SQLFusion - Justice Normand Glaude grants standing to the Unpper Canada District School Board at the Cornwall Public Inquiry

RULING ON THE APPLICATION FOR STANDING OF THE UPPER CANADA DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD

The Upper Canada District School Board (the “UCDSB” or the “Board”) has applied for full standing for Part I and Part II of this Inquiry, limited to those issues that directly affect its interests. The UCDSB provided written submissions in support of its application, and counsel for the UCDSB appeared before me on June 27, 2006 to present oral submissions on the matter.

After hearing those submissions, in the interest of avoiding any delay in the progress of this Inquiry, I advised counsel for the Board that I would grant the Board’s application for standing, with reasons to follow. I did that so that with the knowledge that it had been granted standing, the Board could immediately begin to prepare its corporate presentation and the process of production of documents to the Commission.

The following are my reasons for granting standing to the UCDSB:

Counsel for the Board explained that the UCDSB is a publicly funded school board established in accordance with the Education Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E-2 and Regulations. Its jurisdiction includes the counties of Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry, and it is successor board of the Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry County Board of Education. The school board had, and continues to have, duties and obligations in respect of the children attending its schools, including a duty to report children in need of protection. Counsel for the school board further noted that it has policies and procedures regarding allegations of abuse.

Given the foregoing, I am satisfied that the UCDSB is likely to be directly and substantially affected by Part I of this Inquiry, and grant it full standing, limited to those issues which directly affect its interests.

I am also granting full standing to the UCDSB for Part II of this Inquiry, limited to those issues that directly affect its interests. I am of the view that the UCDSB and in turn, its staff and students, may be directly affected by any recommendations made in Part II.

Additionally, the UCDSB represents distinct ascertainable interests and perspectives that are essential to my mandate in Part II, and may be well-placed to assist me in addressing the issue of further improvement of the response to allegations of abuse in the context of publicly funded educational institutions.

While not addressed by counsel for the UCDSB, and without any knowledge of the facts, I am mindful that it is possible for conflicts to arise between a board and its current and/or former staff and/or their representative(s). Should such a conflict or potential conflict arise, I expect that counsel for the UCDSB will advise Commission counsel in a timely fashion and ensure that such conflicts are resolved expeditiously.

The UCDSB did not apply for funding.

Released: June 30, 2006