Law Times

Law Times • may 9, 2011 Some days it's about people, not politics O ver the years, poli- tics and journalism tend to foster cynicism. Per- haps it's the same in the practice of law. You begin to view things with a jaundiced eye, be- lieving that nothing is for nothing and that altruism was long ago checked at the door. Th en, once in a while, something happens that gives pause and in so doing restores faith in human nature and casts a new light on our own endeavours. It also re-ener- gizes us to the cause. Such is the case with Paul and Marjory Springer. He's 92; she's 87. Th ey've been married for 66 years, a remarkable achievement in itself. More remarkable is that they're inseparable and, although ravaged by the burden of age and dementia, they still gaze fondly at each other in the Sudbury, Ont., nursing home where they're living out the last days of their considerable lives. Th e heartbreak of this story is that, if not for a deter- mined MPP, an alert columnist, and a government that showed it can still lead with its heart, this couple would have been separated. You see, there are almost no rooms for married seniors. Sure, there are semi-private rooms, but the rules forbid a man and a woman from sharing unless they request one. In that case, they lose their comfort allowance of $130 a month and must subsidize the additional costs with their own savings. For the Springers, their savings, having sustained them for so long, were too meagre to carry them the rest of the way in a semi-private room. Clearly, they were in a bureaucratic trap. Th ey tried to move to another home but faced the same dilemma. Th eir destiny would be to end up in diff erent wards with three strangers thanks to new rules introduced last July. Enter Christina Blizzard, the long-standing Queen's Park columnist for Sun Media who took up their cause in her Sunday column two weeks ago. Th at would have been the end of the story because everyone knows that no matter how much columnists and politicians rant and complain about an issue, they almost never get an imme- diate reaction. Th is time, however, something special happened. Soon after, NDP Nickel Belt MPP France Gélinas stood in the legislature to raise the issue. Minister of Health Deb Matthews immediately rose to her feet and acknowledged the question. "I'm very, very happy today to tell you that we are going to be changing the rules so that couples who are living their fi nal years in a long-term care home will be able to share a room together for as long as they live," Matthews responded. "Th ey should not be required to pay a premium. Spousal reunifi cation goes to the top of the list. It is our highest priority. "When we took offi ce in 2003, we heard horror stories about couples who had spent their whole lives together and all they wanted to do was spend what was left of their lives together." Wow. Full disclosure here, I've known Blizzard for some 31 years from my time at the Toronto Sun and through my friendship with her husband. I admire, respect, and like them both. But what happened here would garner my incredulity and respect regardless of our friendship. Frankly, I can't remember a faster acknowledgment and response from a government in all my years in journalism. Neither can Blizzard. "I ran into the premier in the elevator, and he actually thanked me for the column and bringing it to light," she said. "He said, 'You know we both say and write things and we wonder if anyone is listening sometimes.'" Here's the kicker. It's no secret Blizzard is a right-winger who works for a right-wing media outlet and that she has been a constant thorn in the Liberals' side during their mandate. Still, this was a story that transcended politics. You'd have to be heartless not to be touched by it. Hats off to Blizzard, the members of the legislature, and especially Premier Dalton McGuinty. Perhaps we could have less mudslinging and more collaboration as this term winds down. It really works better that way. Ian Harvey has been a journalist for 34 years writing about a diverse range of issues including legal and political aff airs. His e-mail address is ianharvey@rogers.com. Inside Queen's Park By Ian Harvey staff , and members of the bar were present to celebrate the bicentennial of the Law Society of Upper Canada. In keeping with the spirit of the bicentennial, T I volunteered to be one of 10 benchers to dress up in period costumes to re-enact the found- ing of the law society. As we sat in our costumes on the lawn, a seagull with an intestinal disorder fl ew over the celebrations and decided to inaugurate my expensive rented costume with a large dollop of poop. I have often thought of that incident as a meta- phor for my 16 years as an elected bencher: a mix- ture of enjoyment and accomplishments liberally scattered with frequent occasions when the presence at Convocation of a seagull with diarrhea would have improved the mood of the day. My term as an elected bencher with full voting rights ends the day before Convocation this month. My forced termination follows the implementation in December 2009 of the recommendations from a deep- ly fl awed governance task force that prevented seven current benchers from running for re-election. We remain as emeritus benchers with all existing rights and privileges except for the ability to make mo- tions and vote at Convocation. When I asked Treasurer Laurie Pawlitza if I could share some memories and issue a challenge to the in- coming benchers at our last voting Convocation in April, the answer was no. So here are the remarks I was not able to deliver to my bencher colleagues at Convocation. I have listed them in no particular order as highlights, seagull moments or challenges. • Highlight: Being at Convocation allowed me to get to know some of the greats of the legal profes- sion who are now gone from our midst. I am eter- nally grateful for the opportunity to have known, among others, Stuart Th om, Brendan O'Brien, Laura Legge, John Arnup, Don Lamont, Ron Cass, Barry Pepper, and Ken Jarvis. • Highlight: Convocation approved many sig- nifi cant milestones since I became a bencher in 1995. Among these, I count the payout of the $154-million insurance defi cit; the passage of a statement of principles acknowledging the law society's respect for religious and spiritual beliefs; the bicentennial celebration; the passage of a paid parental leave policy; the implementation of the task force reports on sole and small-fi rm practi- tioners and retaining women in the legal profes- sion; the decision not to hold Convocation on any day that confl icts with the religious beliefs of a bencher; and the institution of the position of a complaints resolution commissioner. • Top highlight: To me, the most signifi cant milestone in my 16-year term was the creation of TitlePLUS by the law society. It aimed to counter the eff orts of established title insurers who arrived in Canada with thoughts of setting up closing centres and repealing Regulation 666 that requires the involvement of lawyers in title-insured real estate transactions. With the co-operation of Convocation and the Ontario government, former treasurer Harvey Strosberg was able to bring TitlePLUS into being in the face of intense lobbying eff orts by Amer- ican insurers who wanted to bring the no-lawyer model of U.S. title insurance to Canada. Without TitlePLUS in the marketplace, as many as 8,000 Ontario real estate lawyers would be out of business now. • Seagull moment: Convocation's undermining of its own specialist certifi cation program by al- lowing the uncontrolled use of the word expert in lawyers' promotional materials. • Seagull moment: Convocation's rejection of my proposal for an ethical investment policy for its millions of dollars in invested funds. www.lawtimesnews.com COMMENT A bencher's final remarks as elected representative BY BOB AARON For Law Times he scene is the bandshell at Simcoe Park in Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ont., in June 1997. On this sunny afternoon, the benchers, senior • Seagull moment: Convocation's reluctance to pub- lish benchers' expense accounts and remuneration. • Seagull moments: Lack of civility at Convoca- tion. Sadly, there are too many examples of in- sults and epithets in Convocation's transcripts, and my colleague Gary Gottlieb and I have suf- fered the brunt of many of them. Speaker's Corner • Seagull moments: In any properly governed or- ganization, the ultimate authority for the agenda is the board itself. Th e law society's agenda has been ma- nipulated in the past without the knowledge or consent of the benchers. Committee re- ports have disappeared, and individual bencher motions have never made it to the table. Th is should never be allowed to happen again. At the same time, in-camera proceedings should always take place without any staff , unlike the present policy. • Th e worst seagull moment: Convocation's awarding of an honorary doctorate to arch- bishop Desmond Tutu, who is quoted as saying that Zionism has "very many parallels with ra- cism." Th e award ranks as one of Convocation's worst decisions in its history. • Seagull moment: Creation of a real estate issues working group that in years of navel-gazing has accomplished virtually nothing. Challenges to the new bench: • Marginalizing of benchers: Th rough the admin- istration of several treasurers, I have seen hugely disproportionate responsibilities and honours sprinkled amongst benchers. Th is, of course, resulted in a number of us, notably me and my friend Gottlieb, being marginalized. Th is lack of transparency in the appointments process must stop with the new crop of benchers. • Law society governance: As a government-appointed member of the board of Tarion Warranty Corp., I was privileged to see state-of-the-art corporate gov- ernance at work and was shocked at how far behind the law society had fallen. Tarion enthusiastically encouraged its board members to take an intensive three-day course on board eff ectiveness at the Uni- versity of Toronto Rotman School of Management. During three days last fall and 2 1/2 years at Tarion, I learned more about proper and eff ective board governance than I did in 16 years at Convocation. Convocation should encourage its members to take similar courses. Th is is not meant as a criticism of the LSUC's excellent CEO Malcolm Heins or the superb senior staff at the law society. But clearly Convocation must come out of the 19th century in terms of board governance. It needs to learn how to work better as a group in order to more eff ectively govern itself and the profession. At the moment, we earn a failing grade in this area. • Disappearing policy decisions: Over and over again, Convocation makes policy decisions and promptly abandons them. Proper policy govern- ance dictates regular followup on board decisions. • Ombudsman: If Convocation is serious about modern corporate governance, it will immediate- ly implement the position of ombudsman to act as an intermediary and problem solver between the law society and its stakeholders. Despite the concerns, perhaps the most reward- ing part of being a voting bencher for 16 years was the opportunity to represent the voice of the little guy at Convocation. Over the years, I have heard by phone and e-mail and in person from hundreds of my colleagues in the profession asking for advice or information or expressing their opinions about the hijinks in the benchers' quarters. My colleagues have elected me as bencher four times. I am truly grateful for their trust and humbled by their support. Although I am no longer able to vote at Convocation, I look forward to being their eyes, ears, and voice at Osgoode Hall during the years to come. To those who have honoured me with the op- portunity to serve, thank you. Bob Aaron is a Toronto real estate lawyer. As of May 25, he becomes an emeritus bencher. PAGE 7

• Cover
• LawPRO Warning
• Final Remarks
• Focus On E-Discovery