Statute, and we saw that there was this advisory committee that was supposed to be in place and hasn't been in place for the last few years. So we said to the minister, isn't it about time you appointed this committee because it hasn't been in place.
Now, instead of bringing into the committee the range of people who ought to be there to reflect the knowledge and opinion and experience of dealing with processes under this Statute, we see something different happening. The answer to your question is there are people out there, and some of these parents who have come to talk with us did apply in response to the ad, did apply to be on the committee. It's not impossible to find parents who are prepared to serve on this committee. They're out there. If the minister doesn't like the particular ones who have come forward, he can target, as he clearly did with the composition of the committee from the names we saw before, he can go around and target agencies and say, look for parents who have experienced the system and who are likely to do a good job on this committee. [Not a good idea Mr Epstein ! You are gving permission for the Minister to hand pick the trophey cases we know they maintain for susch an occassion- As stated earlier , this committe needs gutsy people we will be critical of the system ! ] The answer, so far as I can see, is, indeed, there are parents out there who are prepared to do this job.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Any further comments?
Ms. Streatch.

MS. STREATCH-the government - future Minister of Community Services: Mr. Chairman, I wonder, though I don't have the same concerns as my colleague across the way, I do believe that Mr. Van Zoost certainly indicated and articulated clearly here his two children, he views that as qualifying him. The fact that he served quite a bit of time with the Shelburne Youth Centre, I find particularly encouraging. Even though it doesn't go to his being a parent, I find that his role on the Shelburne Youth Centre to be quite encouraging.
I guess my concern is if we do not approve Mr. Van Zoost, does that slow down our committee, does that slow down this important process that we all agreed last time we met was important to get this moving? I guess that would be my concern, Mr. Chairman. If we don't get this committee moving, does it indeed slow down our entire process by not accepting this name? [ What a manipulator! ]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Glavine.

MR. LEO GLAVINE-Liberal: Well, with all due respect to what Mr. Epstein has said here, I know that probably most committees do make some internal kinds of changes as they go along. It just so happens in this case that I know Mr. Van Zoost from the community, from his professional involvements, his volunteerism at schools. Gee, people have the ability to empathize. I don't have to be lined up in a certain category to be able to understand and to put forward strong positions. [Yes you do -the law - the Act itself, clearly defines the categories and without the mandatory appointments, as defined, you do NOT have a legal committee! And as stated earlier, the Minister to put him in the "other" category. By placing him into the parent category, you push out a parent who should legitimately be filling that space ] I think this is a committee that needs to get up and running, and simply get moving. I certainly endorse Mr. Van Zoost's appointment to this committee. [So did the PCs strike a deal with the Liberals or was this because he knew Van Zoost ?]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Ms. Massey.

MS. MASSEY-NDP: I can see this could be debated probably all morning. I'd like to say two things. The committee hasn't been in place, so I think that if we're going to put it in place let's get it right from the get-go. It's very important, we're talking about the lives of children here and, of course, their parents. Although I agree, I can empathize and I empathize on a daily basis in this job, but I've never ever had my child taken away from me, and I do not know what that feels like. I don't know what that feels like. I think we need somebody on this committee who has had first-hand knowledge in that area. I don't think this applicant fits that description.

I'd like to say again that I have no personal criticism to make of Mr. Van Zoost. I think if he gets appointed either in this category or any other category, I hope he does a good job, there's every reason to think he would. The committee is deliberately structured to involve people whose own parenting is called into question, that's really what the committee has two positions out of 10 designated as. That is why I have doubts about Mr. Van Zoost being appointed in this category.
We all agree the committee should be up and running, that's why we appointed six of the people the last time, so that they could begin to turn their minds to the work of the committee. If Mr. Van Zoost is appointed today, I'll note that the second position of a parent is still vacant and I hope the department will move properly and quickly to bring a name that really does fit the intended category here.
MR. CHAIRMAN: But I think even with the composition of the board that there's probably still room for two on that committee, if I'm reading it right here.
MR. EPSTEIN: We must be missing someone else because I think we appointed six the last time and if Mr. Van Zoost goes on that's seven, and it's a 10-person committee. So one is a parent and there must be two others. I think we asked them to look at the minority group representation, yes, that's right.

MR. CHAIRMAN: So it can be 10, so there's still . . .

MR. GLAVINE-Liberal: So in fact we can still have two parents who meet the actual qualifications the committee is desiring, or has mandated I should say. [What a sly manipulating trick - the members are getting mixed up about the number of people yet to be appointed so he throws in this one to placate the unhappy - But in saying this he is also admitting that Mr Zoost does NOT meet the requirements of parent, the category the committee ends up allowing him to be appointed in! - The HR committee has failed their responsibility! ]

MR. CHAIRMAN- PC- the government :
The committee can be up to 10 people and Mr. Van Zoost will be seven. Anyway, we do have a motion on the floor. We have discussed it enough. Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried. [What timing ! The HR members are placated (and confused because they can't keep track of the appointments made thus far, so the Chair, a government person rushes for the vote before they have time to think - VAN Zoost was appointed even though he did not meet the reqirementas to the he was appointed to! ]

Fr Hansard for HR Committee: Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Mr. Ronald Chisholm (Chairman)
Mr. Brooke Taylor
Ms. Judy Streatch
Mr. Frank Corbett
Mr. Howard Epstein
Ms. Joan Massey
Mr. Keith Colwell
Mr. Leo Glavine
Ms. Diana Whalen

[Ms. Judy Streatch was replaced by Mr. Cecil O'Donnell.]

MR. CECIL O'DONNELL: Mr. Chairman, under the Department of Community Services, to the Children and Family Services Act Advisory Committee, I so move Kenneth Deveau as a member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Epstein.

MR. HOWARD EPSTEIN: Thank you very much. I'd like to just make a couple of brief comments about the two nominees that we have in front of us for the committee today. This, of course, has been something that has been discussed at our committee on two previous occasions.
What we have today are two nominees to fit the designated category under the Statute of representatives of minority communities inside Nova Scotia. On the face of it, of course, both of the nominees fit the category - and indeed I want to say I'm going to support both of these nominees - one comes to us from the Acadian community, another comes to us with experience at MISA, Metro Immigrant Settlement Association, and is, herself, an immigrant to Canada [from Europe] and is in a position to have a lot of contact with others in other branches of the immigrant community in Nova Scotia. Both of these things fit the category in the Statute.
[Page 2]
On the other hand, there's something as simple as whether either of these individuals have children themselves, we don't know that. It's not stated in their letters and although I'm sure they're both - based on their qualifications - going to do a decent job on the committee, it rather seemed to me that when I read the guidelines in the Statute for the composition of the committee that part of the idea here was, at least impliedly, that the individuals who had come forward in this category representing linguistic or other minorities, might themselves, either at least be parents, or perhaps even be people whose children themselves might have been at risk. At the very least I think what we see is a missed opportunity to appoint people whose parenting skills have been drawn into question. [This is referring to the comments made at the last meeting , that even though the committee admitted they were appointing someone (Van Zoost) in the parent category who did not fit the requirements of the category, that somehow, they could make things right by appointing 1 of the 2 required parents from a different category - As you can see, this was not done - There was no requirement for the government to appoint a parent in the minority, or any other category. The Human Resources committee failed to do their job to make sure the first parent was appointed in the parent category, as was their responsibility, so now they found themselves with the possibility of having only 1, not the legally mandated 2, parent on the Minister's Advisory Committee! ]
So that said, I am going to vote for them
[Why make an objection and then tell everyone you are going to vote for the names brought forward? Epstein could not expect anyone to be persuaded by his arguement if immedaitely after putting forth an arguement against he then tells every one he is going to vote for the persons in question -Wishy-washy or what! ] and will note that we still have one vacancy on this committee, and that's in the category of a parent whose parenting skills have been called into question. I wish to say, again, that the department has in front of it applications from people who clearly fit not just the letter, but the spirit of that category. We know, because some of us on this committee have been approached prior to this by people who have put their names forward, that there are candidates who do fit this category of having their parenting skills called into question and have had direct experience of the committee.
So I hope the department looks favourably upon one of those applicants and comes forward with their name fairly soon,
or find someone else who fits that last vacancy [the government went searching for their own supportive people even though there were people who had applied for the parent category and made the requirements] that is there for the committee. I will vote in favour of these two but note that it's a little bit of a missed opportunity. [Wishy- washy]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Taylor.

MR. BROOKE TAYLOR - [PC government ]: I was just going to point out to Mr. Epstein that we, too, have heard from a number of people who have applied for this particular committee. Howard, I know you've been following this very diligently, the composition, I'm just wondering, do we not currently have a person drawn from a linguistic minority on the makeup of the current membership of the committee?

MR. EPSTEIN: Do you mean previously appointed?


MR. EPSTEIN: I don't remember, particularly.

MR. TAYLOR: I had thought, or perhaps mis-thought, that we did make reference to that. They fell, I think, under two categories . . .

MR. EPSTEIN-[NDP]: What happened, I think, was the first time we met to discuss this committee, there were two nominees for these two positions [minority category]. We questioned them at the time because they both worked for Children's Aid Societies and that seemed to give an excessive

[Page 3]
weighting on the committee to people who were part of the system, rather than coming from outside the system. We questioned their names at the time and didn't appoint them. They would have fit the linguistic or minority category, I think, but their names didn't come forward again, these are two different names.

MR. TAYLOR [PC] : There's an e-mail circulating too, or at least I know it went to our caucus and the NDP caucus, from a Marilyn Dey. She sent the e-mail out on behalf of herself and a Linda-somebody [Youngson] , I forget the last name. She's claiming that the other person that she sent an e-mail on behalf of as well, has a cultural background that should be given consideration too, she's a card-carrying Aboriginal. Again, it's just a concern that I want to make sure that we do get this right. I think there is opportunity, but . . .

MR. CHAIRMAN-[PC government] : Thank you, Mr. Taylor. We have a motion on the floor. Is that en bloc? [Did you notice how the Chair jumped in and shut down his own fellow PCer, stopped all conversation before anyone could think things out, and immediately called for a vote- These politicians are sleek!]


MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, just the one name. The first name was Kevin Deveaux.
Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.

MR. O'DONNELL: Mr. Chairman, under the Department of Community Services, to the Children and Family Services Act Advisory Committee, I so move Mira Musanovic as a member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.

Fr Hansard for HR Committee: Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Mr. Ronald Chisholm (Chairman)
Mr. Brooke Taylor
Ms. Judy Streatch
Mr. Frank Corbett
Mr. Howard Epstein
Ms. Joan Massey

Mr. Keith Colwell
Mr. Leo Glavine
Ms. Diana Whalen

MR. CHAIRMAN: I guess we all know why we're here, it's to make an appointment to the Children and Family Services Act Advisory Committee. There is one appointment that we have to do.
Ms. Whalen.

MS. DIANA WHALEN: Mr. Chairman, if we are able today I would like to add an item on there and have us look at the agenda, so we could actually choose a witness for January and have more business for our January meeting. . . . .

[Page 2]

[Page 3]
MS. JUDY STREATCH [PC-government - the current Minister of Community Services] : Mr. Chairman, you know for goodwill around the table, I will go along with the will of the table. I would like to say that I came here today with one specific agenda and that was to look after the Community Services committee and get that clarified and get that out of the way. I understood from our meeting in November that we would be discussing witnesses in January. For the record, I will support the will of the table but I came here today with one specific agenda and that was to satisfy the Community Services committee.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, maybe we'll deal with that one specific agenda item and we'll come back to this item after we do that. Is it agreed?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: It is agreed.

MR. CHAIRMAN: We do have one appointment to the Children and Family Services Act Advisory Committee. We do have one name that has come forward.
Mr. Taylor.

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, to the Children and Family Services Act Advisory Committee, I so move Valerie Hill as a member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion?
Mr. Epstein.

MR. EPSTEIN - [NDP]: I just wanted to note that in looking at the CV that we've been given and in making some inquiries about the nominee, it seems to me that indeed we do have, in the case of Ms. Hill, someone who does exactly fit the requirements of the legislation for this slot on the committee. She seems to be someone whose parenting skills were called into question in the past. I understand she has since then worked very actively and diligently in organizing other parents in her area of the province. [If this was true, I question why a web search came up with no information on this person. Does anyone have anyinformation they can pass on to us ? ] I gather her work has been very productive, I have every reason to think that she'll be a good member of this committee.
[Page 4]
I'm very happy to see that there is someone who has been nominated now in this category who, I think, really fits both the letter and the spirit of what it is that has been built into the structure of the committee. [ BUT, there was suppose to have been 2 people that really fit the letter and the spirit of the parent category] I only want to add that I hope if we do confirm her nomination today that the committee will get up and running as soon as possible, and get on with its work.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Any further discussion? Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.

Fr Hansard for HR Committee: Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Hon. Ronald Chisholm (Chairman)-PC (gov)
Hon. Brooke Taylor-PC (gov)
Hon. Judy Streatch-PC (gov)
[current Minister of Community Services]
Mr. Frank Corbett-NDP
Mr. Howard Epstein-NDP
Ms. Joan Massey-NDP
Mr. Keith Colwell-Liberal
Mr. Leo Glavine-Liberal
Ms. Diana Whalen-Liberal
[Hon. Judy Streatch was replaced by Mr. Gary Hines.]

MS. DIANA WHALEN (Chairman) : I'd like to call the meeting to order. I'd like to have everyone introduce themselves for the record.

[The committee members introduced themselves.]

MADAM CHAIRMAN [MS. DIANA WHALEN] : For our first order of business today, we have received a letter of resignation from a committee member. I wonder if everybody has had a chance to review that. A copy has been put in front of us. I thought we might deal with that right away. This resignation relates to the Advisory Committee on the Children and Family Services Act. We've had a lot of discussion here about the composition of that committee, the membership and the relative qualifications of each member or category that they represent. I just wanted members to be aware of this, and if there is any discussion, I'd like to hear it.
Mr. Glavine.

MR. LEO GLAVINE: I guess the point that I want to make here is really centred around a process. Perhaps I am not so much wanting to discuss at all Mr. [Tim] Van Zoost, who of course is the centre of this particular letter. There are appointments in this committee, especially ones like we have gone through regarding the Advisory Committee on the Children and Family Services Act, which require people from different backgrounds and so forth who will fit the criteria that have been set down for that committee. However, there are circumstances of a very sensitive nature that can be, and in this case were, brought forward about Mr. Van Zoost, which we as a committee, I think, need to be addressing in camera [this means behind doors -in secret] , and perhaps some of such a sensitive nature that I wonder about it being recorded in Hansard, personally.

[Page 2]
Mr. Van Zoost went through the ropes, of course, a little bit, because in his initial appointment, or the initial time he came before this committee, perhaps he was not in the appropriate category required for the Advisory Committee on the Children and Family Services Act. That being said, when he did come forward there was quite a bit of debate around the appropriateness of his serving on the committee. In that context, of course, some very private information came forward.
I think there is the possibility of that happening further at this level of appointments to provincial agencies, boards and commissions. For that reason, I think we as a committee need to address the very idea of some of our discussions being held in camera [in secret! ], if it is a critical matter to one's appointment. For private matters to have become public, I think, certainly the onus is upon us now to do some review of procedures at this committee. I just kind of open this up.

I have to be a bit careful here. Mr. Van Zoost is a constituent of mine. He came to discuss this matter with me, in terms of how best to have it addressed. I know at one point he was perhaps looking at an appearance before this committee to present, in fact, the whole implication of what happened to him and the potential for a very upsetting family matter to have been addressed, if you wish, in the public domain.
I guess perhaps now he is not going to appear before the committee. I don't think there is such a letter, or perhaps there is. I haven't spoken with him in recent weeks. I do think that we as a committee need to set something in motion here, so that this kind of circumstance doesn't come upon us again.


HON. RONALD CHISHOLM: Madam Chairman, I was the chairman of the committee when those discussions took place. I did get a letter, as chairman of the committee, from Mr. Van Zoost, requesting a meeting, to appear before the committee, to explain his side of what he thought went wrong. Subsequent to that, I sent him an e-mail and said that we would discuss it at our meeting here today. I think each and every member of the committee should have received a copy of that letter and my response to him.
As Mr. Glavine has said, Mr. Van Zoost did have some concerns, major concerns, as to a pretty delicate situation for him. Anyway, I guess we can discuss that as part of our discussion here this morning. I haven't heard that Mr. Van Zoost doesn't want to appear before the committee now. Maybe he doesn't. Maybe Mr. Glavine has more information on that than I do.

MR. GLAVINE: He had presented me with the idea that, in fact, he would write you, Mr. Chisholm, and present that to you as chairman of the committee at that time, and put forward that request. Perhaps if he hasn't followed up, then it means that he's just going to

[Page 3]
go quietly with a letter of resignation and would just like for us to address the circumstances that propelled his decision to resign.

MR. CHISHOLM: There were a couple of things in his letter that he referred to. One was that he would like to have the removal of any private information from Hansard. Now, I'm not sure how that can happen. It's on the public record now, and I'm not sure that can happen. Anyway, I guess it's open for discussion.


MR. HOWARD EPSTEIN: The question of occasionally going in camera is well worth our attention. I don't think we really turned our minds to it when we were dealing with this particular nomination. It's good that we remind ourselves that this is an option available to us from time to time. I can't think that it will come up very often. I think that it's really the particular structuring of this committee that might call for it.
You'll recall that one of the designated positions is for someone whose parenting skills have been called into question, although those exact words aren't used in that subsection of the legislation, but that's really what it amounts to. Where that comes up, indeed, it may well be that when someone is applying for the position or is being nominated for the position and sets out the way in which they meet the section of the Act, indeed they might not be all that happy to have the full details set out in Hansard. We could consider going in camera if that ever happens again. [Excuse me, the public has a right to know why a person supposedly fits into a particular category so the public can object if people are appointed who do NOT fit the specified category, as was the situation with Mr Van Zoost. This presses the government and the Human Resources Committee to be accountible for their appointments - VAN Zoost resigned because the public did object, and there was a public outcry backed by an article written by Stephen Kimber. In this case, the system worked ! ]
I guess we should remind ourselves that we didn't have a request that the material be treated as confidential, either from the nominee or from the department, at the time. As a committee, I guess we just didn't turn our minds to it at that time. I take it from our experience with this particular applicant and for this particular position that we'll be alert to this the next time it comes up. I guess it will come up, because if Mr. Van Zoost has resigned from the committee, there will be a vacancy. So sooner or later the department will have to turn its mind to coming up with another person to fit the category. I think that's really where we stand at this point, we'll just take it, I hope, as a reminder to ourselves to think about this the next time it comes up. [Stay tuned - Because of this secretive mindset, another person, who had no right to be appointed in the parent category, was appointed ! ]


HON. BROOKE TAYLOR: Madam Chairman, I think we have to be very careful here, from my observations, in camera is something that we should try to avoid if at all possible. We established, many years ago, as a subcommittee of this committee, some guidelines. I think, although I don't know the exact terminology - perhaps Gordon could help us - that when a person went through the so-called screening process, then it was agreed that their name and, of course, resumé and references, et cetera, would become public. There may be times that we would want to go back and look at that, but, essentially, I think that's a
[Page 4]
guideline we have in place here. I don't know Mr. Van Zoost at all, but did I hear this morning that he may still want to come in and speak to the committee, or did I misunderstand that? I can't understand the value of that at this particular time. [Thank-you Mr Taylor for speaking out for democracy and freedom of information, and for informing us of the guidelines! ]


MR. GLAVINE: He had spoken to me about that possibility, just to alert this committee and possibly put before it the standing idea that there may be times in which personal and very private information could become public, as it did in this case. Because of the nature of this committee going forward, it became the subject of an article in The Daily News.[10. Committee? Committee? Check. Justice? Maybe no by Stephen Kimber, Sunday, December 18, 2005] It was with great consternation that the family discovered, when they checked on a family Web site, [ What's Wrong with Nova Scotia's Children and Family Service Act:Comments & Recommendations CFSA Section 88 (1) (scroll to last article)] that now this information had been moved in there, because when the name Van Zoost was "Googled" in, if you wish, this came in conjunction with a Web site that they had created.
Certainly as an educator, I know that even at the high school level there are children who do not know that they are adopted children, while it is a much more widespread practice that children know earlier on. So can you imagine, a family and children discovering, if it happened to go public, as it did in this case, then it does present some very serious consequences. As Mr. Epstein said, it is just a reminder that if such sensitive information comes forward, we need to be cognizant of that and we need to act on it appropriately in this committee. [Mr. Glavine just ignored what Mr Taylor just said about guidelines- Another example of disregard for law and process?]
[9:15 a.m.]


MR. GORDON HEBB- [who is this guy?] : I was just going to respond to Mr. Taylor. What he's referring to is the policy as set out on the first page of your binder. [Thank- you for your insight]

MADAM CHAIRMAN [MS. DIANA WHALEN] : If I could, I recall reading the letter. I'm sorry it isn't before us today so that we could see it, because it was quite lengthy. I know you have a copy. Perhaps members of the committee would like to review the letter that came from Mr. Van Zoost. I do remember that he wanted the courtesy, the opportunity, really, to come before us and maybe explain why he was offended and so on, and perhaps that will be done in camera [this means in secret, behind closed doors ]. We can decide that. I was just looking at the rules for meetings. If a majority of the committee votes, we can hold a portion of our meeting in camera. So that's something we could look at. I think, because he has been upset by this, it would be good to offer him the opportunity to come. That's what I feel as a citizen, that if he wants to come and address us, he should be allowed to.
Mr. Colwell.

[Page 5]
MR. KEITH COLWELL : I agree. I think that where he did send a letter in, even though he has been talking to Mr. Glavine about this, I think we should give him the courtesy of responding to the letter, and in a positive manner indicate that he could come to the committee. If, indeed, it is his wish to come, I would like to see, at least initially when he comes in to discuss this very delicate situation, that it be in camera, at least that part of it. Then maybe after that we could go out of camera and have a discussion with him on less-sensitive issues, maybe just around the topic of this. I think that would be a very good idea. I can't imagine what it would be like for him if that happened, or for anyone that would happen to. Maybe we could make sure to send him a very nice letter from the committee indicating that he has the opportunity to come, if he so wishes.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Corbett, did you have a comment?

MR. FRANK CORBETT -[NDP ]: A couple of things. One that jumps out at me here, I guess, is the fact that these come to us as items to vote on, from Executive Council, with no direction as far as the propriety of saying anything in public, outside of the fact that these books are to be treated as confidential. When we get into this arena, there's nothing in there. There is a whole body that vetted this, that did not see any reason to hold back any information. The other fact of this is that this was a committee - and again I have all kinds of sympathy for Mr. Van Zoost - that basically government was being forced to strike because it abdicated its role for many years. So one would realize, I would have thought, at some point, the sensitivity that should have been exercised around this.
I want to lend my voice to those who say that if we're at any point going to go in camera, we better be darn sure that we're going there for a good reason and that the utmost of prudence be exercised when we go in camera. I think part of our job and part of what we're vetting here today is for all Nova Scotians to see. Indeed, I think that if there were something to be learned from this, it's that maybe when this information is coming back from Executive Council that there be addenda at that point to tell us what's going on, to give us some more direction on it. [Well said Mr Corbett ! ]


MR. TAYLOR : Madam Chairman, do you know - or perhaps, Gordon - whether or not when an applicant applies for one of these ABCs if in fact it's explicit or understood that if they are appointed to the agency, board or commission that remunerates its members at the rate of $100 or more per day that in fact the information can be made public? [Uh BUT here's the problem ! This board gets LESS than the normal $100 per diam -$45 I believe - so they can be secretive! ] Do we know if in fact Mr. Van Zoost would have been aware of that? If he wasn't, that may be the crux of the problem. It goes on to say, "Requests for this information from the press or public will be referred to the Executive Council Office."
I just think that it may be a case of Mr. Van Zoost not being aware of the information. Again, I support my colleague across the way and want to repeat, I really don't think that this
[Page 6]
committee should be going in camera. When it gets to this stage, our job is to approve or disapprove. It should have been vetted and screened by the committee previous to coming here, I really believe. It's unfortunate that this happened, I feel for Mr. Van Zoost, but for this committee to go in camera, it really has to be based on strong rationale, and this time I think we unwittingly found ourselves in the situation we're in.


MS. JOAN MASSEY: I'd just like to note that there are indeed people who put their names forward as applicants for these committees. In fact, there are people who have put their name forward and have become the successful applicant, as far as the minister's concerned, who do not know it is voted on at this committee. They believe that when the phone call comes from the department that they in fact are on this committee.
I think there is a breakdown, maybe, in communications between when people apply and the process they follow. I agree with my colleague beside me that, indeed, I think that whole process needs to be looked into and maybe some education for the people who are involved in putting their names forward. So this may be something that's a lesson for everybody and we can learn from it and maybe improve the way we're doing things.

MADAM CHAIRMAN [MS. DIANA WHALEN] : Exactly. I think there are lessons to be learned just in what has unfolded, but I'd like to go back to the gentleman's request to come before the committee. If it's the agreement of the committee, I feel we should write him a letter and give him that opportunity. I guess it remains, perhaps in discussion with him, whether or not he's willing to speak in camera or out of camera. I think we would have no objection if he is speaking about personal details and wants to explain things to us that we could go in camera at that point. [Note, how she so skillfully dismisses previous statement made about the use of "in camera" . The mindset is just, "lets move it along". Shame on you Ms Whalen ! ]
Anyway, I'd like us to be able to agree to move forward and invite him to come. So is that the wish of the committee?

MR. GLAVINE: I so move that Mr. Van Zoost, if he so wishes, appear before the Standing Committee on Human Resources.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: So we'll move forward and invite him, then, if there are no objections. Thank you very much.
The time is getting later and we do have guests this morning, so I'd like to move to the appointments of agencies, boards and commissions.
Mr. Chisholm.
[Page 7]
MR. CHISHOLM: Madam Chairman, under the Department of Community Services, to the Children and Family Services Act Advisory Committee, I so move Frederick Francis Benson as a member.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.

Fr Hansard for HR Committee: Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Mr. Keith Colwell (Chairman)
Mr. Diana Whalen
Mr. Leo Glavine [Mr. Leo Glavine was replaced by Mr. Stephen McNeil.]
Hon. Carolyn Bolivar-Getson
Mr. Alfred MacLeod [Mr. Alfred MacLeod was replaced by Mr. Keith Bain.]
Mr. Chuck Porter
Mr. Charlie Parker

Ms. Joan Massey

HON. CAROLYN BOLIVAR-GETSON: Mr. Chairman, under the Department of Community Services, Children and Family Services Act Advisory Committee, I so move :
Katherine Briand
[Previous apointee: as legal aid lawyer rep (government position)- from Antigonish ] ,
Lynn Cheek
[Previous appointee: as the minister’s representative -from New Glasgow-This woman resigned from this committee when it got out to the media that she put up all kinds of roadblocks to stop people, who were critical of the government, from making presentations to this CFS Act Advisory Committee! - Wake up people! ! ],
Cheryl Harawitz
[Previous appointee: Specific appointment by the Minister of Community Services - served as Chair of the committee- f rom Halifax]
Richard Gruchy
[Previous appointee: representative of an agency -from Fall River] ,
Trena [Slaunwhite] Gallant
[Previous appointee: Specific appointment by the Minister of Community Services - from Halifax] , and
Barbara Sowinski
[Previous appointee: Specific appointment by the Minister of Community Services - from Dartmouth as members.]


MR. CHAIRMAN: Ms. Massey.

MS. JOAN MASSEY: With regard to that committee, I'm just wondering if the committee is now full, if all the spots are full on that committee. I know we had some discussions at prior meetings, and I think this is the one where we were trying to make sure that parents who actually had children who might have been in need of protective services, that those parents had gotten on that committee. It just seems like a lot has happened since last Spring, with the election and this sort of thing. If you'll excuse my lack of remembering what actually happened with that committee, maybe we can get an update if the committee is actually full.

[Page 2]
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's not a question I have an answer to, but we can inquire to make sure and bring that information back to the committee.

MR. CLARRIE MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, as a novice, this is a general question which I would just like to get clarification on. When we are making appointments like this, there are never any listings of the people who have applied who are not being appointed. I think that would be most helpful to have an entire list and then to see the appointments. I'm wondering why it doesn't work that way. It's probably a juvenile committee point to be making but I'm a juvenile here, despite my age.

MR. CHAIRMAN [Mr. Keith Colwell] : I'd like to take that under new business, if I could, because that's something that I think would require some discussion, if that's all right with the member, and I will put it under new business, but it's a very good point.
We'll get the information Ms. Massey requested. We'll send a letter off to the department.

MS. BOLIVAR-GETSON: I do know that the people who have applied did meet the parameters of what we were asking for [No SHE DOES NOT KNOW ! No one has mentioned the various categories of people who have to be appointed and if those categories have been properly met! - Why is it so difficult for these people ot to have a copy of section 88 of the CFSAct on hand so they can refer to these categories? ] , but I'm not sure if the committee is 100 per cent full.

MS. MASSEY: It's the parents with the children who actually were involved with those kinds of situations. [This the parent category and 2 people are suppose to be appointed to the committee in the parent category- None of the appointments brought forth on this day are parents !]

MS. BOLIVAR-GETSON: I'm told that they did meet the parameters that we applied for, [So who informed this person? ] but . . .

MS. MASSEY: The people who are being appointed here today do not fit those categories, I don't believe. There is a legal aid lawyer, the minister's representative, agency representative, so I'm just not sure. I would like to have a little bit . . .

MR. CHAIRMAN: I'll send a letter to the department and get a definite answer on whether this is a full appointment, and I'll bring that back to the committee at our next meeting.
Any other questions on this before we move the question? [Despite the serious questions that need to be answered BEFORE the vote, they are going to take a vote anyway ! ! ? ? ] Ms. Whalen.

MS. DIANA WHALEN: Just one question, but this is an unusual one in that we had quite a bit of discussion about it last year on the composition of the committee because it has very strict guidelines about the membership and who they should represent. What I'm noticing today is that it has come back so quickly and when you look at the information, the fine detail, it shows that the term is only one year, which seems really short for a committee because as we know at this Human Resources Committee,
[Page 3]
we look at over 100 agencies, boards and commissions. If it's going to be renewed every year, I think that's a little bit too short, actually. I imagine they've hardly met. Prior to us making appointments last year, it was a committee that hadn't met I think ever, or it certainly hadn't met in the last three or four years. So could we also, in your request - my request would be to ask why the term is so short and why it wouldn't be two or three years.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, we can do that, if that is the wish of the committee. Okay, we can do that as well. Any other questions before I call the question on this?
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried. [ So the people were appointed even though it was not clear if there were any people in the parent category currently on the committee or if there were the 2 spaces for these appointments left ! - This is scandalous - This shows the Human Resources Committee is either too lazy to do its job properly or that it has no respect for the law - Because these categories for appointment are specified by the NS CFS Act and, by law, must be filled as specified ! See what happens at the next meeting (below: Not a whimper - Not a word - Not a question about the information that was asked for]

Fr Hansard for HR Committee:Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Mr. Keith Colwell (Chairman)
Ms. Diana Whalen

Mr. Leo Glavine
Hon. Carolyn Bolivar-Getson was replaced by Hon. Ronald Chisholm.]
Mr. Alfred MacLeod was replaced by Hon. David Morse [The government brought in the big guns - the former Minister of Community Services ! ]
Mr. Chuck Porter
Mr. Clarrie MacKinnon
Mr. Charles Parker
Ms. Joan Massey

HON. RONALD CHISHOLM: Mr. Chairman, under the Department of Community Services, Children and Family Services Act Advisory Committee, I so move Kenneth Deveau and Mirjana Musanovic as board members. [Both were previous apointees under the minority categories!]

MR. CHAIRMAN [Mr. Keith Colwell ]: Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried. [What a sham! ]

Fr Hansard for HR Committee: Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Mr. Keith Colwell (Chairman)
Ms. Diana Whalen was replaced by Mr. Harold Theriault
Mr. Leo Glavine
Hon. David Morse
Mr. Alfred MacLeod
Mr. Chuck Porter
Mr. Charles Parker
Ms. Joan Massey
Mr. Clarrie MacKinnon

MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm going to bring the meeting to order. As committed in the past, if there's an issue with an individual who is going to be appointed to a board, we should talk about it in camera. There is one issue with one potential appointment that we want to talk about in camera. I would ask everybody who isn't a committee member to leave the room now. We're going to go to a short in camera session. We'll move from there.
[9:09 a.m. The in camera session commenced.]
[9:22 a.m. The public session reconvened.] . . . . .

Pg 3
MS. JOAN MASSEY: Mr. Chairman, I think, recently all members of the Human Resources Committee received an e-mail from two ladies in regard to an issue around them trying to make a presentation at the Minister's Advisory Committee for the Children and Family Services Act, that committee that we worked hard at getting going again. The issue revolves around the timeliness in these two ladies receiving a reply to the request to make a presentation. I don't want to mention their names [ This was Linda Youngson and Thelma Gillespie and you can read their presentations HERE] here today, because, well, we all know why [we would like to know why !] , but I'm wondering, if I pass this information along to you if you could follow through for us and make sure that they are communicated with in a timely fashion in the future.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I appreciate your bringing that forward. On behalf of the committee, as long as it's the wish of the committee, I will do that. We can write a letter to Executive Council, making a specific inquiry as to what the status is on those and ask them if they could - and we can only ask, of course - correspond with the people in question to let them know what the status is of their application. Any objections to that? Hearing none, that will be done.

Fr Hansard for HR Committee: Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Mr. Keith Colwell (Chairman)
Ms. Diana Whalen was replaced by Mr. Wayne Gaudet
Mr. Leo Glavine
Hon. Carolyn Bolivar-Getson
Mr. Alfred MacLeod
Mr. Chuck Porter
Mr. Charles Parker
Ms. Joan Massey
Mr. Clarrie MacKinnon

MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there any discussion? . . . .
The next one is the Department of Community Services, Children and Family Services Act Advisory Committee.

MR. MORSE [Previous Minister of Community Services] : Mr. Chairman, I would be proud to move Robert Seymour Wright as a member of the Children and Family Services Act Advisory Committee.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion?

[There should have been discussion - Mr Wright was appointed in the parent catergory BUT he was a government man: He was a social worker - He worked in child welfare, as a front line worker, supervisor, forensic clinician, and Executive Director; former director of Family and Children's Services of Cumberland County; and in justice, as a correctional mental health specialist. In May of 2007, Mr. Wright was appointed to serve as the Executive Director of the Child and Youth Strategy of the Province of Nova Scotia. He steped down from this appointment to this committee only after his appointment was exposed as the sham it was by the media]

Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.

Fr Hansard for HR Committee: Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Mr. David Wilson - Glace Bay (Chairman)
Ms. Diana Whalen
Mr. Michel Samson

Hon. David Morse
Mr. Alfred MacLeod
Mr. Chuck Porter
Mr. Charles Parker
Ms. Joan Massey
Mr. Clarrie MacKinnon

MR. PORTER: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. First I would suggest we generally do them individually for each committee. I would start off with the Children and Family Services Advisory Committee and move that Audrey C. MacNeil be appointed as a member.
[Page 2]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The motion is on the floor. Is there any discussion?
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.

[No indication whatsoever what category this person has been appointed to ! ]

Fr Hansard for HR Committee:Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Mr. David Wilson - Glace Bay (Chairman)
Ms. Diana Whalen [was replaced by Mr. Keith Colwell.]
Mr. Michel Samson [was replaced in the witness portion by Mr. Leo Glavine.]
Hon. David Morse
Mr. Alfred MacLeod
Mr. Chuck Porter

Mr. Charles Parker
Ms. Joan Massey
Mr. Clarrie MacKinnon
[was replaced by Mr. William Estabrooks.]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. We're dealing first of all with the appointments to the Department of Community Services. You have, I believe, everything before you in your folders and the binders that you've received, so let's start please. Mr. Morse.

HON. DAVID MORSE: Mr. Chairman, I so move Marilyn Booth, Katherine Briand, Cheryl Gillett Harawitz and Gary Newcombe as members of the Children and Family Services Advisory Committee.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
[Again no clarification or discussion as to what categories these people are being appointed to! ]