HANSARD
Printed and Published by Nova Scotia Hansard Reporting Services
Ms. Maureen MacDonald (Chair)
Mr. Chuck Porter
Mr. Alfred MacLeod
Mr. Keith Bain
Mr. Graham Steele
Mr. David Wilson (Sackville-Cobequid)
Mr. Keith Colwell
Ms. Diana Whalen
Mr. Stephen McNeil
[Mr. Keith Bain was replaced by Mr. Patrick Dunn.]
[Mr. Graham Steele was replaced by Mr. Howard Epstein.]
[Ms. Diana Whalen was replaced by Mr. David Wilson (Glace Bay).]
[Mr. Stephen McNeil was replaced by Mr. Michel Samson.]
WITNESS
Ms. Heather Foley Melvin
CEO, Conserve Nova Scotia
In Attendance:
Ms. Mora Stevens
Legislative Committee Clerk
Mr. Alan Horgan
Assistant Auditor General
Mr. Gordon Hebb, Q.C.
Chief Legislative Counsel
Also in attendance:
Mr. Grant Machum
Stewart McKelvey
Mr. Allan Crandlemire
Executive Director
Conserve Nova Scotia
[Page 1]
HALIFAX, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 31, 2007
STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
9:00 A.M.
CHAIR
Ms. Maureen MacDonald
VICE-CHAIRMAN
Mr. Chuck Porter
MADAM CHAIR: Good morning, I'd like to call the committee to order. Today we have before us Ms. Heather Foley Melvin. This, in a way, is an unusual occurrence, it is not often that a witness is brought back before the committee to answer questions that were outstanding from the witness' first appearance in front of the committee. Ms. Foley Melvin has with her today her solicitor.
We have correspondence that was received quite late yesterday afternoon with respect to the matter in front of us today, that I would like to table at this time so that it will be available to not only members of the committee, but members of the media and to the public. I'm tabling a piece of correspondence from Mazda Canada Inc., I'm tabling the confidentiality agreement that corresponds to or that was submitted in addition to the letter from Mazda Canada and I'm also tabling a letter that the committee received late yesterday afternoon from the Deputy Minister of Justice, Mr. Doug Keefe, acting on behalf, I think, of the Government of Nova Scotia. So those pieces of correspondence are now tabled and they are available to members and they are on the public record.
[Page 2]
We will now have introductions from members, a brief opening statement by the witness and we will go into questioning from each of the caucuses for the first round of 20 minutes per caucus. At the end of that we will take a very short break, to allow Hansard to prepare for an in camera session and to allow our witness to get a drink of water or whatever. Then we will come back for the in camera portion of the committee meeting. Following that, we will go back into the public domain. That is the schedule we will have here this morning. So with those brief remarks, I will start by asking members to introduce themselves.
[The committee members introduced themselves.]
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Ms. Foley Melvin, the floor is yours for an opening comment.
MS. HEATHER FOLEY MELVIN: First I'll comment, I am fighting a wicked head cold this morning, so forgive me. Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to speak to you today and to further clarify responses I gave during my previous appearance on November 1, 2006. I am also here today because of the committee's proposed motion to recommend to the House that I be held in contempt. I am very, very concerned about the implications this has for me personally; contempt potentially has criminal ramifications. It is for this reason that I have legal counsel here with me today.
I have been asked to return to this committee to clarify my answers to two questions, one relating to my private sector compensation and the other regarding my meeting with the Premier in June 2006. I provided you with a letter from my former employer citing their concerns with the public release of my private sector salary. As was requested in the committee's motion, this issue will be dealt with in camera this morning.
We are therefore left with responses I gave in relation to my conversation with the Premier. First, though, I would like to clarify the responses I gave during my last appearance. Specifically, I'd like to clarify my replies to questions with respect to both my salary and my conversation with the Premier. I did not decline a question that I did not wish to answer, as suggested previously by Mr. Steele. Instead, I declined to answer what I thought I was not permitted to answer. I declined to answer the questions in good faith, knowing that I had signed a contract of employment. Furthermore, I did not feel that I was legally permitted to provide any further detail to the line of questioning being asked by Mr. Steele.
In retrospect, I made a mistake by not requesting to be excused from answering the questions of Mr. Steele and for not stating my reasons for doing so. As I'm sure you can appreciate, this process is very new to me. I believe that Mr. Steele acknowledged that this was the first time I had appeared before the Public Accounts Committee during
[Page 3]
his questioning. I know now that I should have clearly advised the Chair about my concerns answering Mr. Steele's questions.
I can assure you that I was not telling the committee what questions they can and cannot ask, rather, I felt that these were questions that I could not answer. I acknowledge that the committee has the legitimate right to ask questions about my move from chief of staff to my new position at Conserve Nova Scotia. I also recognize that Mr. Steele had the right to ask me questions that related to that move.
As suggested by Mr. Steele, I did feel uncomfortable answering certain questions. However, I can assure the committee that this was for legitimate reasons. I am not a lawyer but had understood that there were certain limits on what I could say in response to the questions of this committee. First and foremost, I want to assure this committee that I fully answered all of the questions that were asked of me regarding Conserve Nova Scotia and my appointment as president and chief executive officer of the agency.
The Premier and I did have discussions regarding other matters unrelated to Conserve Nova Scotia during our meeting. When questioned by Mr. Steele, I had understood that he was seeking for me to disclose those unrelated conversations. I did not feel that I was at liberty to do so for the following reasons; the discussions related to transitional issues relating to the Premier's Office and the issues fell into two main categories: they were staffing issues and ongoing issues that needed to be addressed by the Premier's Office. I did not feel that I was legally allowed to disclose this information to the committee. It was my understanding that this information would be of a confidential nature and that it related to the Premier's Office and the affairs of the Province of Nova Scotia. I was not certain of my legal obligations.
The government has provided a letter outlining my ability to discuss the details of that conversation and my former employer has provided a letter about my ability to disclose the details of my private sector compensation. Again, I want to emphatically state that there were no further discussions between the Premier and myself regarding Conserve Nova Scotia.
The second question raised by Mr. Steele relates to disclosure of my salary with my former employer. Mr. Steele raised and asked numerous questions in relation to my compensation package. In response, I acknowledged that I was well paid. I was not prepared to disclose my compensation package as I did not feel that I had the right to do so in a public forum. Again, I am not a lawyer but I considered this information to be confidential and I had an obligation of confidentiality to my former employer. Knowing that I had signed a confidentiality agreement, I did not feel that I was legally entitled to disclose this information.
[Page 4]
After I was made aware of Mr. Steele's motion to find me in contempt, I contacted my former employer. They have confirmed that they consider this information to be of a proprietary and confidential nature. I did, however, obtain the consent of my former employer to disclose my compensation package in camera and I have also provided a copy of the confidentiality agreement.
Again, I was in error for not stating reasons to the Chair in order to be excused from answering the question. I recognize that I am a senior public servant employed by the Province of Nova Scotia and it is for this reason that I want to ensure that the committee understands why I did not feel I was at liberty to provide any further response to Mr. Steele and to this committee. I want to apologize if my responses came across as though I did not wish to answer the questions. I believed that I had certain legal obligations which I did not express to this committee.
Madam Chair, that concludes my introductory remarks.
MADAM CHAIR: Thank you very much. I want to say to the witness before we go on, that nothing you say here today, in fact, can form the basis for nor support a cause of action, either civil or criminal. So you should not be labouring under the misconception that this has implications in that regard.
I think the only time that might change is if you were under oath and you provided information that was not accurate to the committee and then that's a different matter but we have not gone that route in terms of administering an oath.
We will now start questioning, with Mr. Wilson. You have 20 minutes.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you Ms. Foley Melvin for returning. I want to start by stating one of the reasons why you are here and that pertains to the questioning that you refrained from answering when you last appeared here, I believe in November.
As a new member of an agency or policy, I understand that you might not be familiar with the process here in the Public Accounts Committee but I want to make it very clear to you and to anybody who is listening, that the Public Accounts Committee is one of the most important committees we have here in the province because as I'll read the mandate of the Public Accounts Committee, and I'll read that now, "the Public Accounts Committee is established for the purpose of reviewing the public accounts, the annual report or other report of the Auditor General and any other financial matters respecting the public funds of the Province."
I think that states exactly what our mandate is here in the committee, to ensure that the public funds that are spent by government are spent appropriately. Definitely
[Page 5]
with your situation, with your case where you were a chief of staff of the Premier and where you went into a meeting and you came out as a chief administrative officer of an agency or an office or a department that wasn't yet formed or created, there are a lot of questions around that.
Also, it is within our rights to ask questions to witnesses, especially bureaucrats of this province, and that you're bound to answer all the questions that this committee feels appropriate. I think the questions that we did ask you and in subsequent meetings, that they were reasonable requests, to try to get a straight answer from you on different issues around your appointment to this agency.
I take some offence, over the last several months, on the process by which we find ourselves here today, especially around receiving correspondence from yourself at a late moment, on the eve of our last Public Accounts Committee meeting to deal with the steps we were going to take with you, and also last night, receiving, on the eve of this committee meeting, a letter from the Deputy Minister of Justice around your questioning, your answers and maybe the actions of this committee.
I want to reflect that our committee is there to try to seek answers in the expenditures of public financing here in the province, and that it's the majority of this committee that felt that your answers weren't answered properly, and it's up to our committee to determine that, not the Deputy Minister of Justice, not yourself, not any other bureaucrat in the Province of Nova Scotia. I'll talk a little bit about the two letters, especially the letter we received late last night from the Deputy Minister of Justice. In it, it stated that he felt that you provided the committee with the information that we requested, and also went on to say that, and I'll quote this, "She also advised the Committee that portions of that conversation dealt with transitional issues in the Premier's Office, including staffing issues, and did not relate to her appointment as Chief Executive Officer."
[9:15 a.m.]
It wasn't until this morning that I realized that the Deputy Minister of Justice sent a correction to that. I note that Madam Chair tabled that earlier, so I won't read that. He stated that you had intent to advise us today that a portion of that conversation that you had in the office or in the room when you received your appointment revolved around issues in the Premier's Office, but at no point did I hear, when you last appeared, anybody asking what conversation you had about staffing issues in the Premier's Office or what was going in the Premier's Office, it was around your appointment. We all took out of that conversation that, yes, the staffing level will decrease in the Premier's Office because you accepted that position.
[Page 6]
So you're here today because you failed, in our opinion, to answer a couple of questions. I'll get into that in the next couple of minutes. The first one was around your discussion and what was said in that meeting with yourself and the Premier when you were asked or were given or came out of that meeting obtaining the position of chief administrative officer for Conserve Nova Scotia. I'd like to start with questions around that conversation.
The first one is, were you given a choice by the Premier to either accept the new position or remain as chief of staff for the Premier's Office?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: No, I was not.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): At no point did he advise you that this is a new position that I'm creating, that you could remain on as chief of staff if you wanted to or take this position? You weren't given that opportunity?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: No, I was not.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Did you ask if you had a choice when that position was offered to you?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: No, I did not.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): So, during the conversation, when the Premier asked you to take the position, what was the position he had offered you? What I'm asking for is what was the title that you would have if you accepted the position?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I don't believe that at that meeting there was any title disclosed. He asked me to implement the new energy efficiency agency that had been spelled out in the earlier platform document.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): He hadn't mentioned that you would be chief administrative officer for what would now be Conserve Nova Scotia?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: He had asked me to lead the agency. There was no title at that time.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Did he mention during that meeting what your duties would be in that position, and at what level - in detail, if you could, if he did mention it - what specific details or what he expected you to perform in accepting that position?
[Page 7]
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: There weren't a lot of details during that conversation. The conversation was more about, this is a task I'd like you to take on, this is what we'd like to accomplish, this is the type of agency we'd like to start, and I task you to build that agency or create that agency.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Some of the documents that came in were received, one of them was the Schedule "A" to your contract. In that contract it states, and I'll table a copy for the committee - I don't know if you want it tabled now, Madam Chair.
MADAM CHAIR: Before we leave today.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): In that schedule the title is Chief Administrative Officer, would you agree with that title?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Yes, I would.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): One of the issues that many Nova Scotians have - I know that many of the committee members here have - was around the title, around how you received your position without what we've stated before is through the fair hiring practice of the province. When did you receive the copy of the contract in Schedule "A" for this position?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: That would have been toward the end of June, probably toward the end of that week that I met with the Premier and I received that from Howard Windsor.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): So one of the questions we had was around the fair hiring policy, and I'll table that also, Madam Chair, that I think has been at the root of the issue of your position now, especially around the creation of the agency or office or department after the fact, and it is around the fair hiring policy.
I know we asked you some questions the last time around that. At any time during that process, after you left the meeting with the Premier, after accepting this position, did anyone within the Premier's Office or the Treasury and Policy Board or Department of Energy, did anybody express concerns that there is potential there that the Premier may have broken that fair hiring policy at any time?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: There was not.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): So nobody from any of those departments ever mentioned to you that there is some concern here that what might
[Page 8]
appear or what the public might see is a breach of that policy that the government should adhere to?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: There was not.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): One of the issues that we have seen lately is the fact that there seems to be a change in the definition of your title. When you look at the fair hiring policy and if you go through it, at no point do we see that the Premier has the right to appoint anybody as a chief administrative officer without going through the fair hiring policy. So does that have any concern of yours that potentially the Premier broke the policy set forth, that government is supposed to follow, when he appointed you to this position?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I believe that Howard Windsor chose the title of chief administrative officer mainly because the agency had not been created at that point. It was understood in the very beginning that once the agency was created, that I would become the chief executive officer.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): So in your position as chief of staff at the Premier's Office, were you aware of the Public Service Commission fair hiring policy and have you read the document in the past?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I had not read that document to that point, no. I have reviewed it since.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): So do you come to the same understanding, when I read through this that I have some concerns around that the Premier did actually break that fair hiring policy because it doesn't state that he has the ability or the power to appoint a chief administrative officer of any agency, office or department in the province?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: All I can answer to that is that initially that was the title and it was understood from the beginning that once the agency was created and there was a place for a chief executive officer in an agency, that I would be that person. The agency hadn't been created at that point and I believe there was some concern as to how you could be chief executive officer of an agency that hadn't been created. I believe that's why it was chief administrative officer initially.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): So you must understand how this appears to not only us on the committee but to the taxpayers of this province, who ultimately are funding this initiative from the Premier, that the Premier broke the rules here. He is playing catch-up now, after the fact that he decided to either fire you or let you go, as chief of staff to appoint you to a senior position in the Civil Service as a CEO
[Page 9]
of an agency that wasn't even really created yet. Do you think the Premier prematurely asked you to take on this task before there was an actual outline of your duties, your title, what you were going to do in the next six, eight months to a year?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I believe the Premier had a vision for Conserve Nova Scotia. It was something that he felt very strongly about, and tasked me to take on the implementation of that agency.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): I think the public will look at that and come to their conclusions. I think I understand your answer. What I would like to do, quickly, is just read the excerpt of Chapter 2.1 of the Human Resources Manual, which is published by the Public Service Commission. I'll quote, and it's under No Competition:
The Government of Nova Scotia may make appointments to positions outside the Civil Service, including:
- Deputy Ministers
- Chief Executive Officers of Agencies, Boards and Commissions
- Executive Assistants to Members of Executive Council
- Secretarial and Policy Advisory Personnel in the Offices of the Premier, Ministers or the Treasury and Policy Board.
Such appointments may be made by the Lieutenant Governor in Council, Ministerial appointment or by Personal Service Contract without competition.
From your answers, and from what we've seen and all the documentation that we received as of yet, that practice was broken by the Premier. It just shows, I think, the lack of leadership from this Premier to take that step. We're talking about funds from the public that are being expended to create this new vision that the Premier had, and I think the Premier should have taken all steps to ensure that we get value for our money, that the policies of this province are adhered to, that it's a fair and transparent process, and that is what I think we see, openly now, that that hasn't happened, and that's why people have an issue with this. They don't have an issue with you personally.
Heather Foley Melvin is not the issue here, the issue is with the Premier and how he took it upon himself to break policy and spend taxpayers' money without following, I think, the policy set forward, not only by his government and previous governments, but what people expect from the government. That's the issue that people have in this province, and I think that's what the people on this committee have an issue with. I hope you understand that.
[Page 10]
Where do we go from here? The issue is, how do you go to perform your duties effectively when we had the start of this issue that we couldn't really get answers to? That's where we need to go in the next little while, to try to understand what has just happened over the last couple of months with this. One of the issues is around that change that the Premier had, or your office had, with the title of your position. I think that's what I said earlier around playing catch-up. I think the Premier, realizing that he had taken some steps to implement this vision he had and he hadn't followed the process. Again, did you advise the Premier that there needed to be a change in your title as chief administrative officer to chief executive officer so that he could try to start adhering to fair hiring policies within the Government of Nova Scotia?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: No, I did not.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Do you feel that that should have been done initially, that the Premier should have been very clear on what his vision was, what the concept of the department was, so that this wouldn't happen, and then he wouldn't have put you in this position, that you have to come forward here to the Public Accounts Committee, you have to appear in front of Nova Scotians to almost debate that you deserve to have this job? Do . . .
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I just wondered if you were finished. Initially, while discussing this with Howard Windsor, both titles were put on the table at that time. I was to begin as the chief administrative officer due to the fact that the organization had not been created, and would be the chief executive officer once it was. That was back in June. That wasn't discussed since the last time here. We did not discuss the fair hiring process at that time.
[9:30 a.m.]
MADAM CHAIR: Time has expired. I'm sorry.
Mr. Samson, you have 20 minutes.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Ms. Foley Melvin, Mr. Crandlemire, Mr. Machum, it's a pleasure to have you here this morning. Unfortunately I wasn't actually on the floor during your last visit here at the Public Accounts Committee. I did get to observe part of it from the gallery, but this is my first opportunity to actually participate directly in this.
Ms. Foley Melvin, I was listening to your answers that you gave, your statement right off the start and some of the answers that you've given. Is it safe to say, based on the answers you've given, that in your view you were dismissed as the chief of staff in the Premier's Office?
[Page 11]
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I was asked to take on a new role, and I would say, yes, that's fair to say.
MR. SAMSON: So it's fair to say that you were dismissed as chief of staff and asked, then, to take on a new role?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I was asked to take on a new role.
MR. SAMSON: Was it ever explained to you why you were being dismissed as chief of staff?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: No.
MR. SAMSON: No reasons were ever given?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: No.
MR. SAMSON: I know you're not a lawyer, you've indicated that and that's fair, but obviously labour law and everything else, if one is going to be dismissed, there are usually questions of unfair dismissal, severance, everything else, and I'm just curious, are those issues anything that you either raised with the Premier or your legal counsel might have advised you that you should raise as to the reasons why you were being dismissed and being asked to move to another agency?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I have never had legal counsel before in my life prior to this particular hearing. So, no, I didn't consult with a lawyer then.
MS. SAMSON: You worked for Mazda Canada, obviously, for how many years?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I did. Between Mazda Canada and Mazda Credit it was 12.
MS. SAMSON: Twelve years. Now, if they had dismissed you, what reaction would you have had at that point? Working with Mazda - you indicated you never sought legal advice, but I'm just curious, after working there for 12 years in management, what would have been your reaction had Mazda just walked in and said, we no longer want you to continue in your specific position that you are doing with Mazda?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I'm certain I would have gotten advice on that.
MR. SAMSON: But in this case, you didn't feel it was necessary for you to seek any sort of advice after the Premier, in essence, indicated you were being dismissed as chief of staff?
[Page 12]
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I did not. I actually was excited about the new task at hand.
MR. SAMSON: Did you enjoy your time as chief of staff in the Premier's Office?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Absolutely.
MR. SAMSON: Basically, you pretty much had the top position of the non-traditional civil servants. You were in a political position but, obviously, you were basically the top political person in the province. Did you not have any concerns that you were being asked to no longer continue in that capacity?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I was disappointed, of course.
MR. SAMSON: But the Premier, again, didn't give you any reasons as to why he was making that decision?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: He did not.
MR. SAMSON: Even to today, January 31st, have you had any discussions with him, just basically saying, by the way, why didn't you want me to stay on as chief of staff?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I have not.
MR. SAMSON: And that doesn't cause you any concern or loss of sleep or pondering?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Will I ever? Perhaps. But to this date, I have not.
MR. SAMSON: As was indicated by Mr. Wilson, what's important to keep in mind here, and I'm sure you probably feel that you're the one who is under a lot of pressure, possibly you might feel you're under attack, and that's unfortunate, because, in essence, it was the decisions of the Premier that have brought you here today. That's why I wanted to ask you a few questions in that regard.
You've indicated that you aren't a lawyer, and that's fine, but is it safe to say that you've followed the political process here in Nova Scotia, and you have some sense of how our Civil Service operates here in this province? Is that a fair statement?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: That's a fair statement.
[Page 13]
MR. SAMSON: To your knowledge, in the past, traditionally, when it has come to hiring deputy ministers or CEOs or heads of agencies here in this province, do you have any knowledge of what the process has been in the past to be able to find people for these types of positions?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: As far as I'm aware, people are appointed to those positions, usually.
MR. SAMSON: Now, before they're appointed, do you have knowledge as to what process takes place prior to someone being appointed? In other words, what process takes place to identify potential candidates prior to them being appointed? Are you aware of how that works?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I am not.
MR. SAMSON: You are not. Have you ever heard of headhunting agencies that work for different companies, work for government, to identify professionals for specific positions? Have you ever heard of those?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Absolutely.
MR. SAMSON: So you know how they work.
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Yes, I do.
MR. SAMSON: Are you aware that the province has used those types of agencies in the past for hiring different deputy ministers and different heads of agencies here in this province?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I'm not specifically aware but I'm sure they have.
MR. SAMSON: And do you consider that to be a normal and prudent practice, to go down that route?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: If that's the decision that they choose.
MR. SAMSON: Okay, that wasn't my question, I guess. My question is, would you agree that that's the normal and prudent course of action to take when trying to identify the best possible person for a specific management-type position, that it would be to go through an agency to identify numerous candidates who might be the best person to head those agencies?
[Page 14]
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I can't comment on whether it's normal because I've not been involved in that process with the government.
MR. SAMSON: Okay, but you have followed the government and you followed some of the decisions and everything else. You would have some working knowledge of how the government has operated in the past, is that safe to say?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I would know how I would hire someone today but I have not followed how this particular government has hired people in my position.
MR. SAMSON: I'm just curious, and if you feel that you can't answer this then that's fine, or if you don't want to answer it but I'm just curious. How were you hired to work with Mazda when you first started with Mazda?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I was approached by Mazda directly.
MR. SAMSON: You were approached by them directly, okay. Do you know why, how they found out as to who you were or what your abilities were?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I obviously was doing a great job for another company and they approached me to come and work with them.
MR. SAMSON: Okay, they approached you directly, it wasn't through any other third party or anything.
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: No, it wasn't.
MR. SAMSON: Are you aware, do you remember the Deputy Minister of Energy - I'm trying to remember his name now but I can't remember his name, I thought it was Dan something - Dan McFadyen, I think that was the name, the Deputy Minister of Energy, he actually had been brought in from the Prairie Provinces, I'm trying to think if it was Saskatchewan or one of them, were you familiar with him at all during his time as Deputy Minister of Energy?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: That was before my time.
MR. SAMSON: Okay. See, it had come to the point that we had recognized, as a province, and the government recognized, that in the Department of Energy we needed some sort of expertise; we needed to go out there and find someone who could be the best possible person to head up the Department of Energy, because of the importance of the offshore and at that time there was more of a focus on the offshore and benefits, Sable project and everything else. So we actually paid quite a bit of money to a
[Page 15]
headhunting firm to go out and find us the best possible person who would come for that. That's how we got Dan McFadyen.
Another example, and I'm not sure if you're aware, with the director of public prosecutions, are you familiar with the director of public prosecutions?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I'm not.
MR. SAMSON: You're not, that is probably not a bad thing. Anyway, we went over a year trying to find who was the best possible person to be the director of public prosecutions and we spent quite a significant amount of money in doing that. Ironically, at the end of the day it was the acting director who was chosen to be the permanent director and I believe both our caucus and the NDP caucus tried to suggest that to the government all along, but anyway, they went through the process and at the end they could still say that they went out and found who they felt was going to be the best possible person.
So you're aware that that's happened in the past, that the province has undertaken to do that.
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: You're making me aware. I didn't follow that.
MR. SAMSON: Okay, but you're aware that the province has, in the past, gone to third party agencies to try to identify the best possible candidates for deputy minister positions and senior civil servant positions.
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I'm not personally aware but I certainly believe what you're telling me, I'm sure that's happened.
MR. SAMSON: Okay, then help me out here. When the Premier asked you to take over Conserve Nova Scotia, did you have any concerns about the fact that they had not gone through the process of posting the job, sending it to a headhunting firm or in any way trying to identify who the best possible candidate was? Did you have any personal concerns about that?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: No, I did not.
MR. SAMSON: And why is that?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I'm certainly a great candidate to have this agency go forward. We've been very successful to date. I have always succeeded at every task I've taken on, and thus far we've done a very good job in launching this new agency. I believe that I am the right candidate.
[Page 16]
MR. SAMSON: That's a fair comment and I'd be surprised if you gave any different answer in that regard, based on your comments and everything else. The problem is that had the Premier - and I'm hoping you understand where we're at - come forward and told us, I've gone to a third party agency or I've posted the job, and they've come back and told me that my chief of staff is the best possible candidate to head up Conserve Nova Scotia, we wouldn't be here today because that would be an independent third party that would have looked at all the possible candidates and would have said, at the end of the day, Heather Foley Melvin is the best person you can find to head up that agency.
I don't doubt that you bring tremendous qualifications and everything else and I certainly understand the statements you just made but unfortunately in your case, and unfortunately for you, that courtesy wasn't given to you by the Premier, and that's what's extremely unfortunate because at the end of the day maybe they would have come back and said that you were the best possible candidate, or, from a list of candidates, they would have said here is who is on that list and you would have been on that list.
Unfortunately, because the Premier didn't do that, we're left to wonder and taxpayers are left to wonder, are you truly the best possible candidate for that position? Maybe you are but because of the Premier's own actions of arbitrarily going out and making this decision on his own, we cannot answer that for Nova Scotians.
As was said earlier, this committee is here to look at public expenditures and try to act as a check and balance for any government expenditures and trying to make sure that proper policy was followed and that taxpayers are getting the best investment for their dollar.
If you could go back, would you then have asked the Premier to go through an open competition, send it to a headhunting agency, and allow your name to stand as a candidate, to determine whether you would have been the best person to be heading up Conserve Nova Scotia?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I am here before you because the Premier asked me to do this and that was the Premier's decision.
MR. SAMSON: I appreciate you saying that. Unfortunately, at the end of the day it's your professional reputation . . .
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I am very aware of that.
MR. SAMSON: . . . and that's the unfortunate part because as I said, it is through no actions of your own that you're here. You're here because of the Premier's actions, and had he followed a proper course, this would not have happened. That's unfortunate
[Page 17]
for you because obviously you have a professional career and one that you're concerned about and I don't blame you. It is unfortunate that this is happening but, at the end of the day, the taxpayers are asking us, why wasn't normal procedure followed? That's what we're here trying to determine.
You've heard the request made by my colleague, to the Premier, who has asked that the position be opened up again to an open competition, so that we can see if there is anyone else out there who may have qualifications that deem them to be the best person for the job or, at the end of the day, if it is you who is the best person for the job.
I guess my question to you is, would you support the request that the position of chief executive officer of Conserve Nova Scotia be reopened to competition, for which you would be able to reapply, and allow your name to stand, along with any others who may wish to apply for that position?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I am currently the chief executive officer of Conserve Nova Scotia. That was a decision made by the Premier and I would ask the people of Nova Scotia to judge me on my performance.
MR. SAMSON: At the end of the day that certainly is what's going to happen. Unfortunately our big concern is that if we don't raise the concern on this issue, how many other people is the Premier just going to simply decide to appoint on his own?
This is not the first time, I can tell you, that I raised grave concerns, and still have them, about the Deputy Minister of Energy, who is there currently. After we lost the best qualified person who was found by a headhunting agency, the Premier decided to take the clerk of the Executive Council and name her the deputy minister, without going through any of the proper procedures. That was the previous Premier and I raised those same concerns that I am raising here today. So it is not just the actions of our current Premier, it is the actions of the previous Premier as well, when you have such important agencies that the Premier is unable tell Nova Scotians, here's the process I followed and here is what I expect Nova Scotians to judge me on and being able to say that this is the best possible candidate.
Without having looked directly at your contract, what term have you been given for employment as the CEO of Conserve Nova Scotia?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Terms as in years?
MR. SAMSON: Yes.
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Three.
[Page 18]
MR. SAMSON: Three years, why three years? Were you told that was the standard, why three years? Do you know where that figure was reached?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I can tell you what I think, I don't know that I can tell you the exact answer. I believe that was or is an appropriate amount of time to start a new agency and to get it off the ground, and to properly become accountable for it. It doesn't happen overnight.
[9:45 a.m.]
MR. SAMSON: How long were in the position of chief of staff?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Approximately four months.
MR. SAMSON: Now, the Premier hasn't told us, and you aren't aware, and you see no reason to ask the question why you would have been dismissed as chief of staff. What confidence can we have that you're not going to be dismissed as the head of Conserve Nova Scotia by the Premier without any more reasons than were given when you were dismissed as chief of staff?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I don't have an answer for you on that.
MR. SAMSON: That's what we're trying to figure out for Nova Scotians. You were chief of staff for four months. The Premier decided right after an election to dismiss you as chief of staff, but instead indicated to you that he wanted you to be head of Conserve Nova Scotia. Is it safe to say that during that conversation the Premier would have made comments along the lines of, I believe you're the best person, you're the best qualified individual to be able to carry out the priorities of our government as the head of Conserve Nova Scotia? Is that a fair statement?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I can tell you that he said I did a great job and that I was very hardworking, and that he was certain this was a task I could achieve.
MR. SAMSON: Help me out here, when he made those comments, that was referring to your time as chief of staff?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Yes, it was.
MR. SAMSON: So he was pleased with your performance as chief of staff but he was dismissing you to in return ask you to go head up Conserve Nova Scotia?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: That's correct.
[Page 19]
MR. SAMSON: You've already publicly indicated, I believe it's safe to say that you have limited knowledge of conservation issues and energy issues, probably the same amount of knowledge that the average Nova Scotian would have. I'm just curious, since you've become the head of Conserve Nova Scotia have you followed any sort of courses or any seminars or anything along those lines to better educate yourself, as the head of this agency, on energy and conservation-type issues?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I can assure you that I have been working diligently, hardworking every day, learning more, meeting with stakeholders, becoming more aware of the issues that confront us. With my team and I, we've been finding solutions to some of those issues. Yes, I've become far better educated.
MR. SAMSON: That's not what I asked you. Let me just ask you more directly, have you attended any sort of educational courses or any sort of seminars that would have provided you with a better education in regard to issues of conservation and energy-related issues, either in this province or anywhere else, since your appointment as the CEO of the agency?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I've attended several meetings with peers in the province and outside of the province.
MR. SAMSON: Have you followed any educational courses or enrolled in any sort of educational courses?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: No, I have not.
MR. SAMSON: Have you attended any seminars or anything dealing with conservation issues or anything of that nature?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: A lot of meetings that we attend are with folks from other parts of the country who are doing the same job. This is an emerging issue. Energy efficiency has become far more top-of-mind than it has ever been. When I am with my colleagues, we have speakers. Certainly there's knowledge to be gained, on a regular basis.
MR. SAMSON: Do you have any intentions of pursuing any sort of educational programs or seminars to better inform you as far as conservation issues?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Once we are firmly fully staffed and our programs are rolling out on a regular basis, perhaps. At this point in time, I am working really hard to bring new policies and programs forward for Nova Scotians.
MR. SAMSON: When do you expect that to take place?
[Page 20]
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: We're working on it on a daily basis. We've launched many new initiatives since October.
MR. SAMSON: Those initiatives that you're indicating, are those initiatives that came from Conserve Nova Scotia, or that came from the Department of Energy and had been worked on prior to the creation of Conserve Nova Scotia?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Some of those initiatives are very much created at Conserve Nova Scotia.
MR. SAMSON: At Conserve Nova Scotia?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Yes.
MR. SAMSON: So they've been created since October.
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Yes.
MR. SAMSON: Which ones would those be?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: We launched, on Monday, a Residential Energy Affordability Program that gives Nova Scotians, 105 Nova Scotians to be exact, the opportunity for energy efficiency upgrades.
MADAM CHAIR: I'm sorry, the time has now expired.
Mr. Porter, you have 20 minutes, until 10:10 a.m.
MR. CHUCK PORTER: Thank you, Madam Chair and again thank you to Ms. Heather Foley Melvin for returning today to answer some very important questions to this committee that we were left with to clarify, so I do appreciate your coming back.
A couple of things that you've been talking about this morning already that I just want to pick up on again. You made a statement a few minutes ago when asked kind of a qualifying question, I guess, about your being the best candidate and you stated that you felt you were the best candidate for this position and again, I would expect no other answer from someone with your responsibility.
So having said that, you sort of just started on where I was going to go, I wonder if you can reference maybe a few of those announcements and on one you were kind of cut off there and if you want to continue with the announcement this week, I think it is important we hear more about that as well and what the department is doing.
[Page 21]
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: The Residential Energy Affordability Program is a $650,000 initiative for the whole Province of Nova Scotia. What it speaks to is 25 residents in southwestern Nova Scotia , 25 residents in the northern area of Nova Scotia, 25 residents in Cape Breton and 30 residents in HRM will be part of a pilot program. Seventy-five of those applicants have been chosen off the Community Services list who are first in line for health and safety upgrades to their homes, so we'll be working with Community Services to identify those individuals and provide energy efficiency upgrades to their homes.
What we hope to achieve is to provide up to 30 per cent energy savings, permanent savings, to these folks who are already low and modest income. The 30 in metro Halifax or HRM are a little bit different pilot projects. For those individuals we'll be asking them to put some work in themselves. If they're unable, we'll ask that their families or friends or neighbours help them out as well.
We're trying to determine, through the program, which might be the best route to go forward. We'll evaluate the program when it's finished but we'll be providing those energy efficiency upgrades to 105 low- and modest-income Nova Scotians, starting earlier this week.
MR. PORTER: And how long is the pilot program for?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Well, until we're finished the 105 homes, and we expect that we should be finished probably by the end of April.
MR. PORTER: How did you arrive at the number 105? I was curious when I read this.
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Well, we wanted to break the province into an area where it was well represented and we looked at the Community Services model, as we were going to be working with them to define who the individual families or homeowners would be. We had already started working with Clean Nova Scotia on a pilot project for just HRM and felt that it really wasn't fair to do one portion of the province, that it made far better sense to cover the whole province, so that's where the 105 number came from.
It's a pilot, it's $650,000. We will certainly evaluate the pilot and hopefully do it again. There are a lot of people to help. It can't all be done at once but it's a great start.
MR. PORTER: Did Conserve Nova Scotia consult with stakeholders on the program?
[Page 22]
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Yes, we're dealing with the Affordable Energy Coalition on this issue and with Clean Nova Scotia, which is a non-governmental organization and the Ecology Action Centre, for that matter.
MR. PORTER: What has the Ecology Action Centre said publicly. I understand they've made a statement. I haven't read it - or have they? Maybe I'm confused, was there anything mentioned on that?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: They have actually. They were very supportive, they would like to see more, as would we, as would all, but I believe it is a great start and so do they.
They were speaking on behalf of their role in the Affordable Energy Coalition. The Affordable Energy Coalition is made up of several non-governmental organizations around the province and I believe it was Brendan Haley who was speaking on their behalf.
MR. PORTER: You indicated the last time you appeared that one of your priorities as a CEO was building public confidence in Conserve Nova Scotia. Do you feel you're achieving that goal and how have you gone about making that happen?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Well, we're working hard to put programs and policies in place that will benefit all Nova Scotians. That was just one initiative.
We also have another pilot project currently in Cape Breton and it is metering 100 homes so that the homeowners can actually see what they use and how much energy it uses and how much money it costs them to use different items in their house. So that's another pilot project on the public education and social behaviour change. People need to be more aware of what they can do, what they do that uses energy and what they could do that might use less.
MR. PORTER: I know from some of the programs and there have actually been quite a few that have been brought out with regard to housing and assessment and the EnerGuide, just as an example and I know in my office, for example, we're fairly busy with putting that information out to constituents. I am just kind of curious provincially, is there a number, where do you think we're at with that? Is it something that's been effective or you think will be quite effective?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: What is that?
MR. PORTER: The EnerGuide was one program but there were a number of energy efficient-type programs that have been released to help improve energy conservation and what have you, in homes. I'm just curious as to how much advantage,
[Page 23]
I guess, maybe for lack of a better word, are people actually taking advantage of the program and, if so, to what extent?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Well, we've done some work with many of the communities in Nova Scotia. Some of it was done through LED Christmas lights, be it with the municipalities or towns, we've provided them with LED Christmas lights and partnered on the cost of which. We also did an LED Christmas light exchange in conjunction with Nova Scotia Power, to help reduce the peak at Christmas time of everyone using the regular Christmas lights. We're replacing them with LEDs which can use up to 90 per cent less electricity.
We've also partnered with Antigonish and done a pilot project there as well which we will make available to other towns and municipalities in Nova Scotia, to do a CFL light exchange. I believe Antigonish was concerned that their power rates are set on their peak in the spring, on the peak of their use. So by doing a community-wide, compact fluorescent light exchange in their community, they figured they could affect their peak and therefore, have a lower overall power rate that they are able to offer the residents of Antigonish.
So that's something, I believe that's 90 per cent done, 90 per cent of those bulbs have been given out in Antigonish and we intend to partner with other communities to do the same thing.
MR. PORTER: So we would certainly - I should say you would - deem that as a successful program then?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Absolutely, but successes need to be measured, so we'll wait for the outcome of that particular program and evaluate that outcome.
MR. PORTER: Last week the Department of Energy announced government plans to foster the use of more renewable energy sources in Nova Scotia. Does Conserve Nova Scotia have a role in this process?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Currently we, on the renewable side, offer a solar domestic hot water rebate. Other than that, the Department of Energy still carries the portfolio on the renewable resources.
MR. PORTER: The federal government stated clearly that green programs are a priority for them, in the current House sitting. Do you have any plans to partner with the federal government, or work in concert with the federal government to maximize any and all programs that they introduce.
[Page 24]
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Absolutely, we hope to tap into the resources. In fact, we're meeting later this week with some of the officials from Natural Resources Canada.
MR. PORTER: We talked a little bit about that last question sort of split the differences maybe in Conserve Nova Scotia and Energy. How will the work of Conserve Nova Scotia differ, then, from the conservation efforts of the Department of Energy?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Well, Conserve Nova Scotia's mandate is for energy efficiency and energy conservation. The Department of Energy, the part of their mandate that I guess closely relates with ours is they handle the climate change file for Nova Scotia and also the renewable resources. The big picture is all working together we'll have a much greener Nova Scotia. We intend to continue to partner with the Department of Energy on those initiatives.
MR. PORTER: Thank you for that. I understand, in addition to yourself, that Conserve Nova Scotia has or will have 11 full-time staff. Is that actually the case at this point in time?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: No, we have eight at this time. We have a new position that's currently in with the Public Service Commission to be rated before we go to competition for that position.
MR. PORTER: What would some of the roles and responsibilities of these people, the expertise of your staff members be?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Well, the individual we'll be looking for in short order will be a director of social marketing, which is a large part of where Conserve Nova Scotia is going, to create a social behaviour change, to let individuals know that they don't need to change, completely, their lives to make a difference, that we can all be part of the solution, and that will require a change in people's behaviour.
Our executive director, Allan Crandlemire, comes from the Department of Energy and has many years of experience in renewables and in energy efficiency and in energy conservation, as well as on the oil and gas side. We're very lucky to have Allan. Our communications advisor also comes from the Department of Energy, as well as our program directors and energy engineers. Currently, we're a staff of eight, soon to be nine, and we will grow, we will grow to 12.
[10:00 a.m.]
MR. PORTER: You talked about that social marketing piece. I wonder, how difficult a task will that be, do you think, for Nova Scotians?
[Page 25]
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Individually, I think if everyone realizes that they can be part of the solution, I don't think it needs to be life-changing. Everyone can do a small part to be part of the overall solution.
MR. PORTER: Obviously there would be an expectation at your level. I would ask the question, as the CEO who feels she's quite qualified to take on this responsibility, you must have some ideas, though, to offer these individual departments. I think about this social marketing one, this person, maybe not yet hired. But you hire this person, you sit down, and obviously Ms. Foley Melvin has some ideas here, some direction to give and some thoughts. I'd be interested in hearing how that will work, as well.
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Absolutely. In order to create change, it needs to be a groundswell. I believe the last time I was at this committee I used the green bins as an example. When they were first rolled up in front of people's homes, they were very foreign, it was new, it was going to require change, and people weren't comfortable with that. Change is often difficult. We've seen today that Nova Scotia is a world leader in our waste resource, and we teach people all over the world how to make that behaviour change. I believe that if Nova Scotians can be shown how easily they can be made part of the solution, as they are often proud to be a Nova Scotian, they can also be proud of being part of the solution.
Education is another large part of what we intend to do at Conserve Nova Scotia - public education through social behaviour change, but also in the school system, working with the Department of Education to work with the desired outcomes that are already determined in the curriculum.
MR. PORTER: So, then, are we planning to go into an advertising, marketing-type strategy program to help bring about that change?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Absolutely. What we intend to start with very shortly is to roll out a CFL fundraising project in the schools. We've done a few pilots, and we intend to offer it to all schools in Nova Scotia, both through the Spring and into the Fall. We'll prepare a kit for each school. Instead of selling chocolate bars or cookie dough or whatever the case may be, we'll actually educate the students on what a difference they can make by selling these products. The students are now part of the solution. The parents and the people at their doors who buy them get to be part of the solution. Not only will they be helping raise money for the school, but they'll actually be part of the solution and saving energy in their homes.
MR. PORTER: Are we talking all levels of school?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Right now we're in P-12. We'll probably begin in the elementary school system and grow from there.
[Page 26]
MR. PORTER: We talked a bit about salaries and the number of people, et cetera. What is the breakdown of your budget, between programming costs and salary and benefits?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Our current budget that was shifted from the Department of Energy is $10.56 million. Approximately $9 million of that will be directed towards programs.
MR. PORTER: Can you outline for me the people and the organizations that you've visited since taking on this responsibility in June?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I guess starting back in June, I've met with most of the stakeholders that we feel will form part - well, I can bring up the Minister's Advisory Council, as well. I've met with most of the stakeholders. I've met out of province with Efficiency New Brunswick. I've met with some individuals from the United States. I've been to Efficiency Maine and sat with their team for a day. I've been to Charlottetown and there met with several of the individuals in my position from across Canada who are working on energy efficiency as well. I attended a meeting here in Halifax, that was put on by the federal government, of all of the folks who are dealing with energy efficiency throughout Canada, mainly in the Department of Energy. Allan and I attended that together.
If I could segue into the Minister's Advisory Council, our mandate is not just residential energy efficiency, it's also commercial, industrial, takes in the transportation sector, Government House in Order, and education. We're still waiting for two replies on the Minister's Advisory Council. We've gone out to the different groups that represent all of the sectors that our mandate covers, asking for them to put forward a representative to represent either their group or their organization or their companies on the Minister's Advisory Council. So we're very close to the letters going out for that to be formalized.
MR. PORTER: Would it be fair to say then that you're quite confident that these meetings with the stakeholders, whoever they may be, the input has been successful, there are plans that you look forward to implementing?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Most recently, at the ENERHouse 2007, which is a Nova Scotia Home Builders' Association annual event, we announced our vision for energy codes, which will have homes built in Nova Scotia to R80 by 2011. That's a great initiative. That's our vision that we announced. We'll now consult with the homebuilders in Nova Scotia to forward that vision and make it become a regulation for homes to be built like that. We're building homes today that are going to be here for 50 or 60 years or more, so if we're not building them smart today, we can't expect them to be energy efficient. We have lots of goals.
[Page 27]
MR. PORTER: I only have a couple of minutes left, and education is always a big piece for me, so I want to ask the question about education and programs. You mentioned last time a pilot program that would be launched in the early years of elementary school. Has the pilot program taken shape at all since the last time we spoke, and can you tell us about it, if it has?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: This would be the in-class hands-on? Yes. We're meeting on a regular basis, with individuals from the Department of Energy. In fact, from the federal Department of Environment, there is a representative of Nova Scotia Power on that committee. Our goal is to come up with - and we have not yet come up with - the perfect solution, but that's what we're working toward, come up with a tool that we can put in the teachers' hands to articulate the outcomes that the children need to learn, but at the same time teach them the benefits of energy efficiency. They are who we're going to be in 20 or 30 or 40 years, and we don't want to retrain all Nova Scotians again, or try to introduce a change in their behaviour patterns again. So if we can educate youth now, they will be, or they are, the future.
MR. PORTER: Keeping that program in mind, is there a specific grade level that we think we start at? I know in my constituency I visited every elementary school last Fall, and we did a conserve-type energy contest, if you will. I focused on Grades 5 and 6, and those who wanted to take part in each of those schools had the opportunity to write an essay to come back with ideas, et cetera. There were some pretty interesting things coming from our children out there. I just wonder, does the department have a rough idea of where they're going? Are you starting with Grade 5? Do you think you're down as low as Grade 2, or something like that, to focus on?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Grade 2 is the level that we're starting. We'll be starting with things as simple as understanding why it's important to turn out a light when it's not being used, very simple things. If they become behaviour, they're part of a very large change.
MR. PORTER: Madam Chair, I think that's my time.
MADAM CHAIR: At this point, I think what we'll do is take a five-minute recess until 10:15 a.m. We will start right at 10:15 a.m. Each caucus will have 10 minutes. It will be in camera. We will then come back at 10:45 a.m., into the public domain.
We are recessed until 10:15 a.m.
[10:10 a.m. The committee recessed to move in camera.]
[Page 28]
[10:40 a.m. The in camera session ended and the committee reconvened.]
MADAM CHAIR: I would like to call the committee back to order. We now have a final round of questions for each of the Party caucuses.
Mr. Wilson, you have five minutes.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Thank you, Madam Chair. With those few minutes I would like to just clarify a few things you stated earlier about the meeting with Howard Windsor around the title of CAO. I think you have stated that he put on the table that you would be CAO for the present time and then once the agency or office opened up, you would become CEO of that agency, office, department, is that true?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: That's correct.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): So when was that meeting, do you recall, with Howard Windsor when he put that on the table with you?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Some of those initial meetings were by telephone but it was later that same week, the week of June 20th.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Did you not ask or did Howard Windsor give you any reason why he would initially title your position as CAO and then eventually, months down the road, change it to CEO? Did he give you a reason for that?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: The reason, as I understood it, is that I would be CAO and once the agency was created, I would become CEO, that's my understanding. The agency didn't exist, therefore, I was the administrative officer in charge of creating it.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): So with that, I'll revert back to something else that I know we mentioned in camera but I think is a fair question to ask you, especially with the recent letter and correspondence we received late yesterday from the Deputy Minister of Justice. Did you seek advice from the Department of Justice on your appearance here today?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I expressed to them that I was very concerned about the motion of contempt and that I needed to find out from them what it was that I was able and not able to say. My contract of employment was with the province.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): And who did you speak to at the Department of Justice?
[Page 29]
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I spoke with Jennifer Palov.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): And how did you get in touch with her?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I believe she called me after I asked for assistance through the Premier's Office.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): And who in the Premier's Office did you talk to, to see who you could ask for some assistance through the Department of Justice?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: It was the Director of Communications.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): Is that Sasha Irving, I believe?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Yes. She directed me to the Department of Justice, or said that they would call me.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): So did they, at any point, state that you should have your own representation at today's meeting?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: No, I went about getting my own. I've been very concerned about the motion of contempt. To have a criminal record for doing my job would be unheard of, so I got legal advice as soon as I heard of the motion.
MR. DAVID WILSON (Sackville-Cobequid): I understand that and that is a great concern of mine also, to think that the government, the Premier, the Premier's Office would allow a bureaucrat, as yourself, to feel that you need legal counsel in this committee is absurd. I can't believe that they would allow you to come here, to feel that way over the last six months basically, without giving you advice and acknowledging the procedure of the Public Accounts Committee and what you can be held in contempt of and what your options are.
That I don't understand and it just shows, I think, and emphasizes the fact that the Premier has no leadership when it comes to not only dealing with bureaucrats like yourself, to allow you to feel that way and feel that you're in jeopardy and your reputation is at jeopardy is just unbelievable. That's why I think this whole process has unfolded the way it has. You, as a civil servant now, were a political appointment for four months, ended up receiving a job, a contract for three years in the Civil Service without, I think, following the fair hiring policy of the government, that's why we're here today. It's not because of you, it is because of the leadership of the current government and the Premier of this province.
[Page 30]
I apologize for that, and I think that the Premier has to answer to that and government has to answer to that. I hope that you come away from this knowing that that isn't how this committee works, it's not what this committee's intent is. It's just to ensure that the money that the government spends, from the taxpayers, is spent wisely, and that there's a value for that expenditure at the end of the day.
With that, one of the things that also concerns us a little bit is around who was involved in all this. You said earlier Howard Windsor was kind of the key person who advised you how this would all unfold. Is that correct?
[10:45 a.m.]
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: That is correct.
MADAM CHAIR: Order. The time has now expired.
Mr. Samson.
MR. SAMSON: Madam Chairman, for the record, I know my colleague has mentioned about your having legal counsel here, can you just confirm for the committee that Conserve Nova Scotia or the Province of Nova Scotia will not be paying for the legal fees incurred from you asking Mr. Machum to be here?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I can't confirm that. That matter is undetermined. I did ask Mr. Machum to represent me on this contempt issue. This issue arose out of my employment. That is yet to be determined.
MR. SAMSON: Do you mean taxpayers might actually be paying for a private lawyer when we have a significant number of lawyers already employed by the Province of Nova Scotia?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Perhaps.
MR. SAMSON: Well, that will be a whole other issue, so I'm not going to presuppose what's going to happen there. I'm just curious, you indicated that you were dismissed as chief of staff. You went on to indicate that you did not ask any questions as to why you were dismissed nor do you, even today, feel the need to ask why you were dismissed. If you get dismissed as the CEO of Conserve Nova Scotia, what actions would you take?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I'm not going to answer that question on the advice of counsel.
[Page 31]
MR. SAMSON: Okay. That got us into a bit of trouble before, when you didn't answer questions. What does your contract say, if you are dismissed? Are you aware of what provisions would be in your contract?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: There is a severance clause in my contract.
MR. SAMSON: Was there a severance clause in your contract as chief of staff?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Yes, there was.
MR. SAMSON: Did you look into what you would be entitled to? You were dismissed, so why did you not seek severance from that position?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I anticipated taking on the new agency with vigour. I was excited about creating Conserve Nova Scotia. I wasn't looking for employment, and I wasn't looking for severance.
MR. SAMSON: Severance is something you're entitled to whether you have employment waiting for you or not, that's something that's part of your contract. Being as you were dismissed, why did you not seek the severance provisions of your contract as chief of staff?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I wasn't looking for additional funds. I just wasn't looking for severance at that time.
MR. SAMSON: If you're dismissed as the CEO of Conserve Nova Scotia, will you be exercising your severance provisions?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: I'll make that decision if and when the time comes.
MR. SAMSON: Just one last question, Madam Chair. Ms. Foley Melvin, as you've noted, Mr. Wilson has asked you some questions, Mr. Epstein has asked you questions, so have I, and I can tell you I have no written questions and I didn't notice that they have any written questions, but I did notice that Mr. Porter does have written questions that he has posed to you here today. Did you play any role at all or have any knowledge in the preparation of those questions that were put to you by the government representative?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Absolutely none.
MR. SAMSON: That's it, Madam Chair.
[Page 32]
MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Porter, for the PC caucus. You have five minutes, until 10:56 a.m.
MR. PORTER: Madam Chair, I want to make one comment with regard to my written notes, basically that's so I can articulate the question clearly so that the witness understands the question. I like to be well prepared when I do come into this committee. It's a very important committee with some very important questions to be asked. (Interruptions) Am I interested in tabling them? No.
Question for the witness. What are your objectives for Clean Nova Scotia into the future now that we've gone through what we have today and in a previous session?
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: For Conserve Nova Scotia, as I said, we'll be travelling the social marketing, behaviour change route where we're currently waiting for the Public Service Commission to rate that job, and it will be going out for competition. The other big step that we'll be taking in the very near future is hiring a manager of measurement and evaluation, which will make us very accountable. We will create benchmarks as a place to start and we will measure and evaluate all of the programs we do and all of the dollars we spend, allowing us to make decisions on whether or not the dollars are being well spent and then we'll use that knowledge to create more programs and/or policies. That is immediate term goals.
MR. PORTER: Thank you for that. I don't have a lot of questions, maybe a couple of comments. It has been almost four hours of questioning now on this topic and I think that we appreciate the fact that you have been able to answer and clarify the questions in this committee.
I want to talk a bit, Madam Chair, if I could, about a motion, if it is in order, at this time.
MADAM CHAIR: Yes, it is. If you would like to move a motion you are free to do so at this time.
MR. PORTER: Thank you, Madam Chair. I think today's appearance by Ms. Foley Melvin has cleared up any and all issues outstanding from her last appearance, therefore I think Mr. Steele's motion regarding contempt is no longer relevant. However, I would like to make it official and move that Mr. Steele's motion be stricken and that the committee thank Ms. Foley Melvin for her appearance and answering questions and clarifying any issues this committee had with regard to this issue.
MADAM CHAIR: So the motion specifically says what?
[Page 33]
MR. PORTER: I would move that Mr. Steele's motion be stricken and that the committee thank Ms. Foley Melvin for her appearances.
MADAM CHAIR: There is a motion on the floor, is there a discussion?
Mr. Samson.
MR. SAMSON: Thank you, Madam Chair. In my almost nine years of being elected and serving almost all of them on this committee, other than for a brief period, I have never heard of a motion to actually strike another motion, which was never actually voted upon, here in committee. I do believe the motion is out of order, I've never heard of such a motion before. The fact is that Mr. Steele's motion was never brought forward for a vote. There doesn't seem to be any indication that that's going to take place today, which I would submit to you, in essence, means the motion has basically gone away, being that it has not been brought to a vote.
What's next? We're going to start asking to have stuff stricken out of the record from the Public Accounts Committee because we didn't like a certain answer? I hear what Mr. Porter is trying to do, I think it is clear that that motion originating from Mr. Steele is not being brought forward and, as a result, it is in essence ending, as a result of that. So I don't believe the motion is in order and I see no reason for that motion to be dealt with.
So I look to your guidance on that but I think it could be an extremely dangerous precedent if we are entertaining a motion to strike another motion, which actually was never brought forward to a vote or a full discussion. So I leave that to you for your decision, Madam Chair.
MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Epstein.
MR. EPSTEIN: Thank you. I think that last procedural point is correct. The motion was tabled, I think we should hear from the committee's legal counsel but, as I understand it, a motion that's already been tabled just stays on the table. I think it would certainly be irregular to so-call strike a motion. It seems to imply that somehow the records of the committee would be interfered with. I think the correct thing to do with a motion that has been tabled is simply to leave it there, subject to what we hear from our legal counsel. Thank you.
MADAM CHAIR: Having heard from Legislative Counsel, I will decide that the motion is in order but we will vote on it. If members of the committee feel that the motion is not supportable, then we'll do that and there will be opportunity for further discussion on what to do with a previous motion that is still here in front of the committee. Is that clear? Mr. Samson.
[Page 34]
MR. SAMSON: Well, let me just make it clear, Madam Chair, that we will not be supporting the motion introduced today but in no way, shape or form does that indicate our support for the original motion. I don't believe that motion is being brought forward and, as a result, in essence it has died as a result of that. So for procedural reasons and for the danger of setting a precedent, I do not support the motion being brought forward, but those are the reasons why. It is certainly in no way an indication of support for the original motion, which is not even being dealt with and actually would not have been dealt with, had it not been for the government members bringing it forward and making it an issue again today. So we would not support the motion as introduced by Mr. Porter.
MADAM CHAIR: I understand that. The question has been called. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye.
MR. PORTER: If I could make a comment before you call for the vote, Madam Chair. Actually, taking those things into consideration, and maybe my lack of experience on this committee, I do appreciate those comments, and I would agree to rescind the motion that I have just moved, based on those comments, if it has been tabled. We'll leave it at that until the vote is perhaps taken, if it ever is taken, on the other motion. I would rescind that motion. Thank you for that.
MADAM CHAIR: The motion has been rescinded. That concludes the opportunity for questions. I would now invite Ms. Foley Melvin to make some concluding remarks.
MS. FOLEY MELVIN: Madam Chair, again, I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to speak to you all today in order to provide more detail and reasoning to the responses I gave during my first appearance before this committee. Like I said in my opening statement, it was never, ever my intent to deliberately withhold information from the committee. I hope that my testimony today has clarified that concern. Thank you.
MADAM CHAIR: Thank you for being here today. At this point, we stand adjourned until our next meeting.
[The committee adjourned at 10:56 a.m.]
