Green Plan Banner

Committees

 

Table of Contents

Roles and Duties

Committee Membership

Green Plan Organizational Chart

 

GREEN PLAN Home

 

 

Roles and Duties:

1. ACCORD COMMITTEE

1.1 Responsibilities

The Accord Committee is responsible for the implementation and management of environmental sustainable programming agreements under the jurisdiction of the COESA Accord. Its role within COESA is to provide direction and determine the overall Green Plan objectives, and to approve financial allocations and reallocations between Green Plan program areas. Terms of Reference for the Committee are presented in Section 6.3 of the COESA Accord (COESA = Canada-Ontario Environmental Sustainability Accord).

1.2 Members

Members of the Accord Committee represent all those federal and provincial departments which are involved with the issue of environmental sustainability as it relates to the Ontario agri-food sector. The Accord Committee consists of eight members representing the following federal departments: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Environment Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada; and the following provincial ministries: Agriculture and Food, Environment, and Natural Resources. To view a list of Committee members and their respective branches, click here.

1.3 Duties/Procedures

The Accord Committee agreed that existing programs will continue to be administered by the existing Committees. Starting with the Land Management Assistance Program and continuing in the future, one Agreement Management Committee (AMC) will be formed to manage and administer all government programs which come under the Canada-Ontario Environmental Sustainability Accord. Accord Meeting #4, Jan 30/92.

Accountability always rests with the Minister of the funding agency. That Minister must, therefore, retain ultimate authority over his resources. At the same time, inter-agency management is needed to achieve efficiency and effectiveness in complementary and joint programming. Accord Meeting #5, March 12th/92.

Material to be discussed at Accord meetings should be provided to members in advance of the meeting; this is to allow staff adequate time to review and prepare comments. In the event that the Accord Committee agrees that information generated by the AMC should be sent to the Advisory Committee, it should only go to the Advisory Committee after review by the Accord co-chairs. Accord Meeting #7, May 13/92.

Project/program approval process:

The Accord Committee approves action items and delegates activities to the Agreement Management Committee who recommends a level of detail for decision documents. An executive summary is a necessity. Any decision required must be clearly outlined in the decision document. Accord Meeting #9, August 6/92.

In light of recent government budget cutbacks, the Accord Committee will be reviewing the Green Plan Budget each meeting. Accord Meeting #12, May 3/93.

The Accord Committee delegated the responsibility for reviewing and approving the Statement of Work (SOW) to the Agreement Management Committee (AMC). AMC Meeting #14, May 20/92.

The current and future roles of the COESA Accord, Advisory, and Agreement Management Committees were examined by the Accord Committee in a lengthy discussion. Of the points raised, it is suffice to note the following:

  1. Members were in agreement that the Accord Committee should operate at a strategic, department to department level, and should approve program financial resources only at the highest level, i.e. Canada-Ontario Agreement level;

  2. It is within the authority of the Agreement Management Committee to manage programs/projects and make financial decisions at these levels;

  3. The role of the Advisory Committee, to provide rural Ontario and other non-government groups a say in what programs are funded and their delivery, is a valuable one;

  4. Now that most Green Plan Programs are underway, a joint meeting of the Accord/Advisory/AMC Committees is in order to evaluate what has been done and what needs to be done; and

  5. These and other issues regarding the roles and department involvements need to be mulled over. To this end a position paper should be drafted to focus and direct any further discussions on committee roles.

There was general consensus that the Accord Committee should maintain a strategic focus and the Agreement Management Committee to be charged with the responsibility and authority to run programs. Accord Meeting #14, January 13, 1994.

 


 

2.0 AGREEMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (AMC)

2.1 Responsibilities

Formed by the Accord Committee to review Green Plan information and identify any programming gaps which may exist, and, based on current information, prioritize what should be done.

The AMC recommends to the Accord Committee a course of action to follow (identifies the possible processes which could be employed to implement programming for each of the ten identified issues).

At the request and the direction of the Accord Committee, the AMC supervises the implementation and evaluation of environmental programs.

  • Refer to the Canada-Ontario Agreement on the Agriculture Component of the Green Plan, Section 3.3 for a listing of the AMC's duties.

2.2 Members

The Accord Committee's participating departments and ministries each identified one staff member for appointment to the AMC. To view a current list of AMC members, please click here.

2.3 Duties/Procedures

AMC is to approve all draft requests for proposals (RFP's) and report their decisions to the Accord Committee. Accord Meeting #9 August 6/92.

At the January 30th, 1992 Accord Committee meeting it was decided to form a "shadow" committee to assist in the prioritization of the Kempenfelt options. There is a need to establish priorities and a process for setting criteria and guidelines for Green Plan funding. The AMC was chosen to prioritize the options from the Kempenfelt conference and make recommendations to the Accord Committee, which would then seek advice on these recommendations from the Advisory Committee. AMC Meeting. #1, February 20/92.

AMC are to review and provide recommendations on project proposals to the Accord Committee. This process will require that an AMC meeting be held prior to any Accord meeting. The role of AMC vis vis contracts and agreements signed between Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and a third party for the delivery of programs under LMAP was discussed. These documents will be available for review by the AMC and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada appreciates receiving any input. However, because the time frame for signing is often very short, it is not always be possible to circulate the contracts prior to the signing. It was agreed that having the contracts circulated for information purposes would assist AMC members and their agencies in maintaining an overview of farm environmental initiatives. It was suggested that the levels of funding be deleted from the circulated copy if confidentiality is a problem. AMC Meeting #4, May 21/92.

2.4 Communications

An Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada communications officer is to become a non-voting member of the AMC. The officer will work in consultation with, and report to, the AMC, and work closely with the designated communication specialist within each of the member agencies of the Accord. The individual specialists will identify technical experts within the agencies to assist the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada lead in developing the appropriate information. This material will be reviewed by technical experts prior to its release. Minutes of AMC meetings will be finalized and two copies will be reprinted for signature by the AMC co-chairs. These copies will be placed in the appropriate Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and OMAFRA files. The Accord Committee and AMC members will not receive copies of the final minutes.

 


 

3.0 ACCORD ADVISORY COMMITTEE

3.1 Responsibilities

The Advisory Committee was formed to provide advice to the Accord Committee on environmental sustainability priorities and programs.

3.2 Members

The Committee is comprised of interested stakeholders representing the diverse interests involved in the environmental sustainability of the agri-food business, producers, environmental groups, consumers, educational institutions, and resource interests.

From this group one or two members of the Advisory Committee are to be identified to represent Ontario on a National Advisory Committee which will provide practical advice to the federal and provincial Ministers of Agriculture.

The Advisory Committee was established by the Accord Committee in accordance with section 6.4 of the COESA Accord. To view a list of current members, please click here.

3.3 Duties/Procedures

Members of the Accord Committee agreed that the Advisory Committee's terms of reference should be rewritten to more clearly detail its role in light of the principles identified ie. the Advisory Committee should provide advice to the Accord Committee on the feasibility, sustainability, and accountability of suggested programming and strategic plans. Regarding rural conservation clubs, it is not the Advisory Committee's role to select projects for funding but rather to provide comments and suggestions for program details and the implementation process. The Advisory Committee will prepare recommendations on specific programs at the request of the Accord Committee. Accord Meeting #3, November 20/91.

Members of the Advisory Committee have expressed concerns about the loose nature of the Advisory Committee's role, the Advisory Committee's relationship to the AMC, "rubber stamping" proposals, and the need for the Advisory Committee to play a part in reviewing, monitoring, and evaluating various COESA programs and projects. The development of a workplan was mentioned. Advisory Meeting #9, August 6/92.

The Accord Committee is in agreement with the Advisory Committee's recommendation that the Accord members prepare an annual workplan to guide their activities. This document will be an adjunct to the Committee's existing terms of reference which speaks to its specific role. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and OMAFRA are to initiate, with the Advisory Committee, the development of its first workplan. A draft document which outlines the Advisory Committee's future directions is to be presented to the Accord Committee. Accord Meeting # 9, Sept. 14/92.

Concerning its role and activities, the Advisory Committee agreed that it has been selected to provide advice to the Accord Committee. The Accord Committee may choose to accept this advice or reject it. The AMC on the other hand is to do the bidding of the Accord Committee. The Advisory Committee is experiencing frustration regarding the synchronization of their activities with the AMC. Advisory Meeting # 10, Oct. 29/92.

The Advisory Committee felt that it required more direction from the Accord Committee on its role and responsibilities before it could complete a workplan for its activities over the next year. A draft operating procedures statement prepared by Dr. Freeman McEwen was provided for information. The Advisory Committee should provide advice to the Accord Committee on those matters/issues on which its comments are requested. However, this does not specifically prohibit the Advisory Committee from providing recommendations/advice on other matters about which it feels the Accord Committee should be advised. More specific comments by the Accord Committee on the role of the Advisory Committee are to be channelled through Mike Hicknell for distribution back to the Advisory Committee. Accord co-chairs will attend the December 15th meeting of the Advisory Committee to present their thoughts and direction on the current and future role of the Advisory Committee. Accord Meeting # 10, Nov 13/92.

As a result of federal funding cutbacks, at least 10% of current funding will be cut from most Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada programs. For example, Green Plan funding will be cut by at least 10% in both 1993-94 and 1994-95. Future cuts may be deeper and affect programming beyond this two year cut. Budget cuts will also have an impact on other areas of programming (for example, future Advisory Committee meetings). No monetary commitments beyond January can be made pending clarification of the budget cuts. The second issue discussed was the membership of the Advisory Committee. The Accord Committee's recent decision to increase the membership of the Committee was based on its belief that the Advisory Committee should have a broader and more balanced base of members. The Accord Committee remains resolute in its determination that members of the Advisory Committee are appointed as individuals and not as representatives of an organization. Advisory Meeting # 11, Dec. 15/92.

John Lounds and Jim Magee were chosen to represent the Advisory Committee on the Wildlife/Wetlands/Woodlands Coordinating Committee. Advisory Meeting #12, April 20, 1993.

During a review of the previous minutes a discussion ensued about the reasons for members' selection on the Advisory Committee and the role of the Advisory Committee. Members discussed the politics of their nomination, i.e. who did they represent ?, the actions taken by the Accord Committee on several of their recent recommendations and the issues they were asked or not asked to comment on. There was also discussion on the amount of funding which is to be provided to support the Environmental Farm Planning initiative. For example, members were concerned that they had not been provided with the funding figures which were finally negotiated with the Coalition. It was requested that a review of the files be conducted to identify where and when the funding budgeted for EFP was identified. Advisory Meeting #14, January 7, 1994.

 


 

 

Table of Contents | GREEN PLAN Home

 

Prepared: Tue 18 July, 1995
Last Revised: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 04:19:46 PM