Historical Documents
Licensure Historical Perspective 1984-1996
In the beginning
Bill Pr 9 of 1984, spearheaded by the late Rod Vaillant, gave members of ACPO the right to title and use of the designation C. Chem. With the passing of that act, ACPO members became subject to a code of ethics and discipline for unprofessional conduct.
Since the passing of the Bill, membership has increased steadily. Our membership became active in support of the next goal, one we are still working towards – licensure. Executive and Council have worked diligently over the years to keep interested parties informed of the need for licensure. Meetings have been held with bodies such as the Canadian Chemical Producers Association, Society of Plastics Industry, Canadian Plastics Institute, etc. In 1990, a committee chaired by G. Orpwood was set up to study the profession of Chemisty in Canada. This committee made a series of recommendations, the most important one being:
"The Chemical Institute of Canada should encourage professional licensing of chemists, comparable to that of engineers, and assist in setting up provincial societies to undertake this licensing." /p>
The following groups supported this recommendation:
|
|
Discussions with Parliament
Briefs and projects began with the parliamentary and bureaucratic members of the Ontario Legislature. Serious discussions were launched with the Peterson Liberal Government, but soon negated with the successful NDP election result in 1990.
During the NDP term (Oct. 1990-May 1995), numerous meetings were held with David Winninger, Parliamentary Assistant to the Attorney General’s office, and with Steven Fram, the Legal Counsel, Policies and Planning for the Provincial Government. Our first brief to them supplied information on the history of the ACPO, the demography of our members, and the areas in which the health and safety of the general public were endangered.
Following these discussions with Mr. Winninger, a second document was prepared to define the profession of chemistry. Copies were sent to the Canadian Association of Physicists and the Professional Engineers of Ontario for comment, before being presented to the Ministry of the Attorney General.
Mr. Winninger then requested specific information and examples of situations in which the public or the environment was endangered as a result of lack of licensure for chemists. Simultaneously, we made a request in the Distillate (now the Chartered Chemist News), vol. 9, no. 3, 1996, for all members to write to politicians starting the case for licensure.
The campaign failed – less than ten letters had been sent.
Brief Encounters with Ministries
More meetings with Steven Fram and David Winninger followed. Late in the NDP’s term, ACPO was advised that the Ministry of the Attorney General was really not competent to evaluate the need for licensure for technically oriented groups such as ourselves. We were told to contact the Ministry of Labour, Ministry of Environment, and Ministry of Health in an attempt to find a Ministry that could license Chemists.At the same time, ACPO was much occupied with supplying briefs and information to the Advisory Committee on Environmental Strategies. This initiative was taken when the Ministry of the Environment circulated draft guidelines on site remediation and clean-up. There was particular concern because the draft gave sign of authority on all aspects of site remediation and clean-up to the Professional Engineers, even in chemical matters. ACPO’s presentation on the subject was well received by the Ministry of the Environment, and briefs retailored concerning licensure, for presentation to that Ministry.
Failure strikes, again!
The NDP government was denied re-election, and ACPO back at square one. After talking with the various Ministries, a brief along with copies of all correspondence to the previous administration was requested by the Ministry of Attorney General. Six months later, the Ministry requested a second copy of the submission, having misplaced the first. Steven Fram, recently retired from legal counsel to the government, became available as a consultant for the ACPO. He advised the Association that the Ministry of the Attorney General was still attempting to, “get out of the licensing business”.
Small steps forward
Meanwhile, contact had been maintained with the Ministry of Labour and a meeting held to present an information package to Dr. Om Malik and Dr. Ed McCluskey of the Occupational Health branch of that Ministry. A second brief was presented and Dr. Malik and Dr. McCluskey were clearly aware and sympathetic to the need for licensure of chemists of Ontario. They indicated that the profession of Chemistry is one which has impact on many industries including Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Labour, Solicitor General’s Office, Corporate and Consumer Affairs, and so on.
The Ministry of Labour pledged support of an Inter-ministerial initiative lead by either the Ministry of the Attorney General or the Ministry of the Solicitor General. Dr. Malik indicated that at that time, those bidding for licensure where going against the political current. Nevertheless, the need for licensure was in fact recognized by the Ministry.
ACPO has been active in non-political arenas as an early participant in NSSC, the Natural Science Societies of Canada, successfully negotiating an exemption clause for Natural Sciences, including chemistry, from the revised Engineering Acts. ACPO met with the Professional Engineers (PEO), the Association of Geoscientists of Ontario, and the Ontario Institute of Agrologists, to discuss many areas of mutual interest.
PEO underwent a fundamental review of the Engineering Act of Ontario. At the same time a task force of engineers and geoscientists recommended that the latter should gain licensure by way of an, “independent college” within an amended engineering act. The draft brief was forwarded to the PEO to determine if there was a means to get licensure via their revised act, while at the same time retaining full independence.
D.A. Bayley, F.P.R.I., C. Chem.
Chair, Licensure Committee