The Committee met at 9:00 a.m. in Committee Room 5083.

CHAIR (Ridgley): Order, please!

Good morning, everybody.

My name is Bob Ridgley, Chair of the Social Services Committee. I would ask the members of the Committee to introduce themselves.

Just a caution, this is a little bit different from the House of Assembly. You actually have to turn on the microphone before you begin to speak.

With that, I guess, we will commence right here with Mr. French.

MR. FRENCH: Terry French, MHA for the District of Conception Bay South.

MR. HUNTER: Ray Hunter, MHA for the District of Windsor-Springdale.

MR. O'BRIEN: Kevin O'Brien, MHA for the District of Gander.

MR. PARSONS: Kelvin Parsons, MHA for the District of Burgeo & LaPoile.

MR. BUTLER: Roland Butler, MHA for the District of Port de Grave.

MR. R. COLLINS: Randy Collins, MHA for the District of Labrador West.

CHAIR: That would be all of the Committee members.

I ask the minister, then, if he would either introduce his staff or ask them to introduce themselves.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It is a pleasure to be here once again. I would like to introduce the Justice Senior Executive. On my right is Ms Debbie Paquette, who is Acting Deputy Attorney General and Deputy Minister of Justice. Debbie is replacing John Cummings, who is now the Channing Chair with Memorial University. On my left is Ralph Alcock, who is the Assistant Deputy Minister for Public Protection. On Ralph's left is Theresa Heffernan, who is Director of Financial Operations. To Theresa's left is Marvin McNutt, who is an avid rollerblader and Director of Adult Corrections for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Behind me, to my left, is Billy Hickey, who is the Communications Director.

I reviewed the minutes of our meetings for the last two years and, as a result of that review, I have invited today - and I am very honored that they have come - Pamela Ryder-Lahey, who is the Director of Court Services for the Provincial Court of Newfoundland and Labrador, and Newman Petten, who is the Executive Director of the Newfoundland and Labrador Legal Aid Commission. I thought, rather than answer Randy Collins' questions myself, I would get someone here who knows what they are talking about.

CHAIR: Thank you, Minister.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible) Don.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Oh, I am sorry. I saved the best for last.

Last, but not least, Mr. Don Burrage, who is Director of Litigation for the Department of Justice.

OFFICIAL: Mr. Curran (inaudible).

MR. T. MARSHALL: And Mr. Chris Curran, Assistant Deputy Minister of Civil and Related Services.

Is that everyone? I think that is.

CHAIR: Thank you, Minister.

We will blame all of that on the fact that it is Monday morning.

Just a caution again. If any of the staff are going to reply to a question, please introduce yourself unless it is continuous questioning. Then, I guess, there would not be a problem there because they will understand who it is, but if it is just a sporadic or interim response it would be best for the sound people if you would introduce yourself.

With that in mind, I would ask the Clerk to begin debate by calling clause 1.1.01.

CLERK: Subhead 1.1.01.

CHAIR: Shall 1.1.01 carry?

I would ask the minister, if he has some introductory remarks, he might begin at this time. We will follow that, then, with the questioning.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I do recall two years ago that I gave some introductory remarks which went on and on and on, something like another Celine Dion song. What I will do today is, I will hit the highlights and will start off with reference to the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary.

There will be forty-four new positions with the RNC. There will be twenty-six officers coming out of the officer cadet program. In addition to those twenty-six, there are going to be eight new officers. Three are drug awareness officers: one for St. John's, one for Labrador West and one for Corner Brook. There will also be five officers hired from the experienced officer pool at the RNC. There is the creation of a canine unit in Corner Brook with one additional officer. There are also nine civilian positions consisting of four dispatchers, two clerk IVs, an administrative officer, a clerical support and a clerk-typist III. There is funding for the historical deficit in other earnings. There will be a replacement of the dog handler in St. John's.

As I mentioned earlier, there will be twenty-six new positions hired when they graduate in May. There will also be funding for the new class that will commence, the final class of the three-year program. There are sexual assault nurses in emergency funding, and there is funding for the crystal meth working group.

With respect to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, there are twenty-two new positions. There will nine new officers: one in Grand Falls-Windsor District, one in Trinity-Conception District, one in Deer Lake District, and one in the community of Nain. There will be two drug awareness officers. The RCMP presently have drug awareness officers in St. John's and Labrador. There will be two new ones: one in Central and one in Western.

I know everyone will be pleased to know there will be three new highway traffic officers on the roads of this Province. There will be two operational communications positions. There will two part-time clerical positions: one in Forteau and one in Mary's Harbour. There is also operational funding for maintenance and operations such as fuel increases, property rentals, health, medical and standby. There is also money for the crystal meth working group recommendations.

The RCMP run a number of vacancies over the years. There is funding in the budget to fill nine of those vacant positions, so that will certainly lead to increased police presence in the Province.

In terms of legal aid, there is an additional $1.1 million for legal aid. This comes out of a recommendation of the Legal Aid Commission and a report on the Aboriginal Law Project as prepared by Jenny Reid. There will be four solicitors: two in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, one in Clarenville and one in St. John's. There are two secretaries: one in Stephenville and one in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. There is also increased operational funding for salary increases, accommodations and lawyer disbursements.

There are eleven new positions approved under the budget. There will be a senior policy analyst to develop a translation interpretation strategy involving Aboriginal justice, strategic policy and planning. That was a commitment made when officials of Justice attended the Aboriginal Law Project in Sheshatshiu last year. There will a senior policy financial analyst retained to monitor federal-provincial agreements, in particular the RCMP agreement - we are presently negotiating a new RCMP agreement; the original one will expire in 2011 - and also to deal with legal aid, to help us monitor funding or lack thereof from the federal government with respect to legal aid. There will be an occupational health and safety manager in human resources in the department. There will be two commercial lawyer positions in the Civil Law Division. There is a legal secretary position in Civil Law, a new Crown Attorney in the Criminal Law Division. With respect to Access To Information and Protection of Privacy there will be a solicitor, a senior analyst and a legal secretary position to assist us in bringing in the privacy provisions of the ATIPP legislation. There is also an estates officer in the Supreme Court.

New funding initiatives: there will be department-wide salary increases for everyone excluding the RNC, Provincial Court Judges and adult corrections. There is funding to host the Federal-Provincial Territorial Justice Ministers Meeting which will take place in Corner Brook, in Humber Valley, in October of this year. We will be hosting the Heads of Prosecutions this year. There is an expansion of treatment programs for sexual and domestic violence offenders. That will be brought out to our correction centres other than where they presently exist in St. John's and Stephenville. They will be brought to Central Newfoundland and to Labrador. The same with the Offender Employment Skills Programs, they will be brought to Labrador and Bishop's as well.

There is funding for the expansion of Unified Family Court. As you know, the department has, for some time, been seeking the appointment from Ottawa of four additional Unified Family Court Judges. They have not been appointed as yet, but we have decided to provide the courts of this Province with additional remedies to offer ancillary justice services. At least that will show our commitment to the feds that we are indeed anxious to move forward with this initiative.

There is funding also for external legal counsel for the Hebron project. The firm of White Ottenheimer & Baker has been retained for that purpose. There is funding for the Electoral Boundaries Commission. There is funding for something new: circuit courts for the Supreme Court. They will circuit to Labrador. That will be new. I think there was $29,000 or $30,000 in the budget for that. There are debit and credit machines for the Supreme and Provincial Court. There is reclassification for the Supreme and Provincial Court Clerks. Last year, we expanded court security, deputy sheriffs outside of St. John's; it was expanded to the Provincial and Supreme Courts in Corner Brook and the Provincial Court in Stephenville. This year, that program will now be expanded to Supreme and Provincial Courts in Happy Valley-Goose Bay and to the Supreme and Provincial Courts in Grand Falls-Windsor. Also, body armour, Kevlar vests will be provided for our sheriffs officers.

With respect to capital, funding has been provided to proceed with the planning, design and the commencement of construction of a new combined court facility in Corner Brook as well as additional vehicles and operational equipment for the RNC.

The decreases in the Budget compared to last year relate to a decrease in funding for the Lamer Inquiry and the removal of one-time funding for Country Ribbon. Increases in the 2005-2006 Budget to Revised primarily relate to funding provided for settlement of a motor vehicle accident. Supplemental supply went through on Friday for that; that was $4 million. Also, there were salary overruns, particularly in Adult Corrections, Provincial Courts and the RNC, and there was a special warrant for that, as well as special investigation funding for the RNC.

Revenue projections - and I will conclude with these comments - on the federal side, the per diem rates and the number of days billed for federal (inaudible) were higher than budgeted receipt of payment for outstanding federal claims for 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. On the provincial side, receipt of prior years' expenditures from the Registry of the Supreme Court, there was an increase in reimbursement of overtime and fees for services of the RNC offset by a reduction in revenues due to a delay in proclaiming the victim fine surcharge.

I believe that covers the highlights so we are now open for questions, Mr. Chair, at your convenience.

CHAIR: Thank you very much, Minister.

Just as a suggestion to all members of the Committee who will be asking questions, in fairness to everybody - the staff, the minister and other members of the Committee - if you have questions to ask and you have to leave, I think it would be fair to everybody if you asked your questions rather than leave and come back and rejoin the questioning. We have had occasions where people have left for an extended period and then came back to the Committee meeting to rejoin the questioning, only to ask questions that had already been dealt with during that person's absence.

I guess it is not a rule of Committee but I will make it as a strong suggestion, if you have questions to ask, speak and then forever hold your piece, if you have to leave, just, I guess, in fairness. Do you understand what I am saying? Because it is just not fair to everybody, I don't think.

We will lead off the questions with Mr. Collins.

MR. R. COLLINS: Good morning.

I want to thank the minister and officials for being here this morning to answer any questions that we may have. I would like to start off, Minister, by asking if you have any idea what the costs are to the RNC detachment in Labrador West, where we do not have a resident judge, for transporting prisoners for court appearances in Happy Valley-Goose Bay versus the cost of having a resident judge in Labrador West.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr Collins, I do not have the number for the police. I do have it for the Provincial Court, for the Crown Attorney's Office and for Legal Aid, but I regret that I do not have that information for the police. I can undertake to provide it to you today.

MR. R. COLLINS: Okay, because it appears to me, when I see them travelling a lot, generally it is two officers and a prisoner, I know it has to be quite costly with airfares and hotel rooms and everything associated with it, plus the absence of the officers in Labrador West while they are in Happy Valley-Goose Bay for a day or two with the court appearance. So, I would appreciate getting the answers from you at some time if you could.

MR. T. MARSHALL: We will call the Chief.

OFFICIAL: Yes, we will look after that.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Would you have that? You wouldn't have it?

OFFICIAL: No, we would have to get that compiled.

MR. R. COLLINS: With relationship to RNC versus the RCMP, if an RNC officer requests a transfer, does the Province pay for the transfer costs, like, for his or her relocation?

MR. T. MARSHALL: I believe we do.

MR. ALCOCK: There are provisions in Labrador for officers, based on certain time periods in which they are resident in Labrador, to request a transfer. In the majority of cases that I am aware of, we certainly pay for transfer both in and out of Labrador, yes, for the RNC.

MR. R. COLLINS: Would that be something that happened over the last couple of years?

MR. ALCOCK: No, it has been a long-time requirement, is my understanding, that the RNC would pay for this.

MR. R. COLLINS: Because I do know of a case where a person applied and was accepted for the detachment in Labrador West but he would have had to pay his own relocation, whereas if it was the RCMP it would have been paid for. That was about two years ago.

MR. ALCOCK: You may be referring to a new officer, is that correct?

MR. R. COLLINS: No.

MR. ALCOCK: I would have to follow up on it. Given the circumstance, all I can say to you, Mr. Collins, our policy generally is that officers transferred in and out of Labrador, their transfer costs are paid for. If there are exceptions to that in terms of a specific case, and something unique to that specific case, I would have to check on the details.

MR. R. COLLINS: How about an officer who is transferred? I understand, with the RCMP, if an RCMP officer is transferred and they own their own home, after a period of time, if they cannot sell their home, then somebody buys it. Would that be true?

MR. ALCOCK: The RCMP operate under a federal government policy in terms of the sale of their residence. I am not familiar with the policy in that regard, that someone - for example, the federal government - would take possession of the property. Again, we would have to undertake to find that out for you. I do know that RCMP officers have stayed in their detachment for extended periods, have been subject to transfer and stayed in their detachment for extended periods, while they have attempted to sell their residence. Again, it is a detail of federal government policy that we can undertake to provide to you.

MR. R. COLLINS: If that were a federal government policy, would this Province still pay for it?

MR. ALCOCK: The transfer policy for the RCMP is variable depending upon where the individual may be transferred. For example, there is interdivisional, there is interregional and there is international. So, if the individual is transferred within the Province, the division or the Province would pay a certain percentage of the costs.

As it particularly relates to the purchase of the property, again I would have to look into the detail of that. I suspect not, that we would be required to pay some piece of the property. Of course, obviously, buying the property and reselling it, any cost would simply be the difference. Nevertheless, you are asking about detail of federal government policy and I have to check that out. I have to check out whether or not, in fact, we pay some piece of that. I am not even sure we pay any of the purchase cost if, in fact, it exists.

I am sorry I cannot be more clear, but that is as much as I know at this time.

MR. R. COLLINS: The court judge, has there been any consideration to putting a resident judge back into Wabush courthouse?

MR. T. MARSHALL: We consider it every time you ask me that question, but -

MR. R. COLLINS: Have you decided to do it yet?

MR. T. MARSHALL: As I have previously indicated, based on the numbers used by the Provincial Court in recommending the establishment of a Provincial Court district or a Provincial Court centre, the number recommended is 1,500 cases. At the present time, I understand there are not enough cases in Lab West to justify that.

I do know that there are now two openings, two vacancies, in Provincial Court, or there have been two indications of retirements, and Provincial Court is now advertising for two new judges, one for Labrador.

CHAIR: I am just saying, Minister, you could leave your microphone one, I guess, for the duration.

MR. R. COLLINS: Did these numbers change? At one time we had a resident judge for years, so did the numbers change that they were not able to have one?

MR. T. MARSHALL: You had a judge prior to 1991, I believe. It was Richard LeBlanc. He was transferred to Corner Brook. Since then, Wabush has become a circuit court like many other circuit courts. My understanding is it used to be served by the judge out of Corner Brook originally, and now it is served from the Judicial Centre of Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

I understand, as a result of one of the vacancies now, there might be a change in which centre will now provide the judge for the circuits into Lab City-Wabush. It is my understanding that as a result of that there will be increased coverage in that the time a judge will be in Lab City-Wabush will increase.

Pamela Ryder-Lahey, who is the Director of Court Services, can probably give you a clearer answer that I have just given you.

MS RYDER-LAHEY: Good morning. I will just move over here so I will be closer to the microphone.

Thank you actually for the opportunity, because I know this comes up frequently in public accounts every year. It is a pleasure to be here to be able to actually speak to the court statistics.

1991, I guess, was the last year we did have a resident judge in Wabush. The caseloads were in the thousands back in the 1980s and early 1990s. Unfortunately, I only grabbed statistics back to 1995-1996, but it does give you a ten-year coverage and flavor of the statistics. That was the last year actually that we saw them in the four digits. There were 1,080 cases in 1995-1996, and it has continued to drop. Last year, in 2004-2005 - and by the end of April I will have the 2005-2006 statistics for you - but last year there were 572 cases in total. That included adult, criminal, youth, family and small claims. With 572 cases, by way of comparison, Placentia which is also a centre without a resident judge, their caseload was 745. That doesn't have a resident judge and is circuited one week per month by the judge from Grand Bank.

In terms of comparison, the caseload is not there to justify a full-time judge. If we had a full-time judge in Wabush, that judge would actually be required to travel and be away from his family and be on travel status for at least 2.5 weeks of the month just to be able to give that judge a full-time judicial workload.

MR. R. COLLINS: A lot of the things that we have seen in this Province recently, everything is not determined by caseload or anything else; geographics have played a role as well.

MS RYDER-LAHEY: Absolutely, I agree with you.

MR. R. COLLINS: I am glad to hear that we are getting better, don't get me wrong, but it is still an inconvenience to the people there as well. It goes back to the question I asked earlier, the cost to the system by having the RNC and whoever is charged with the travel that they involve in (inaudible)

MS RYDER-LAHEY: I think one thing that we all need to keep in mind is that, when you talk about criminal workloads, not every criminal offence or every offender is taken into custody, and therefore they do not have to travel outside of the area. We do circuit there one week per month. Only the people who are in custody would have to travel. We do have video conferencing capability in Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

MR. R. COLLINS: Good, you mentioned that. Okay, carry on.

MS RYDER-LAHEY: I am just going to go right into that, actually.

We have put in a submission, actually, which - we still do not know the OCIO budget yet, if we are getting an expansion of video conferencing for the other remaining court centres. We now have video conferencing capability in seven court centres around the Province, including three of the Supreme Court centres. If we get it in Wabush -

MR. R. COLLINS: You've got it.

MS RYDER-LAHEY: We've got it?

MR. R. COLLINS: You had it.

MS RYDER-LAHEY: No, that was a pilot project through Smart Labrador. When that pilot project ended, which was July 31, 2005, that was not within the power of the Province to say we keep it or we do not keep it. That was a funding initiative, as I understand it, that was funded by Industry Canada, partly by the Province, and then that was really an initiative to make rural areas such as the remote sites in Coastal Labrador accessible on the World Wide Web and through the Internet and through video conferencing. There were a number of initiatives all sort of tied up in the one program called Smart Labrador.

MR. R. COLLINS: But, the hardware for doing video conferencing is all in Labrador West.

MS RYDER-LAHEY: It is there. It is what they call the old TeamStations, and they are not actually now compatible with the new equipment. In fact, we just had a video conference between the St. John's Provincial Court and the University of Alberta on the Robert Parsons matter, which was very highly publicized. There was a witness who testified out there. In fact, the University of Alberta was using the old TeamStation equipment and we had actually technical difficulties connecting to them through the bridge at TETRA. The bridge at TETRA has been upgraded to a software. When we get into technical talk, I am going to tell you, I am not the most literate with the technical pieces.

MR. R. COLLINS: I won't know if you're wrong.

MS RYDER-LAHEY: Well, I wouldn't want to mislead you.

I just want to make sure that you understand, though, with the technical upgrading of the software, that the old TeamStations are no longer compatible. In fact, Smart Labrador put their equipment up on auction, or are putting it up on auction, one or the other, and we looked at: Would it be wise to recommend to the RNC to purchase that equipment? In all honesty, we can say it would not be a wise investment at this point. It would be better to look for the funding for the new equipment to make sure it is compatible.

MR. R. COLLINS: Up at Legal Aid, Minister, is there going to be a legal aid lawyer assigned to Labrador West?

Thanks, by the way.

MR. T. MARSHALL: No. Historically, there were very few applications for legal aid in Labrador City West. I guess that is a function of the type of jobs that were there and the prosperity that was there.

MR. R. COLLINS: What year are you talking about there?

MR. T. MARSHALL: I am saying historically, but then the demographics have changed. They have changed in recent years. You have people retiring, you have children and families living in Western Newfoundland who are unable to get work, and you have some separated families who continue to reside in the area, so the applications for legal aid services have increased. There were 142 applications in 2005. This year, 2006, there were 157.

In considering the need for a legal aid office, obviously the Commission looks at the demand for service, the availability of other justice services such as resident judge and resident prosecutor. At present, of course, Labrador City and Wabush do not have either of those. All legal aid offices are, in fact, located in judicial centers. Based on the number of applications that have been received or approved, it is very difficult to justify having an office infrastructure and a full-time lawyer and support worker working in this area.

The lawyers servicing Western Labrador have come from other legal aid offices. A substantial amount of the work is performed with lawyers from the Stephenville office and supplemented on an as-needed basis from other offices. The delivery of services to residents of Western Labrador is similar to service as provided to other circuit courts that are serviced by the Provincial Court of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Commission feels that, in order to justify the opening of a legal aid office staffed by a full-time lawyer and support staff, there should be 175 to 200 approved applications compared to the ninety-four approved in 2005 and forty-one approved in 2006. The up front costs of opening an office would be estimated at $25,000 with annual operating costs of $215,000.

Newman Petten, the Executive Director for the Legal Aid Commission, is here. Newman, would you like to add anything?

MR. PETTEN: Unless there are other questions.

MR. T. MARSHALL: I beg your pardon?

MR. PETTEN: If there are other questions, I can answer them.

MR. R. COLLINS: Anybody who has a case and is being represented by legal aid, I noticed in the budget there was an increase of one support staff in the legal aid office in Stephenville.

MR. T. MARSHALL: That is correct.

MR. R. COLLINS: Is that due to cases from Labrador West?

MR. PETTEN: No, that is a support staff person. We have four lawyers in Stephenville and only two support staff. The extra position in Stephenville is for a legal secretary.

MR. R. COLLINS: I would imagine a legal secretary would be involved with the filing of files and that on behalf of the legal staff, would they?

MR. PETTEN: Yes, that is correct.

MR. R. COLLINS: So, you have an additional how many cases, you say, from Labrador West now approved last year?

MR. PETTEN: Approved last year, the year just completed, was forty-one applications for Labrador City and Wabush.

MR. R. COLLINS: You have forty-one cases in Stephenville that you did not have the year before that.

MR. PETTEN: All of those forty-one cases would not all be done by Stephenville. We have lawyers go there from Happy Valley-Goose Bay and from St. John's. You see, within legal aid, we represent both sides of the case, particularly in family cases, so it is not unusual for us to have two lawyers travel into Labrador. Even if you had a person stationed there, you would still have to have somebody fly in there.

MR. R. COLLINS: I understand what is happening, but it goes back to my same argument about the geographics. If you have a legal aid lawyer set up somewhere in the Province and somebody can drive there even in four or five hours, or get a ride there, then they can speak with them. What happens with legal aid lawyers, what I am being told - I don't know; I have never used the service - is that they fly in one day, they meet with you for about two hours before you go to court, and then you are into the courtroom. I tell you, people are not feeling that they are getting their due representation that they deserve. They are just not getting it. I mean, they are in Labrador, their files are in Stephenville, and the lawyer is in St. John's or in Stephenville. What kind of a system is that when it comes to providing justice to people who desperately need legal services?

MR. ALCOCK: Most of the people that we end up having a lawyer fly in and consult with an individual, and appear in court, that is normally a situation where it would be on a first appearance and it would be normally Duty Counsel. If that individual wished to have a trial or further appearances then the lawyer would prepare and would communicate with the individual by telephone prior to going there so that, when they went to do a trial, they would actually be prepared and would actually have had some conversation with the clients and with the witnesses that the individual wished to call.

MR. R. COLLINS: If I were going into a courtroom, I certainly would not want that the only preparation I had was with a lawyer over the telephone. That, to me, does not meet justice. Why wouldn't there be, if there were a legal aid person in Labrador West - and, granted, the cases may be down, but it goes back to the other things we talked about, the geographics - if that lawyer travelled once a month, for a week a month or two weeks a month, from Labrador to somewhere else, what is the difference? What is the difference in leaving Labrador West and coming somewhere else than leaving here and going to Labrador West?

MR. T. MARSHALL: There is no difference.

MR. R. COLLINS: There is no difference. There is one key difference: you have at least two weeks a month where the lawyer is there and clients can see them.

MR. T. MARSHALL: The travel costs, the legal aid travel cost in 2004-2005 was $18,000.

MR. R. COLLINS: It is the same cost to travel from Labrador West to Goose Bay or Labrador West to Deer Lake as it is Deer Lake to Labrador West.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Exactly.

MR. R. COLLINS: The other thing on that is - and I know, because I have talked to people at the women's centre there and, I tell you, this is one of their big issues, one of their big concerns. I can tell you from them, on behalf of them, that this is the one area - of all the things they deal with - that is causing the most problems.

MR. T. MARSHALL: We have heard that all over Newfoundland and Labrador, that the legal aid system was under a lot of pressure. That is why the government put $1.1 million into it this year.

As I have indicated previously, there is a famous saying that there is no point having the best legal system in the world if people cannot have access to it.

MR. R. COLLINS: That is the position we are in now.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Right.

What we did is, at the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Justice Ministers Meeting, we put that to then Minister Cotler and we asked him - and I was the one who asked the question - would he and his colleagues provide more funding for both civil legal aid and criminal legal aid in Canada? Because what we have in Newfoundland right now, we have gone from a situation where the feds were paying 90 per cent of the cost of legal aid and we were paying 10 per cent, to a situation where now we are paying close to 65 per cent and the feds paying around 32 per cent.

We have written to the new government to see what their position is, because Mr. Cotler indicated to us at the Federal-Provincial-Territorial meeting of Justice Ministers in the Yukon that he had been unsuccessful in convincing his Cabinet colleagues to put additional funding into legal aid and therefore was unable to respond to the resolution of the provincial Justice Ministers that the federal government do so.

We have written to the new Justice Minister, Minister Toews, and we are awaiting a response from the new government to see what their position will be. Fortunately, the Province did put an additional $1.1 million in this year's budget to help deal with the pressure. The lawyers and the staff have been allocated as recommended by Mr. Nick Avis, the Chair of the Newfoundland and Labrador Legal Aid Commission, and the recommendations of what I call the Jenny Reid report, the Aboriginal Law Report, so obviously, we have dealt with the priorities as recommended by the staff at the Commission. Hopefully, the federal government will now join us in making additional announcements in legal aid because it is obviously extremely important, not only for Labrador West but everywhere.

MR. R. COLLINS: I just have one final question.

Did I understand you correctly last week, that you said we would be getting nine new officers in Labrador West?

MR. T. MARSHALL: No, but it is a good try.

MR. R. COLLINS: How many are we getting?

MR. T. MARSHALL: You are getting either four or possibly five by mid-summer.

MR. R. COLLINS: That is not bad; the year is not out yet.

MR. T. MARSHALL: That is true.

I had spoken to the former Chief, Chief Deering, and -

MR. R. COLLINS: I did, too.

MR. T. MARSHALL: This comes from the new Chief, Chief Browne.

MR. R. COLLINS: That is better.

MR. T. MARSHALL: We are not sure if he said four or five. I remember him saying three or four. Now we can say four or five.

MR. R. COLLINS: I thought you were right. Four or five is what I remember.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Okay, but I am pretty sure it wasn't nine.

I understand there are also going to be five or six going to Corner Brook as well from the new class, so it is good that we are going to see -

MR. R. COLLINS: Our crime rate is low, and we want to keep it that way.

MR. T. MARSHALL: That is right, exactly.

MR. R. COLLINS: That is all I have to say.

CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Collins.

I will pass the questioning to Mr. Parsons.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you.

Good morning, Minister.

On the legal aid piece, how many court-ordered situations do we have now where someone wanted a choice of lawyer and the Supreme Court Justice has agreed with that and ordered that they have counsel of their choice?

MR. CURRAN: Unfortunately, I can't remember the exact number, Mr. Parsons, but in the course of the past year it has been in the area of ten or so, less than ten.

MR. PARSONS: What is the cost comparison when you have a legal aid lawyer versus when you have these court-ordered counsels of choice? For example, what did it cost last year for these ten court-ordered lawyers?

MR. CURRAN: I can't give you the exact numbers but I can undertake to get those numbers for you. I can say that as a rule it depends on the tariff that the court orders. We have been relatively successful, I think, in having the certificates issued at legal aid rates, but from time to time we have not, as you know. Where the lawyer is retained at a rate other than the legal aid rate, then these applications, court-ordered counsel, can be quite costly.

MR. PARSONS: I am wondering if you could, in fact, give me, for the last year, the number of cases that did have court-appointed lawyers, what their scale was that was ordered, and also the type of offence that it was ordered in. I understand it has happened in a couple of murder cases, but other cases where it may have been ordered as well. Maybe if you can just give me the full breakdown on those cases.

MR. CURRAN: I can undertake to get that for you for sure.

MR. PARSONS: Minister, what is the status right now of the Lamer Enquiry?

MR. T. MARSHALL: With the Lamer Enquiry we are simply waiting for Commissioner Lamer to provide us with his written report.

MR. PARSONS: When do you figure we will be getting that?

MR. T. MARSHALL: It is due by the first of June.

MR. PARSONS: The RNC: In the latest Auditor General's report it seems, notwithstanding having some extra money to put into bodies and recruitment and so on, that there are some significant problems there from a financial accountability perspective.

I wonder if you would like to comment on that issue?

MR. T. MARSHALL: In this Budget we have addressed the points raised by the Auditor General. One of the criticisms was the fact that police officers were occupying what he felt could be positions that could be performed by civilians. As a result of that, we placed funding in the Budget for nine civilian positions in order to enable the RNC officers who have been occupying those positions to get back into operational positions; in other words, provide more policing. I believe that some of them, however, are officers who might be on soft duties for medical or sick leave reasons. We have tried to address the recommendations of the Auditor General, and I believe we have done so.

With respect to financial comments, can you give me some specifics?

MR. PARSONS: Well, for example, the overtime issue continues to be a major one.

MR. T. MARSHALL: There are two major issues of the RNC. There is the overtime issue and the sick leave issue. What we have done on the management side is that we have put additional management positions into the RNC, including an Executive Director of Finance, David Hickey, who used to be Director of Human Resources in the Department of Justice. He has gone down and taken the Executive Director position. There is also a full-time Manager of Human Resources who has now been hired. I cannot recall the name. There is also a Director of Finance and a Vehicle Fleet Manager. We have asked the RNC, specifically, to address the sick leave issue and provided them with the managerial resources they need to do that.

MR. PARSONS: Instead of just managerial - I note, for example, page 380 of the Auditor General's report under the heading of Sick Leave, a very, I thought, damaging statement broaching and verging on something fraudulent. I mean, officials of the RNC had identified in the Mount Pearl detachment that members were working overtime on their days off and going on sick leave on their scheduled days of work. That is a pretty damaging statement. It seems like there is some deliberate intent on the part of the RNC members to beat the system. I mean, do you feel it is sufficient to address the Auditor General's concerns simply by hiring a manager? I don't think the Auditor General made that statement without some factual background. What, if anything, has happened with respect to following up on this issue? Because if that is the case, it is a deliberate attempt. We have more than just a management issue.

MR. T. MARSHALL: The Chief of Police was directed to come in and discuss the comments and some matters involving overtime. I discussed it with him personally, as did senior officials of the department. We directed that the necessary corrected action be taken to specifically monitor this overtime in view of the comments made by the Auditor General and in view of facts that had come to the attention of the department. Ralph, could you -

MR. ALCOCK: The Department of Justice, I guess, we as executives, certainly share the concerns that were generally expressed by the Auditor General as they apply to both sick leave and to the excessive amounts of overtime that have been incurred.

The new Director of Human Resources has been instructed to focus on issues of sick leave, why do we have the significant amount of sick leave, what kind of policies are in place to deal with it, what kind of policies do we have and what kind of initiatives can we take in order to ensure that individuals who are off on any type of leave are monitored and that they return to work in an expeditious manner? We also have an additional person who we are about to hire who will focus on return to work and return to work strategies for officers.

We share with the Auditor General and yourself, Mr. Parsons, the concern with the amount of sick leave that has incurred at the RNC, and are attempting to, shall I say, get to the bottom of it, to resolve any issues that are outstanding and assure that people who are on leave are there for valid reasons, and attempt to get anybody who is off on leave for any extended period back to work at the earliest possible time.

MR. PARSONS: I think there have been thoughts for years that there might be some abuses of the system, but that bold statement by the Auditor General suggests that there are, in fact, people who are deliberately, fraudulently, taking advantage of the system. Whatever the normal policy is of getting sick leave, for example you are off three days and you have to get a note or whatever, that is obviously not working when it comes to the RNC, given his statement. It seems to more than just a case of monitoring. It almost seems to be a case where you have to change the rules as to how you get your sick leave rather than just say, we are going to monitor it next year and see what happens again.

MR. ALCOCK: Excuse me, Mr. Parsons. I do not mean to indicate that we were simply monitoring. I think that the RNC and the headquarters of the Department of Justice are much more proactive than simply monitoring a given situation.

Yes, it is of considerable concern. The RNC follows policy in regard to sick leave which is government-wide policy. There are certain rules which government has established within the Department of Justice, Forestry, Natural Resources or whatever the case may be, which equally apply to the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. An issue of changing the rules is an issue of changing the rules, it would seem to me, for government in its entirety. What we have do, I think, with the RNC and any other area of the Department of Justice which is incurring some difficulty or causing us concern, is try and get to the bottom of it and resolve the issues, which we are attempting to do.

MR. PARSONS: Purchasing, in a more financial vein, I guess, rather than human resources or a behavioral vein: The Auditor General points out the contravention of the Public Tender Act, in that it does not always call public tenders for purchases greater than $10,000 and does not always obtain either three quotes or establish a fair and reasonable price, for purchases $10,000 or less. In fact, he makes reference to forty-two purchases in excess of $10,000 and found that seven had not been publicly tendered. That is a pretty significant proportion of your tendering that did not comply with the Act. It is not a case of one out of forty-two, we have seven instances. That is a pretty high percentage.

Who is in charge of overseeing that the legislation, the Public Tender Act, is in fact followed, the Financial Administration Act? Somebody down there must be responsible when this stuff happens. Where does the buck stop?

MR. ALCOCK: The part of the issue as it relates to the Auditor General's report, I believe, and as it relates to what the Department of Justice has been doing, is a timing issue. The issues raised by the Auditor General are valid, and we are obviously concerned. What we did, within the last twelve to sixteen months, was put a number of positions in place that would deal with these issues, deal with these difficulties, deal with these acts, or deal with the work that was being done that was in certain cases inappropriately done. There is a catch-up time, I guess, whereby the effect will take place based upon what resource we have put in place. We have tried to deal with the issues, both financial and human resources, but it is the timing as it relates to when the Auditor General's report comes out.

At this particular point in time, the Chief Executive Officer of the RNC is the executive director, but that position has only been in place for a year and the Auditor General's report, of course, goes back. The individuals who we have put in place haven't had an opportunity prior to the release of the Auditor General's report to deal with all the issues that were identified by the Auditor General. We expect that to change.

MR. PARSONS: Was there a particular incident reference - he does not get into the details. He probably did with your department. Was there an incident, during the public sector strike, where even though you have a standing order for certain things it was routinely breached, and they did not go to the company with whom they had the standing order, they just went wherever they felt, willy-nilly? For example, the rent-a-car piece: I understand there was a standing order with Enterprise Rent-a-car, but they just went willy-nilly wherever they felt like they wanted to rent, in contravention of the long-standing policy that you abide by the person with whom you had the standing order. Was that, in fact, correct?

MR. ALCOCK: Mr. Parsons, I cannot answer to the specifics of that. Again, we will undertake to get the information. It is an issue whereby, recognizing the problems that were taking place down at the RNC, we had put in place management resources, and in the Budget additional clerical resources, to deal with those issues. Those management resources are in addition to ensuring the type of thing which you referenced which may have happened - I cannot say for sure - but also to ensure that proper policies are in place to ensure that it does not happen again. We are working on changing.

MR. PARSONS: I wonder if you could also undertake to provide me with - during the public sector strike, I understand, there was in excess of $40,000 spent on one particular corner store for lunch meals and whatever for the RNC who were called in. Could someone identify what corner store that was?

MR. ALCOCK: presume, if there are no Freedom of Information issues there, which I really need someone else to answer, then certainly we will provide you (inaudible). It is probably a matter of public record and therefore available to you. I cannot speak to the specific amount or the corner store, but certainly we have no hesitation in providing anything that is public information.

MR. PARSONS: Continuing with the -

MR. T. MARSHALL: Earlier - you were talking about overtime in particular - you said that putting people in positions was not enough. With respect to overtime, I can tell you that the Chief of Police was, in fact, directed to change the policy in approving overtime down at the RNC. That happened a number of months ago. So there have been directions to improve the policies, not just monitor.

MR. PARSONS: On the information technology piece with the RNC, just a few of his comments - anybody reading this, of course, who does not have an understanding maybe of how big an operation the RNC is, would get the impression that they are in serious trouble talking about information technology: No formal disaster recovery plan, electronic data not backed up, backup tapes not stored in fire resistant containers, backup tapes not regularly tested for data integrity, access codes not changed, passwords inactive. We are dealing with an agency that deals with some pretty sensitive types of information, yet it seems that their standing when it comes to information technology is out of whack here. Has there been anything done to address these concerns?

MR. T. MARSHALL: With the RNC in general, what government has done over the past three years is, you have seen four major initiatives take place within the RNC. Initially, there was dealing with the RNC's recruitment and their human resource needs. Government instituted a police officer cadet program that will train and provide the RNC additional officers. Last year, there were twenty-eight officers trained, graduated from the program and hired by government; all twenty-eight. There were sixteen women and twelve men. This year, there will be twenty-six graduating this summer all of whom will be hired by the RNC, and next year we hope that the full complement of thirty officers will be trained and hired. As I mentioned earlier, there are another five officers who are going to be hired from the experienced officer application pool, and there were six last year who were allocated to a drug squad by the Chief of Police.

Secondly, we have reorganized the managing structure of the RNC. We have increased the number of superintendents, changed the number of inspectors and provided these new positions that I referenced earlier such as a new Executive Director, a Director of Finance, a Director of Human Resources and a Vehicle Fleet Manager, all with a view to increasing the ability at the executive level and the managerial level of the RNC.

In addition, in this Budget we address many of the concerns that the Auditor General has, in fact, raised. We certainly take what the Auditor General has said very seriously. As I said, we met with the Chief of Police, we raised these concerns of the Auditor General with the Chief of Police and we have placed in this year's Budget, 2006-2007, funding for positions that will deal with many of the criticisms made by the Auditor General.

In addition, we have appointed a new Chief of Police, Deputy Chief Joe Browne, who is a Newfoundland and Labradorian who has had twenty-four years of experience with the police force. He has been Deputy Chief since 2001. He has now been appointed as the new Chief of Police.

You can see, that over a period of three years many initiatives have been taken in order to help the RNC to become a world-class police force.

As Mr. Alcock had mentioned, the executive there has not really had enough time to deal with a lot of the comments the Auditor General has made, but deal with them they will.

MR. PARSONS: Minister, referring now to the Estimates book on page 218 , under the heading Civil Law, 2.1.01. I noticed last year you had budgeted $2.48 million and spent $1.74 million. This is line .05, Professional Services, 2.1.01., Civil Law .05, Professional Services last year, budgeted $2.480 million, actually spent $1.740 and bumped up this year to $2.730 million. I believe you made reference in your introduction about White-Ottenheimer being retained for Hebron-Ben Nevis. Is that the heading where that would have fit? The expenditure you anticipated for -

MR. T. MARSHALL: The $250,000 in blue in the second column from the right?

MR. PARSONS: I do not have your book.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Okay.

MR. PARSONS: I just have the black on white one.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Incremental funding of $250,000 is provided for external legal counsel to assist the government's team in the negotiation of commercial arrangements with the Hebron audit.

MR. PARSONS: I guess given the recent developments concerning Hebron-Ben Nevis, everything is supposedly wrapped up. I guess that will be changing.

What portion of the $2.730 million did you anticipate would be taken up with the Hebron-Ben Nevis?

MR. T. MARSHALL: $250,000.

MR. PARSONS: And the balance? Because that still leaves you $2.50 million.

MR. ALCOCK: That particular account is used to fund professional services, primarily lawyers, in a considerable number of areas. For example, it would deal everything from issues relative to Terra Nova and Aboriginal issues. There is a significant amount of the money in that account for what is considered general civil division purchase of legal support services for numerous lawyers that are hired throughout the year. It is all of the major projects which the government would be undertaking, or the majority of the major projects government would be undertaking, as well as a general kind of account for the provision, the requirement of legal services for the civil division department.

MR. PARSONS: I notice under the same heading, 2.1.01.09, last year it was $3 million revised to $7 million. I take it that increase of $4 million is what we dealt with in the House last week in the Supplementary Supply Bill 3.

MR. T. MARSHALL: That is correct. That was $4 million.

MR. PARSONS: Could you give me some idea of how many cases government actually settled last year?

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Burrage can handle that one.

MR. BURRAGE: Last year we settled seventeen cases.

MR. PARSONS: Totaling?

MR. BURRAGE: Some of those involved cash payouts, some of them did not. There were twenty-four cases which were discontinued against the government without cost. There were twenty-eight judicial rulings in our favour and three judicial rulings against government.

MR. PARSONS: Is the information privileged as to whom you settled with?

MR. BURRAGE: Not as a matter of course. In some of the circumstances, depending on the nature of the settlement, the individuals asked that the amount and their names not be identified, particularly in a case, for example, of a sexual assault. They just do not want their neighbours to know. As a matter of course, unless there is a Freedom of Information issue associated with it, we do not have confidentiality agreements.

MR. PARSONS: Could you undertake to provide a list of the ones that you can? I am not so much concerned with the names of the individuals involved but the law firms who represented the individuals. Who were the counsel involved?

MR. BURRAGE: Yes, sure, that would not be a problem.

MR. PARSONS: Minister, the court house being planned for the West Coast in Corner Brook.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Yes.

MR. PARSONS: Can you give me some idea of the timelines involved in terms of design, tendering, construction, opening date, that sort of thing?

MR. T. MARSHALL: I will give you my understanding. I know when it comes to building government buildings sometimes it is difficult to understand and follow why things happen and when they happen. They never seem to happen as fast as you want them to happen.

I am advised that the Corner Brook Court House will be constructed over three fiscal years involving two construction seasons, and that is based on the understanding that construction would start in the fall of this year. I understand that the group who are involved in monitoring this project will be meeting Thursday of this week in order to come up with more definite timelines. I understand there is a possibly of a design taking place this summer with construction to start in the fall. Others might recommend something that is called the design build. Based on the information that I am given, two years from September.

MR. PARSONS: This will be a government-funded, government-owned facility unlike the one in Grand Falls, I understand, which is a lease-type arrangement.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Yes, it is my understanding that it will government build and government operated. There has never been any discussion about any other way of doing it.

MR. PARSONS: Being from the West Coast, of course, I have no objection to the new courthouse in Corner Brook. What might have happened though? I understand the priority used to be Clarenville. I agree priorities often change for different reasons, but I am wondering what might have happened. I know a few years back Clarenville was a big pressure point in terms of a new provincial court building there.

MR. T. MARSHALL: With the assistance of the Chief Judges of the three courts, we put together a courts management advisory board so that we would ensure that the proper amount of consultation in terms of dealings with the courts would take place, and one of the things we talked was courts for the future. Given the financial climate at the time our government first took office, Chief Justice Greene of the Trial Division made the comment that, look, we may not get courts for ten or twenty years, but he recommended that we start the planning process now so that when government was in a financial position to fund new courthouses we would be ready to go. We agreed with that and we put a number of committees together. I then asked the Chief Judge of the Trial Division and the Chief Judge of the Provincial Court what their priorities would be in terms of where the next court should go. Chief Judge Reid of the Provincial Court indicated that if we were going to build a combined court, supreme and provincial, that Corner Brook would be priority. Chief Justice Green of the Trial Division felt that they were all priorities, so either one was fine with him. On that basis, the decision was made to go ahead with the Corner Brook Court House.

I did, subsequent to that, view the provincial court in Stephenville. When I saw that court I did call Chief Judge Reid and ask was he sure that Corner Brook was the priority. The response was that if it is going to be a combined court house, a provincial and supreme, that Corner Brook was the priority. If it was going to be just a standalone provincial court then Stephenville would have been his priority. We decided to go with the combined court.

MR. PARSONS: Minister, a couple of weeks ago I believe I heard, through the media, that the provincial court judges tribunal was in session, was due to clue up. What is the status now in terms of the tribunal submitting its report and when might we expect to see it in the House?

MR. T. MARSHALL: My understanding is that they have finished their hearings and they are now writing their report.

Chris, when would you expect us to receive that?

MR. CURRAN: We received a letter from the chairperson of the retired Judge Jeffrey Steele last week and he indicated that they are exercising their best efforts to have the report prepared by the end of this month. He said it is a large and complex undertaking but they are doing their best to meet our deadlines.

MR. T. MARSHALL: I now recall that I think Judge Steele indicated that they had to have their report done by April 1, and that has not happened.

MR CURRAN: That is correct.

MR. T. MARSHALL: That will now require an amendment to the judges act, the Provincial Court Act, to permit that. I think the letter did indicate that they were not able to meet that deadline.

MR. PARSONS: Normally, when the Tribunal does report, what are the timelines in terms of the department bringing it to the House?

MR. T. MARSHALL: If I recall correctly, we have to file within fifteen days of receipt by me of the report, or by the Attorney General of the report. We have to file within fifteen days. I am not sure of the time frame in which the government has to respond or lay a response before the Assembly.

OFFICIAL: Thirty days.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thirty days.

MR. PARSONS: Given that it does not appear that the House will be open beyond May 18 or 19, do it see it coming before this spring Session or it will probably be the fall now? Now you have to amend the Act itself, I guess, plus bring back the report, study it and bring it back.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Make recommendations.

MR. PARSONS: If you are not going to get it until the end of April you only have about eighteen days of operational time in the House to get it in there.

MR CURRAN: The Chair indicated that they were exercising their best efforts to get the report to us as early as possible. Depending on when we receive it, there is still an outside chance that they will be able to make the Session in spring. This was always the department's intention and, I think, the intention of the commission, but they have these exigencies to deal with. If we get it early enough, we will meet the deadline. Otherwise, as you say, you may have to push it out until the fall.

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Minister, the penitentiary: I guess, anyone who has toured the penitentiary comes to the quick conclusion that we need one. It is, of course, a major, major financial decision to make. What are government's thoughts, or the departmental thoughts, right now on the penitentiary? Have you been considering replacing it?

MR. T. MARSHALL: I would agree with you, that the penitentiary is coming to the end of its useful life. I am advised by my officials that it is certainly manageable. I should point out that improvements are being made. A new roof was put on one of the buildings recently, and we are now engaged in putting in new mirrors and new desks. We are renovating the showers down there now.

Marvin, what else are we doing now just to make the living conditions more acceptable?

MR. McNUTT: Actually, Mr. Alcock and I and others, the deputy as well, met with Transportation and Works just last week, and we put on the table a list of seven items that we believe to be absolute priorities, items that should be expedited if we were to achieve some standard of reasonable living for the inmates in that facility. They did agree at the table that, in fact, they would begin to undertake certain initiatives immediately. There were others which were a little more costly, or substantially more costly, such as refurbishing of the cells themselves. That item is going to cost in the range of $250,000. What we agreed to do then was submit a prioritized list of the cells that should be done immediately, and we have received that as of Friday. That would be forty-three cells.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Obviously, if we are going to build a new prison, it would take some time before a new prison was constructed. The reason I asked Marvin to answer that, to give you that information, was to show that we are taking steps to deal with conditions at HMP right now.

Government has written to the federal government to determine whether there would be interest from the new government in joint sharing or joint cost of a new combined federal-provincial prison for the Province. We have written to Minister Day. We pointed out the reasons why we think they should joint with us on such a project, and I have asked for a meeting with Minister Day in order to advance that initiative forward.

MR. PARSONS: I realize the number of inmates fluctuates, of course. How many are we carrying now, on average, in a given day?

MR. T. MARSHALL: Where?

MR. PARSONS: In HMP?

MR. McNUTT: On any given day, that would be a typical day Monday to Friday, we would carry 150 to 160 but then we have to accommodate the intermittents on the weekends now. We have a special purpose unit for that. It is only used on the weekends. Right now, we could expect another twenty inmates then to be admitted for the period Friday night until Monday morning.

MR. PARSONS: Sometimes overcrowding seems to be an issue. Do you have many incidents now of overcrowding?

MR. MCNUTT: Periodically, yes we have. Within the Province we are operating at 10 per cent over, what we would call, our rated capacity. At HMP, we have 145 single-bed cells, but then within that number we have thirty which are double-bunk. We have installed an extra bunk in thirty of them so we would have 175 beds. It is not a good practice but it is manageable right now. We are very concerned about the numbers increasing perhaps. We have witnessed the increases in terms of the remand population in particular, which has been a trend right across Canada actually. Last year, the courts in this Province also imposed twice as many federal sentences as they had the year before. We do not know why. We are trying to determine why that is the case. We go through these experiences, and right now, I guess, one of the major reasons for the increase in the remand population is that we have thirteen people who are in our custody for homicide-related offences.

MR. PARSONS: What percentage of our prisoners right now are federal? I know that was always a good money generator for the Province, taking some of the feds' bodies.

MR. MCNUTT: It is actually, and increasing. Typically, between HMP and Stephenville we would have approximately sixty on any given day, and we receive $200 a day for each of those from the federal government.

MR. PARSONS: The Salmonier property: I guess the decommissioning is complete now. What about the property itself, the actual acreage, buildings and so on, where does that sit now, with Justice or Public Works?

MR. T. MARSHALL: I believe we have transferred that over the Transportation and Works. Is that correct?

MR. McNUTT: It was one of the few buildings in the Province that was actually maintained by a line department, but through a minister's order it was transferred back to Transportation and Works.

MR. PARSONS: I have nothing further. Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Parsons.

We will pass now to Mr. Butler.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Minister, for the opportunity. Seeing that Mr. Parsons asked that question on the facility at Salmonier Line, when I went through the minutes from the Estimates last year I asked the very same question and received the same answer, but usually when you go back to some of the departments you get different feedback.

I am wondering, has the Department of Transportation and Works ever contacted your department again for any legal advice on how to proceed? I know last year there were two or three scenarios that possibly could happen with that facility, there was agriculture and other people who were interested. I am just wondering, from a legal prospective has that department since it was turned over to them ever come back for legal advice on how to proceed, to dispose of it, or anything along those line?

MR. T. MARSHALL: I am not aware. I remember inquiring whether we still had responsibility for the lands or whether it had been transferred to Transportation and Works, and it has now been confirmed for me that it is Transportation and Works. I suppose it is possible. We do have lawyers in the department who provide legal advice to that department, although I thing Transportation and Works has their own lawyer on staff.

OFFICIAL: They do.

MR. T. MARSHALL: The answer it probably no.

MR. BUTLER: Just some of the subheadings. Under 1.1.01 - and that is generally the few questions I have - 1.1.01, the Minister's Office under Salaries: I notice for 2006-2007 the budget forecast shows an increase of $51,200 in Salaries. I was wondering what position would that be? Is it just the one position? Permanent? Part-time?

MR. T. MARSHALL: Subhead 1.1.01, the Minister's Office?

MR. BUTLER: Yes, under Salaries, 01.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Salaries. You are talking about the increase between -

MR. BUTLER: It shows an increase of $51,000.

MR. T. MARSHALL: The Minister's Office or Executive Support?

MR. BUTLER: The Minister's Office.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Page 215?

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. T. MARSHALL: You are talking about an increase or a decrease?

MR. BUTLER: An increase of $51,200 for the Budget 2006-2007.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Could you give me the two numbers? I do not see a change of $51,000. Salaries went from $186,000 to $194,000.

MR. ALCOCK: Maybe I could clarify. I believe you are on Executive Support as opposed to -

MR. BUTLER: Yes, I am sorry.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Yes.

MR. BUTLER: Subhead 1.2.01. I said 1.1.01.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Right. We are talking about Salaries in Executive Support. Are we talking an increase of $52,100 or the savings of $51,400?

MR. BUTLER: The increase of $52,100.

MR. T. MARSHALL: That is incremental funding to provide - I mentioned in my opening remarks we are hiring a senior policy analyst to perform research into translation services in Labrador as per the Aboriginal Justice project report. This funding is for that salary increase.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

MR. T. MARSHALL: There is also an analyst being hired to help us with the Unified Family Court expansion.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

The next one is subhead 1.2.02, Administrative Support, in 05, Professional Services. There is an increase there of $74,800. I was just wondering: Can you list the professionals who are on contract with that department? That is under 1.2.02.05.

MR. T. MARSHALL: That is a shortfall of $74,800.

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. T. MARSHALL: There were increased costs for the criminal code review board and there were increases in operational costs relative to office of the Commissioner for Lobbyists. That is the $74,800, right?

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

The other one there in the same, 1.2.02, but down under Revenue, it shows the Revised for 2005-2006 was $340,000 and this year it is $63,000. I was just wondering what the difference would be.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Is that (inaudible), Related Revenue?

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. T. MARSHALL: There were increased revenues that resulted from miscellaneous refunds, prior years expenditures and increased third-party liabilities such as car accidents where employees were not at fault. These items are considered one-time revenues and are not budgeted from year to year.

MR. BUTLER: The other one I have, 1.2.04.07, Property, Furnishings and Equipment - I know this year the estimate is $1.376 million. Does that have anything to do with the new courts?

MR. T. MARSHALL: No, the courts are not in that section. That $635,000 is incremental funding provided to the RNC for the replacement of communication equipment. Aliant has switched from an analog system to a digital system, so it will no longer support the system the RNC has. So $418,000 of that is a new digital communication system for the RNC. The rest of it is four additional vehicles. There is one for the dog unit in Corner Brook and three for new officers. Then there is miscellaneous equipment that requires $50,000. It is mainly that major piece of communications equipment.

The Court House is two sections over, I believe.

MR. BUTLER: My next one is 2.3.05., Electoral Districts Boundaries Commission. I know it shows an expenditure of $500,000. I was just wondering, Minister - and you probably referenced this from time to time in the House as well, but I just wanted to ask the question - will the Commission be completed in 2006-2007 or sooner than that, and when do you think the recommendations will be brought before the House?

MR. T. MARSHALL: They are mandated by the Act to complete their report before the end of the year. We have ensured they would be appointed at a time and would be given a staff at a time where they can do that. They have now all been appointed; the staff has now all been appointed.

MR. CURRAN: The staff is in (inaudible) and we should get most of the staff this week.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Given the fact the previous Commission did a lot of their work in 2003, although they did not have a chance to finish it, I would imagine - and I have talked to the Chair, Judge O'Neil - they will have their work done expeditiously.

MR. CURRAN: Their office is up and running.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Yes, their office is up and running.

Where are they, Chris?

MR. CURRAN: They are over in Pippy Place.

MR. T. MARSHALL: In Pippy Place.

Once they give the report, then government has to amend the House of Assembly Act. I think the plan is that will happen in the spring of next year so that the law is in effect, the law has been amended to reflect the recommendations of the commission well in advance of the election, which is set for October of next year.

MR. BUTLER: The only other question I have has to do with the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. I know you mentioned the new recruits who were coming on. I think it was twenty-eight last year, twenty-six this year, more next year and so on. I am just wondering, would you have the figures for over the same period of time, how many officers will be coming out of the system either through retirements or whatever other means? I know those numbers are fine, but is it that many coming out and probably it is only going to balance itself out, or will we have an increase over a period of time?

MR. T. MARSHALL: I have those numbers, I just do not have them with me. Going by memory, we have not had the retirements that were anticipated. There was a guesstimate or an estimate of the number of people who will retire, because when this program was brought in, obviously we thought we would have twenty-five a year. I think ten were to replace retirees, fifteen would be new officers each year. I think what we have seen so far, the retirees were not as high as anticipated.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

OFFICIAL: We are hiring more, the first twenty-five.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Yes we are hiring more, as I said twenty-five. Last year we hired twenty-eight, this year twenty-six, and hopefully next year thirty. We are going above the anticipated twenty-five.

The year before last we hired five or six officers of the chief allocated to the drug squad. In this year's Budget there are going to be an additional five. Apart from the three drug awareness officers there are going to be an additional five which I had assumed that the chief would hire from the experienced officer pool. There are a number of Newfoundlanders who work for police departments in other parts of the country and who wish to return. Their applications are kept on file and there will be five of those hired this year. Although the chief could elect to, instead of doing that, instead of putting thirty in the new recruiting program he could make it thirty-five, but I would suspect that he may want to take advantage of some of these more experienced officers that will be in this pool.

MR. BUTLER: The only other comment - and this is probably not totally in relation but I know Mr. McNutt is here and involved with Her Majesty's Penitentiary in Whitbourne and so on. Out in our area - while you were answering the question I forgot the name of the group, but more or less what it is, is they deal with the young people rather than them ending up with a record. I am trying to think of the name right now.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Youth diversion.

MR. BUTLER: Right on.

I attend their annual meetings on a yearly basis, and I am saying they are directly related, but I just want an opinion from someone. I saw the good work that group is doing to get the young person, and the numbers they are receiving now - I take it they come through, not in my area, the RNC, because they are not out there, but the RCMP or whoever. That is where the numbers are picked up.

I am wondering what has happened. I am glad the numbers are not up but I know the problem is not being resolved, whatever the catch is there. I think the number they gave me was three or four or five or six cases they had this year. That is wonderful, but know there are more cases out there and I am wondering why they are not being referred to those people to nip it in the bud. I know of a couple of cases in my own community, and I have called the RCMP and they have said: Well, there is really not all that much we can do. I know if some of those young people got into that system - because I know of other young people who went there and didn't have to go to Whitbourne. It was a wonderful program and it is still a wonderful program.

I am just wondering, is there something changing when the feds brought in the new rules and regulations back two or three years ago, that the RCMP or whoever do not have the power to do this now? Is there something happening there now, that you have to get more leeway before you get them in there?

I think there are young people falling through the cracks because of that; not that many but there are some. I am just wondering if someone could make a comment on that.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Chair, Tom Mills, the Director of Public Prosecutions, has joined us. I think he would be the ideal one to answer that question.

MR. MILLS: You will have to shut me up on this topic because I can talk about it for a long time.

What I think you are referring to is what I call the Youth Diversion Program. It is known by different names. Currently it is popularly referred to as an Extrajudicial Sanction Program. Our Province has been a leader in the area of diversion programs, taking young people away from the court system and dealing with them in another setting, for over twenty-five years. Those are programs that were set up by what was once known as the Department of Social Services, and the lead department now on it is the Department of Health and Community Services through the regional boards. They are based on a community model, so it is a community group that takes care of these particular matters. They are referred, actually, by prosecutors to the local community groups.

You are right, that we have noticed a decrease in the actual numbers going through to different youth diversion programs. I still use the old name. This is the right across the Province, not just in your area. There seem to be a couple of contributing factors to that. One is that we have fewer youth, in general, in the Province than we did twenty-five years ago when we set them up, so the pool is actually smaller in the number of people. The other, as I said, is that with the YCJA, when that was set up by the federal government, they enshrined what I believe was a common law power of the police anyway to simply not charge people, to simply send people on their way with a warning or a discussion, so there has been an increase in that now-called warnings or police warnings. We think that some of those are being sent that way.

There are still a number of cases going through the court system which could be dealt with, I believe, in a youth diversion type program. It is incumbent upon the community groups to expand the kinds of young people or offences that they will deal with. We have seen that, for example, occur in St. John's. When these programs were first set up, they would only be deal with first-time offenders, so basically it was a one-shot deal. The St. John's program two years ago said, no, we are prepared to take them back a second time, so we have seen an expansion in certain areas. Certainly in your area, if they were prepared to take other categories of offences or second-time offenders, we as a prosecution service would be very open to that. There could be more dialogue about, are there other kinds of cases that could be extended.

The program has been evaluated on at least one occasion and has been shown to be incredibly successful. The recidivism rate, in other words whether or not the young person would re-offend, has proven to be very good. The whole model of using community representatives to interact with the young person, I think is an ideal model and more effective than the courtroom setting, in my experience.

MR. BUTLER: I think the rate out in our area, with the group that I am referring to, is 97 per cent to 98 per cent who never offended after.

MR. CURRAN: It is very high, and everyone has (inaudible). Certainly, that could be explored to see if they want to take a wider group. I constantly monitor this, actually, because I really believe that is the way to go.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you.

That is the only questions I have, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Are there any further questions?

If not, then, Minister, before we return to you for closing comments, we will do our bit of housekeeping. I would ask the Clerk to call the subheads.

CLERK: 1.1.01 to 4.2.02 inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall the subheads, 1.1.01 to 4.2.02 inclusive, carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01 through 4.2.02 carried.

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, Department of Justice, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report the Estimates of the Department of Justice carried without amendment?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, the Estimates for the Department of Justice carried, without amendment.

CHAIR: The other item of housekeeping would be the minutes from our meeting of April 5 with the Department of Health and Community Services. I entertain a motion that they will be passed.

MR. FRENCH: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by Mr. French.

AN HON. MEMBER: Seconded.

CHAIR: All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Carried.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

CHAIR: Minister, are there any closing comments?

MR. T. MARSHALL: I would just like to thank the members of the committee for their usual diligence and congratulate them on the way they do their work. I look forward to seeing them again next year; maybe.

MR. BUTLER: I guess we can all say that, eh?

CHAIR: Thank you, minister.

Likewise, I would like to thank the committee members for their preparation, for their questioning, and thank the Minister and his staff for their forthright answers and professionalism.

This committee will meet again at 7 o'clock tomorrow evening in the House of Assembly to consider the Estimates of the Department of Education. Until that time, I would entertain a motion to adjourn.

MR. O'BRIEN: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by Mr. O'Brien.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Carried.

Thanks very much.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.