Tag Archives: Right to Practice

Oppositon to Bill 22- next steps

Hi Everyone,

I do not want us all to lose our momentum. I am encouraging everyone to re-address their letters of opposition and send them to their MLA. I would also suggest that you CC Premier, David Alward.

Below you will find a link to the MLA contact list.

We cannot afford to lose our momentum while we wait. We don’t want this to go to Second Reading without us informing our MLAs and the Premier of our opposition to Bill 22.

Gareth

Link to MLA email contact list

Gareth Davies: Yesterday’s meeting of the Standing Committee on Private Bills was an extraordinary event

Hi Everyone,

Yesterday’s meeting of the Standing Committee on Private Bills was an extraordinary event. Thanks to those who could make it. For those who could not make it I will try and summarize the key events.

First and foremost, it was clear to me that the MLAs that asked questions (about half of them) were obviously concerned and informed. This can only be the result of all of our correspondence over the last 10 days. I want to congratulate all of us for having the motivation and bravery to speak out against Bill 22. I was greatly impressed with ALL of the letters I read. They were all professional, clear, concise, and reasonable. I am so proud of the strength and integrity of forestry practitioners in this province.

I was very relieved that there were pointed and intelligent questions coming equally from both Conservative and Liberal MLAs. I think that we can be re-assured that there is no political agenda coming from Cabinet that would push Bill 22 through.

The proponents of Bill 22 appeared to be incapable or unwilling to answer any of the questions or concerns of both the Members of the Standing Committee and the opposition. Their lawyer dominated a lot of their presentation. Other presenters in support of Bill 22 were members of the ARPFNB executive. They supported Bill 22 by claiming it would ensure “good forestry” practice by preventing unqualified people from practicing forestry. They openly revealed their desire to control both the training and education of forestry professionals, as well as the practice of forestry throughout the NB forest sector. They openly revealed that they intend to determine the scope of training and competence for all forestry practitioners in the NB forest sector. They openly stated that they are unwilling and incapable of editing Bill 22 so that it only applies to their membership. In general they spent most of their time repeating the same propaganda, telling personal life stories, and personally accusing me of spreading misinformation with regards to Bill 22.

Other than representatives of the ARPFNB, there were NO other parties that presented in support of Bill 22.

The audience was filled with people opposed to Bill 22. Myself and Todd MacPherson spoke on behalf of the NBFTA. Robert Whitney spoke on behalf of MCFT. Hugh Hambly spoke on behalf of his forestry consulting business. Ken Hardie spoke on behalf of the Federation of Woodlot Owners. I believe that we all did a very good job of presenting our opposition to Bill 22. We were more than capable of answering the questions raised by the Members of the SCPB.

Now, unfortunately, we must wait. But it is clear that we have convinced the SCPB that Bill 22 in its current form is inappropriate as a Private Bill.

Thanks again for all your hard work on this.

Gareth

ARPFNB correspondence re Technicans/Technologists Exemption to Bill 22 and our response.

The President of the NBFTA, Gareth Davies, has an announcement to make. This has been done in collaboration with some members of the Executive who have been available this long weekend. Late on Thursday afternoon some members of the NBFTA and select few other individuals received correspondence from Ed Czerwinski, Executive Director of the ARPFNB (posted below Gareth’s message).

At the conclusion of this posting I, Todd MacPherson, have added a brief editorial on this latest development.

To the NBFTA membership:

Mr. Ed Czerwinski sent the NBFTA another letter on April 5, 2012, stating that the ARPFNB intends to insert, in Bill 22, an exclusion for forest techs. Please read his letters below. Mr. Czerwinski sent the NBFTA a letter on March, 22, 2012 claiming that they had already inserted this exclusion in the legislation. This was discussed by our membership at the NBFTA AGM on March 29, 2012. At the AGM, our membership agreed to continue opposing the legislation with or without the exclusion. Bill 22 did not contain this exclusion when it had First Reading in the NB Legislature on March 30, 2012. Bill 22 may or may not contain this exclusion when it is examined by the Standing Committee on Private Bills on April 12, 2012.

The NBFTA cannot stop opposing this. Our AGM on March 29, 2012 was publicly advertised. If the ARPFNB wished to convince our membership that Bill 22 excludes forest techs, then they could have been on the agenda of our AGM.

REMEMBER this: the ARPFNB is not offering to change the definition of “Right to Practice”. They are only offering an “Exclusion” for forest techs.

Under section 25, “Right to Practice” Bill 22 states:

“25 No person shall practise professional forestry in New

Brunswick, either privately or employed by another, unless

registered to practise under the provisions of this Act

and the by-laws.”

The NBFTA cannot stop opposing this unless under “Right to Practice” it clearly only applies to university-graduate “foresters”.

If, and only if, the ARPFNB shows us a draft of Bill 22 with a fundamentally changed definition of “Right to Practice”, then we would put it on the agenda of our next Executive Meeting, and next year’s AGM.

We MUST stay focused.

This is not about forest techs vs. foresters vs. forestry practitioners vs. whoever.

This is about a PRIVATE BILL (meaning private interest) that states that all those that practice forestry must be registered members of the ARPFNB.

The NBFTA has a mandate and a duty to oppose this legislation on behalf of all forest techs.

The practice of forestry relies on all forestry practitioners, not just “foresters” and “forest techs”.

We cannot stop opposing this until this so-called private bill actually becomes private, meaning their “Right to Practice” definition only applies to their membership.

Gareth Davies

President, NBFTA

This is one of two emails received from Ed Czerwinski, Executive Director ARPFNB

To whom it may concern,

An explicit exclusion for all forest technicians and forest technologists was prepared and sent to the ARPFNB lawyer on March 20.  Clearly, it did not make it into Bill 22 before it received first reading on March 30.

I assured all of you that it would be done, so I have to accept responsibility.  The lawyers office feels they have significant responsibility in this regard as well.

Once again, I stress to you, members of the NBFTA, MCFT, or other forest technicians or technologists working in New Brunswick, that there was never any intent to make you, “illegal”.

The amendment to Bill 22 has been prepared, and will be presented on April 12, by the ARPFNB lawyer.

Please see the official amendment attached.

Thank you.

Ed Czerwinski, RPF

*****************************************************

To All ARPFNB Members and the Forest Community..

The Association of Registered Professional Foresters of New Brunswick (ARPFNB) presented to our Legislative Assembly a revised version of “An Act to Incorporate the Association of Registered Professional Foresters of New Brunswick“.  The main objective of this new Act is to move from Right to Title as Registered Professional Foresters (RPF) to Right to Practice (RTP), for our members.  This initiative provides protection to the public by ensuring competent, independent, professional conduct and integrity of registered professional foresters who manage private and publicly-owned forest resources.  It is important that all foresters be accountable for their actions.

The proposed Act as amended does not impose any requirements, restrictions or limitations on forest technicians or forest technologists who may be working within the practice of professional forestry as defined in the Act, and who are competent to do so by virtue of their education and training.  That exclusion reads:

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent persons from performing work within the definition of the practice of professional forestry provided they are graduates of a forest technician or forest technology program acting within the scope of their training and competence,”

Additionally, the proposed Act does allow for those individuals/employees without a forest technician/technology diploma, but are competent through their experience to obtain a “special permit”, to continue working in the area of their expertise, should that work fall within the definition of the “practice of professional forestry”.

It is our sincere belief that Right to Practice will achieve the high standards required in the practice of professional forestry for New Brunswick.  The professional forestry associations in British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec have had similar legislation for many years.  In addition, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador as well as Saskatchewan are currently pursuing legislation with mandatory registration for foresters in their respective provinces.

Members of the ARPFNB place tremendous value on the great working relationship that foresters, forest technicians, forest technologists, and other forest community members have always enjoyed.  Members of the ARPFNB look forward to continue working together as a team for the best management of our forest resources.

Sincerely,

Ed Czerwinski, R.P.F.

Executive Director

Association of Registered Professional Foresters of New Brunswick

1350 Regent Street, Suite 221

Fredericton, NB

E3C 2G6

Website: www.arpfnb.ca

Email: arpf@nbnet.nb.ca

At the end of this posting I will embed the document that he attached.

Here is the content of another email sent directly to the NBFTA President, Gareth Davies (note the time and date please) :

From: Ed Czerwinski [email address removed for privacy as it was his work email]
Sent: April-05-12 2:56 PM
To: Davies, Gareth; ‘Gareth Davies’
Subject: FW: Amended s. 52 of “Exclusion” Wording for ARPFNB Act

Gareth,

Please share with the NBFTA members.

An explicit exclusion for all forest technicians and forest technologists was prepared and sent to the lawyer on March 20. Clearly, it did not make it into Bill 22 before it received first reading on March 30.

I assured you that it would be done, so I have to accept responsibility, the lawyers office feels they have significant responsibility as well.

Once again, I stress to you, the members of the NBFTA, MCFT, or other forest technicians or technologists working in New Brunswick, that there was never any intent to make them, “illegal”.

The amendment to Bill 22 has been prepared, and will be presented on April 12, by the lawyer.

Please see the attachment.

Sincerely,

Ed

Ed Czerwinski, R.P.F.

Executive Director

Association of Registered Professional Foresters of New Brunswick

1350 Regent Street, Suite 221

Fredericton, NB

E3C 2G6

Website: www.arpfnb.ca

Subject: RE: Amended s. 52 of “Exclusion” Wording for ARPFNB Act

Matt,

As per your instructions below, attached is the amendment to be presented by Mr. Norman at the Committee hearing. You cannot renumber the paragraphs, so I simply added a new (b.1).

Any concerns let me know,

Shayne

Subject: RE: Amended s. 52 of “Exclusion” Wording for ARPFNB Act

I’ll prepare the amendment and send to you and Mr. Norman. As I stated, it will be up to Mr. Norman to present the amendment to the Committee for its consideration.

Subject: Amended s. 52 of “Exclusion” Wording for ARPFNB Act

Hi Shayne,

Thank you again for drafting the necessary amendment form. I know you are busy, so it’s much appreciated.

The only amendment will be to section 52 by adding a new subsection (c). I’ve included the entire section in both languages below.

52 Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent persons from

(a) carrying out functions on their own land and for their own purposes that may include the practice of professional forestry,

(b) performing the work of a forester-in-training or student, provided such work is performed under the direct supervision of a registered member who takes responsibility for the work,

(c) performing work within the definition of the practice of professional forestry provided they are graduates of a forest technician or forest technology program acting within the scope of their training and competence,

(d) practising engineering or geoscience under the Engineering and Geoscience Professions Act,

(e) practising land surveying under the New Brunswick Land Surveyors Act, 1986,

(f) practising agrology under the Agrologists’ Profession Act, 2004,

(g) carrying on any profession or occupation authorized by an Act of the Province of New Brunswick,

or requires such persons to become registered under this Act to perform such functions.

52 La présente loi n’empêche pas d’exercer les fonctions suivantes ni n’oblige personne à se faire immatriculer sous le régime de la présente loi pour exercer ces fonctions :

a) des travaux effectués sur ses propres terres et pour ses propres besoins, même dans l’exercice de la foresterie professionnelle;

b) des travaux effectués par un forestier stagiaire ou un étudiant, pourvu qu’ils se fassent sous la surveillance directe et la responsabilité d’un membre immatriculé;

c) des travaux visés par la définition de l’exercice de la foresterie professionnelle, s’ils sont effectués par un diplômé d’un programme en techniques de foresterie ou en technologie forestière exerçant dans son champ de formation et de compétence;

d) l’exercice de la profession d’ingénieur ou de géoscientifique sous le régime de la Loi sur les professions d’ingénieur et de géoscientifique;

e) l’exercice de l’activité d’arpentage sous le régime de la Loi de 1986 sur les arpenteurs-géomètres du Nouveau-Brunswick;

f) l’exercice de la profession d’agronome sous le régime de la Loi de 2004 sur la profession d’agronome;

g) l’exercice de toute profession ou de tout métier sous le régime d’une loi du Nouveau-Brunswick.

Editorial from Todd MacPherson, Past President NBFTA

The NBFTA has been open and transparent with its members throughout this process. Members of the Executive and General Membership have been working on this all weekend as best as possible. Thank you for your continued support.

I am personally aware of letters written to Ed Czerwinski, at least one RPF included, questioning this action. I suggest that you also express your personal feeling directly to him through the email address given above. This came out mid-afternoon on the beginning of a long weekend.The finished document had been in the hands of the ARPFNB and their lawyer for approximately 10 days before being presented at first reading in the legislature.  Please note that this exemption had been in a previous draft of the bill and then removed. During the 10-day window our AGM was held. If this exemption had been there then, we could have properly addressed it with the membership at our AGM on March 29, 2012.

It is impossible for us, as an Executive, to address this properly with our members prior to the Standing Committee on April 12th. NBFTA members were made aware of the exemption possibility at the AGM, yet no motion was made to overturn our opposition to Bill 22. As the NBFTA has said since at least 2009, the overall process has been flawed and continues to be flawed.

The ARPFNB has stated that they want a good working relationship with technicians and technologists. We agree and withdrawing Bill 22 would be a good start in that direction.

We continue to oppose Bill 22. Please send your letters of opposition to the Standing Committee ASAP.

click here to download the amendment or read it below

Bill 22: letter of opposition guidelines

This is for anyone trying to figure out how to voice their concern over the right to practice legislation in a letter of opposition. If you work or know anyone working any type of forestry job this act affects you. Even if you are a member of ARPFNB this act affects you.

Your letter does not need to be fancy or professionally done. The committee members just want to know why you object to the bill and that you may lose your job or lose workers. A few lines will do. If your interest or property may be affected by this bill, please write the Standing Committee on Private bills a letter of opposition and have it sent in before April 11th. The Bill is going to second reading on April 12th. The best way for everyone to voice their concern is in writing.

Some guidelines for your email letter of opposition:

Address the letter to:

Dear Members of the Standing committee on Private Bills,

Send your letter of Opposition to the committee members (all of them, just copy and paste): Carl.Killen@gnb.ca; Danny.Soucy@gnb.ca; jim.parrott@gnb.ca; jake.stewart@gnb.caSherry.Wilson@gnb.ca; Bertrand.LeBlanc@gnb.ca; Roger.L.Melanson@gnb.ca

Subject line: Opposing Bill 22: An Act to Incorporate the Association of Registered Professional Foresters of New Brunswick

Things you may want to write about:

    • You may want to state You wish you were consulted by the ARPFNB in the drafting of this legislation because you do not agree with the power they will hold over the forest industry if this passes.
    • You may want to say Forest tech’s will no longer be able to practice forestry in NB, only university graduates.
    • You may not agree with the mandatory membership
    • You may not agree with the authority they will be given to charge people for violations of the rules they have the discretion to make up.
    • Any reasons you want are valid to state. They want to know.

*If you would like to appear before the standing committee on Private bills to read your letter and/or speak your concerns, please call the assistant clerk of the legislative assembly to schedule time. The more people who do this the better! (But in the very least send in a letter!) Call Shayne Davies 453-2162.

Rebecca Jones

Treasurer, NBFTA

The NBFTA Position on Right to Practice: A quick version

In response to members of the ARPFNB publicly posting correspondence to us on this website I think a condensed version of our position is in order:

FACT: There is no exclusion clause for Forest Technicians and Technologists in Bill 22. It was there and the ARPFNB removed it.

FACT: A broad range of Stakeholders were identified and agreed to by both Executives of the NBFTA and ARPFNB in 2009/2010. Letters of support were requested from these Stakeholders, none were received. Some letters of rejection were received.

That is what led to the NBFTA rejecting Bill 22.

At the end of the day the Stakeholders have overwhelmingly rejected Right to Practice in its current form.

Brett Hanson: NB forest technicians unhappy with proposed legislation

The following article, written by Brett Hanson, appeared in The Working Forest Newspaper on March 30th, 2012.

Forest technicians may be barred from practicing forestry in New Brunswick if proposed new legislation is accepted.

The New Brunswick Forest Technicians Association (NBFTA) is sounding the alarm over this proposed legislation. The legislation, drafted by the Association of Registered Professional Foresters of New Brunswick (ARPFNB) is  entitled ‘An Act to Incorporate the Association of Registered Professional Foresters of New Brunswick’ and is intended to define the profession of forestry, its accountability, and establish disciplinary procedures and offenses for violations. However, the document clearly states under “Right to Practice” that no person shall practice professional forestry unless registered as a Registered Professional Forester (RPF). It is this portion that has Gareth Davies, NBFTA President deeply troubled.‘

Davies says that this wording bars forest technicians from practicing forestry in the province. The NBFTA contends that this will not only have profound effects on forest technologists but the industry and province at large.

“This is the third attempt at bringing right to practice legislation to New Brunswick. The technician’s association has always been interested and involved in this process,” Davies said. “The NBFTA had a vote in our association in April 2011 to oppose the legislation and to discontinue our participation in it. The reasons for that being that both ourselves and the foresters association failed to get broad-based support for it in the forestry sector.”

You can read the rest of the article at http://www.workingforest.com/nb-forest-technicians-unhappy-proposed-legislation/

NBFTA Open Letter Opposing ARPFNB Right-To-Practice Proposed Legislation. Contact your MLA

Hello

As per the NBFTA membership mandate, the Executive has issued a public statement in opposition to the ARPFNB Right-To-Practice Proposed Legislation. To do your part, as a member of the NBFTA, we ask that you contact your MLA and voice your concerns over this proposed legislation.

NBFTA Official Response in Opposition to Proposed Right-to-Practice Legislation

ARPFNB’s final draft of proposed legislation

Link to MLA email contact list

Letter to the Editor: Key stakeholders have had no voice Re: Proposed foresters legislation

The following appeared in The Daily Gleaner on Thursday November 17th, 2011

Key stakeholders have had no voice

Re: Proposed foresters legislation

On behalf of the New Brunswick Forest Technicians Association (NBFTA), I wish to respond to the legal notice posted by the Association of Registered Professional Foresters of New Brunswick (ARPFNB), on Oct. 14.

The NBFTA had been involved in the drafting of this proposed legislation entitled “An Act to Incorporate the Association of Registered Professional Foresters of New Brunswick,” and voted to oppose this proposed legislation on April 7.

This proposed legislation intends to define the profession of forestry and its accountability, and establish disciplinary procedures and offenses for violations. The implications of defining the forestry profession and its accountability will have profound effects on the entire N.B. forest sector. The NBFTA believes this proposed legislation must receive the formal participation and support of key stakeholders.

Key stakeholders have not participated in the drafting of this proposed legislation. The ARPFNB has failed to get any letters of support for this proposed legislation from key stakeholders.

The NBFTA represents professional forest technicians and technologists in the province. Professional forest technicians and technologists play a vital role throughout the New Brunswick forest sector. The NBFTA is not opposed to professional certification and accountability, but it is opposed to this proposed legislation and the process in which it was drafted.

Due to the social and economic importance of the forest sector to the province of New Brunswick, this proposed legislation is of general public concern. The NBFTA cannot support this proposed legislation.

A detailed account of our position can be found on the NBFTA website: http://www.nbfta.org/

Gareth Davies

President, NBFTA

The New Brunswick Forest Technicians Association votes to reject Draft Document and Process for Right to Practice Legislation

The New Brunswick Forest Technicians Association votes to reject Draft Document and Process for Right to Practice Legislation

To Whom It May Concern;

At the Annual General Meeting of the New Brunswick Forest Technicians Association (NBFTA) on April 7th, 2011 the Membership voted on Right to Practice Legislation.

The Members were asked to cast their vote as either “Yes” or “No” on the following statement:

“I support the Act to Incorporate the Association of New Brunswick Forestry Professionals”.

The vote results were as follows:

25 Votes Cast

Yes Votes: 2 (8%)

No Votes: 23 (92%)

The vote was cast after a presentation from Dr. Roger Roy, President of the Association of Registered Professional Foresters of New Brunswick (ARPFNB) on Right to Practice (RTP), followed by a question and answer session. After Dr. Roy left the meeting the Membership discussed the issue and then a motion was made to conduct the vote.

Following this vote, and much focused discussion, the NBFTA has concluded that it cannot support and must now oppose the ARPFNB’s proposed RTP legislation. The NBFTA believes that the process by which the RTP document has been produced is fundamentally flawed thus yielding a flawed document. Further, this process has failed to gain the necessary participation of a broad base of the New Brunswick forest sector.

Based on Membership feedback, the NBFTA’s reasons for rejecting the current RTP document are as follows:

  • The NBFTA required written letters of support from stakeholders when we became partners in the RTP process with the ARPFNB. This requirement had been previously agreed to by the ARPFNB, yet, as of the writing of this letter, none have been received. Generally speaking, the NBFTA Membership was not satisfied with the explanation given by the ARPFNB regarding why there are no letters of support.
  • The RTP document has been changed significantly, from the early stages, when all forestry practitioners would be required to work within their competencies and continue their education. This is no longer the case in the current RTP document.
  • Changes to the RTP document were made without any consultation with the NBFTA before voting for the changes. Rather than standing up for the original proposal, which was agreed upon by our two Associations, the ARPFNB chose to make significant changes to bring some of their members on board.
  • Because of changes to the definition of forestry, the RTP document no longer requires that all practitioners become registered and, in fact, contains an ‘out’ clause which, in effect, would allow one person to assume the entire responsibility for an organization, no matter its size. If public accountability is the goal of the RTP document then this ‘out’ clause does a disservice to the public. In the opinion of the NBFTA the RTP document does not have anything to do with the best interest of the general public.
  • The RTP Document has been changed and approved by a small number of members of the ARPFNB, yet non-members, who are practicing Foresters in New Brunswick, have had little or no input. The NBFTA finds this most troubling; that an organization would attempt to force something on professionals without allowing them to participate in the process.
  • From the Government of New Brunswick website (underlined sections are important because the proposed Act would affect the rights and interests of many others not included, such as Technologists, and other forestry practitioners not represented by either association):  Private Bills are those relating to private or local matters or for the particular interest or benefit of any person, corporation or municipality. Private Bills are not usually promoted by members of the Legislature, but by outside persons or bodies. They confer special powers upon companies, municipalities and private persons and are not of general public concern. Therefore, before any special favour of this nature is granted, the Legislative Assembly requires to be satisfied that no other rights or interests would be prejudiced by granting the special legislation sought to be obtained.

In conclusion the NBFTA feels that the approach to RTP has been a flawed process due to lack of written stakeholder support, changing the RTP Document without NBFTA consultation, resulting in sacrificing any apparent public good or accountability to the public by forestry professionals.

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the New Brunswick Forest Technicians Association;

 

Todd MacPherson, Past President