The Committee met at 5:30 p.m. in the House of Assembly.

CHAIR (Hutchings): Good evening everybody. We are here this evening - the Social Services Committee - to review the Estimates for Human Resources, Labour and Employment, and Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.

Just a couple of housekeeping items; our general pattern has been, in terms of questions from the committee, we have been going in fifteen minute intervals. I will notify you around fifteen minutes.

I will ask the minister to have some opening comments and, as well, to introduce his staff. You do not need to refer to the committee in their official titles, certainly by name is fine.

The other thing, witnesses who are giving information, I ask you, for the benefit of Hansard, to identify yourself each time before you speak.

We will start to the right, if the committee could introduce themselves.

MR. KING: Darin King, MHA for the District of Grand Bank.

MS SULLIVAN: Susan Sullivan, Grand Falls-Windsor-Buchans.

MR. CORNECT: Good evening, minister.

Tony Cornect, Port au Port.

MR. COLLINS: Felix Collins, District of Placentia & St. Mary's.

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

MR. REID: Scott Reid, a researcher with the Opposition office.

MS MICHAEL: Lorraine Michael, MHA, Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

CHAIR: I will ask the Clerk to call the first subhead.

CLERK: 1.1.01.

CHAIR: Shall 1.1.01. carry?

I will now refer to the minister for opening comments and introduction of your staff.

MR. SKINNER: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

It is our pleasure to be here this evening to provide whatever information the committee members would like to inquire upon.

I am here this evening with a small delegation of people, who I will let introduce themselves a bit later. I will tell you that there are representatives here from the Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment, there are representatives from Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission, and the Labour Relations Agency.

Before I get them to introduce themselves, I would suggest, if I could, to the committee - rather than having everybody stay here all night - if maybe we could start with Housing, go to the Commission, go to the Labour Relations Agency, and then to the departmental initiatives, if that would be okay. I would prefer if we did that, so that maybe people can move on. If that does not work with you and we need to do it in a different order, I am totally flexible. I am just trying to allow people to move on rather than have them sit around all night.

With that, I will ask the people who I have here with me to introduce themselves. I will just remind them to wait until the light comes on before they speak.

MS CAUL: Hi, I am Brenda Caul, Deputy Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

MS TUBRETT: Denise Tubrett, ADM, Corporate Services, with Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

MR. HANLON: Brendan Hanlon, Director of Finance with Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

MS WHEATON: Roxie Wheaton, ADM Responsible for Client Services.

MR. PENNEY: Wayne Penney, ADM, Labour Market Development, HRLE.

MS GOGAN: Aisling Gogan, Director of Poverty Reduction Strategy.

MR. BARTLETT: Eric Bartlett, Executive Director of Corporate Services with the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission.

MR. MAHONEY: Tom Mahoney, Executive Director of Worker Services, Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission.

MR. MORIARITY: Ed Moriarity, Communications Director.

MR. KENNEDY: Gerry Kennedy, Executive Director, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.

MR. WILLIAMS: Kevin Williams, Team Leader, Programs Division, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.

MR. LAWRENCE: Tom Lawrence, Chief Financial Officer, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.

MR. FOWLER: Wayne Fowler, CEO, Labour Relations Agency.

MR. SKINNER: Thank you.

If I could, Mr. Chair, I will have just a couple of brief remarks, if I could, about the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, if it is okay if we start there – just by way of introduction for the committee members.

Budget 2008 is certainly, I believe, giving a fair bit of good news for the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation. As members may be aware, we have just over 5,500 non-profit homes throughout the Province. The vast majority of them would be in the twenty to sixty year old range. A significant number of them would be in the forty, fifty, sixty year old range. A fair amount of work needs to be done on the interior and the exterior of those units, and in this budget government has provided Housing with an increase of $2 million per year over the next five years to address the interior housing renovations that need to be done.

As well, there is significant funding of $27.5 million announced, an increase over five years that we have provided to Housing, which basically will be used to modernize and improve the social housing stock.

We also have a one-time $2 million funding allocation, which will be available this year, to address asbestos and mould abatement throughout the Province. As members across would be aware, there have been some issues with asbestos and mould, and we have a $2 million injection of funds into this year's budget to deal with that.

Also, under the Poverty Reduction Strategy, we have three new housing initiatives to help reduce the wait list for social housing. In this budget we have $1 million approved in 2008-2009 and an additional $1 million in 2009-2010 to increase the number of rent supplements that are available Province-wide, by 500 over the next couple of years. So, we hope to be able to get 250 this year from the private sector and another 250, obviously, next year; $1 million in each year.

Those rent supplements, just so you understand, the number we came up with was based upon the wait list that we had. We analyzed the wait list, determined how many people who were out there who could avail of this particular subsidy and then we put a budget allocation forward to try and address the wait list.

We have also approved $350,000 under the Poverty Reduction Strategy to extend the changes we made in last year's budget in rental calculations to community-based housing groups. Last year, for instance, we did a calculation on rent, on net pay versus gross pay. For seniors, the rent geared to income scale was reduced to 25 per cent from 30 per cent. Just as an oversight - it was not any particular reason, it was just an oversight - the community-based housing groups did not get that. When we recognized the oversight the budget had been passed. We did not have the funding there, so we incorporated an extra $350,000 into this year's budget to be able to apply the same rental calculations or changes in rental calculations to individuals, tenants of ours living in those community-based housing. That is about 1,000 tenants who will be affected by that change in a positive way.

The final thing is we have gone through a fairly extensive IT reconfiguration at Housing, which is going to bring us current and in line with today's technology. We had some fairly old legacy systems there, and there has been a fair amount of investment made over the past couple of years in the IT budget of Housing. This year, in particular, we have a couple of new IT positions that we funded with a $140,000 investment which were identified as a part of our review that we did, that we are lacking. They were new positions that we needed to effectively use the new IT equipment that we had. They did not exist in our human resource component, so we brought in the funding to be able to hire those two people.

I will stop there. There is lots more I could say, but I will stop there and allow the committee to address any questions to myself or to the officials of the Housing Corporation.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Mr. Butler.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you very much.

I would like to welcome the minister and your staff here, sir, from the various divisions.

First of all, I want to introduce this gentleman. This is Scott Reid, one of the research people with us. Where we are small numbers, we like to bring someone for company.

Minister, I know you mentioned that you have a fairly large delegation. When I came in I thought the House was still in session, to be honest with you.

On a more serious note, I think every year that I have been taking part with the estimates for your department - and I think Housing was under Municipal Affairs at one particular time, not too long ago. I am going to make a comment again tonight that I always make, that is, the main thing that is involved in my district is when it comes to the provincial repair program. There are very little units of housing like you have here in the city and other areas, but I have to say, we know there is a two-and-a-half year wait list but when people put requests in and I know they are of an emergency nature and you see it yourself, I have to say, the officials, they are not jumping because Roland Butler calls, I know that, but they do take the needs of the people seriously. I have seen that so often. I guess this past year, more so than recently. It is good to see that once the need is there you are not just left on the wait list and the people are there to help. I must say, the inspectors drop by fairly quickly when they know there is something of that nature. I want to say that, and say thank you to the staff.

MR. SKINNER: Thank you.

MR. BUTLER: To begin with, I am just going to do those one-liners. I am not too fussy about them but you have to do them anyway, I suppose, from time to time.

Under Housing, 1.1.01., I was just wondering, can we get a breakdown of the amount that is spent on each of those programs that is listed there, the Grants and Subsidies? Is that all the - or are there various - maybe most of it is going into programs like I just mentioned, the repair program? What else might be entailed there?

MR. SKINNER: I can certainly give you some numbers to quantify that a little bit more. Then I will turn my attention to the back row and they can fill in the gaps that I may leave.

Just for clarification, the amount that you are asking me about, I assume, Mr. Butler, is the amount of $40,075,200?

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. SKINNER: Yes, okay.

Some of those things are the Aboriginal housing trust fund, which is $8.1 million - I am giving you round numbers here, $8.1 million; affordable housing trust fund of $1.1 million; the mould and asbestos remediation that I talked about earlier, $2 million there; the interior retrofit program, $2 million; the rental supplement program that I referred to is $1 million. We increased the market rent that we are going to pay the landlords. There was a $200,000 allocation for that. The community-based housing rental change that I referred to is $350,000. We invested $100,000 in a community facilitator, we are calling them. You would be familiar – you may be familiar. I am sure Ms Michael is familiar with this. I am trying to remember the name of the group –

OFFICIAL: Community Centre Alliance.

MR. SKINNER: Community Centre Alliance, thank you. It just escaped me for a second.

The Community Centre Alliance that exists here on the Avalon which sort of works jointly with all seven community centres, there was no such resource existed on the West Coast, so we have an allotment of $100,000 to try and bring a Community Centre Alliance type person and support system to Corner Brook and to the Dunfield Park area. There is $100,000 for that. CMHC revenue, $836,000; Information Technology staffing that I talked about, $146,000.

That is about it I guess in terms of round numbers. I will throw those out to you as an example of the kinds of things that the monies are going into.

MR. BUTLER: Very good.

The other heading, 1.1.02. –

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: Yes, that is correct.

Maybe you can explain this for me. It looks like the total budget there is federal money for this year, Grants and Subsidies, $1.7 million. I was wondering why there was no federal budgeted last year or in the revised figures last year?

MR. SKINNER: I am going to have to turn to my officials and see if they can help me with that. Tom?

MR. LAWRENCE: Basically, what that is, that is a capital grant that we are receiving this year which we never had in a long time. It is to cover off the construction of some new units in St. John's and Stephenville. It is fully funded from the trust fund.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

MR. SKINNER: Just for clarification, Mr. Butler, I believe that is under the affordable housing trust fund as well. That is affordable housing units that are being constructed.

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

My next question is with regards to a report that was in the AG's report, and that comes down to everybody from time to time. The AG always finds different issues to bring forward. He indicated that there was a lack of adequate recordkeeping within the department and so on. I think he went on to say inspections prior to attendant vacating and delays in collecting efforts and so on. I was just wondering, what has been done to address this problem? Is the problem as bad as what it seems, like when you read something?

MR. SKINNER: Certainly, the Auditor General did identify a few concerns that he had with the corporation. I will tell you that they have all been responded to officially by the corporation back to the Auditor General.

In terms of the detail of them, I will turn to officials just so they can give you a bit more information. It is my understanding that we have responded and the Auditor General is satisfied with the responses that have been provided, but I will ask the officials to help with that.

Mr. Kennedy.

MR. KENNEDY: These concerns primarily dealt with a study that we carried out of how we administered our social housing operations in the Province. We identified - it was a joint union management study and to look at, really, some ways we could improve it. Of course, any time you implement a program like that you are probably a little more ambitious in terms of how soon you can implement all of the recommendations. I think his comments were more to those recommendations that we had said need to be implemented, but they have not been all fully put in place. I think, as the minister said, subsequently we responded and outlined a timeframe. I think we have made real good progress in terms of getting them all in place. So, it seems to be okay.

MR. BUTLER: Very good.

Minister, you mentioned here in your opening remarks about the asbestos and the program – I think you said $1 million or whatever it was for asbestos, mould and so on. Would that be also in rental units that you would have out around the Province or is that for the major housing complex more so?

MR. SKINNER: No. There was an inspection done of all of the units that Newfoundland and Labrador Housing owns throughout the Province. There was an assessment report done on each one and those units that did have the potential for asbestos were identified.

Just for the information of the people in the room, the fact that units contained asbestos in and of itself, was not necessarily a concern. It was only when the asbestos was disturbed or something was broken, the gyproc was broken that it became a concern. We have responded to emergency concerns, ones that we knew we had to get in and get at. That has been done. There has been, I believe, $1 million spent on that. I will get the officials to correct anything I say that might be wrong in a second, but I believe there was $1 million spent on that.

What we have now is a plan in place, on a go-forward basis, that if we go into any of our units to do any repairs or any maintenance calls or anything like that, we will try and look after the asbestos that is there, undisturbed, and get that cleaned up as we go through the units.

If I could, I do not know if I have missed anything that somebody might want to add to that.

MR. KENNEDY: Just for the purpose of clarification, a lot of that asbestos that is causing us the difficulty is asbestos that is actually in the sparkling, in the plastering as opposed to - there is some of it around pipes. Most of that has been looked out for. It is the asbestos in the gyproc that is causing us the difficulty. As the minister said, we actually went out and took samples of the gyproc and identified it and put steps in place.

MR. BUTLER: Minister, you also mentioned about, I believe it was 500 rental units over a period of time. I was just wondering, what is the breakdown for Western, Central, Labrador or Avalon, or would you have that?

MR. SKINNER: There are 500 in total; I will say that to you. Well, let me back up. We currently have about 1,000 rental supplements already that we have available to potential tenants of Housing. There is a wait-list as I indicated, so we analysed the wait-lists that we had and determined that over two years we needed to incorporate about another 500 of these rental supplements into the system to be able to look after all of the need that we saw there.

I will say to you, that about 80 per cent of the wait-list is for non-elderly singles and also for seniors and two-member families. They would be the other people who would be on the wait-list. We have basically provided that money to try and look after that over the next two years.

In terms of the regional breakdown, I am going to have to refer to the back row again and see if they can help me with that.

Mr Williams.

MR. WILLIAMS: Our breakdown: I think it is quite obvious that the vast majority of our units are in the St. John's metro area. That goes for our own units as well as our rent supplement units. Right now we have 1,000 rent supplement units. Approximately 700 of those are on the Avalon Peninsula and the others are throughout the Province with the next highest lot in Corner Brook, in Grand Falls, Gander and so on, as you would expect with the larger areas.

The allocation for the extra 500 units that we will be getting over the next two years will be based on a wait-list. The intent is to reduce our present wait-list by 500 clients with those units. The wait-list that has existed in our regional office will be used to determine where those units will be allocated.

MR. BUTLER: With regard to the Provincial Repair Program, I know there is approximately a two to two-and-a-half year wait-list. Is that holding its own now, or is it on a decline or on a rise again?

MR. SKINNER: As you are aware, we did invest significant money into the Provincial Home Repair program to try and decrease the wait-list. If memory serves me correctly, I believe we expected to eliminate the backlog that we had over a five-year timeframe, and we are making progress on that. Going from memory - and again I will refer to the people in the back to help me with my numbers - but I believe we would typically do probably 400 per year, and I think we are up to about 600 a year now.

MR. WILLIAMS: Well, overall. A little bit of an explanation, I guess, around the Provincial Home Repair program, and, Mr. Butler, you alluded to the fact that we deal with emergencies immediately. There are two categories which we deal with immediately: one is an emergency situation, furnace down or something like that, roof leaks and that sort of thing, and the other is a disabled component where we provide accessibility modifications immediately. There has been a significant increase in that demand over the past few years, as we would expect with our aging population.

Prior to the extra money that was infused in the last year's budget, we were doing about 1,800 clients a year, which included disabled, emergency and people coming off our wait-list. This past year ending March 31 we did approximately 2,500 people. The wait-list a year ago was about 4,200 and we are down to about 3,600 now. We would hope that trend will continue. We are not seeing a significant increase in demand as a result of this, which we expected. There was a bit of spike obviously when money was announced. People realized there was more money out there and we received more applications. We expect that we will meet those objectives of reducing that wait-list to a current list in the next four years.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Chair, I do not know how I am doing for time but I only have one other question.

CHAIR: Okay, carry on.

MR. BUTLER: I have to explain this one a little bit I suppose. I think the name of the program is already changed. Back when there was a Federal Liberal Administration, they came in with what they called the Home Heating Efficiency Program. I know when government changed they had to review it and rightly so, and I think they changed the name on it. Prior to, I guess, last year there was a notification went out that applications would be available in April of 2007. I can tell you I have a list of about seventy-five people and I think every second week they call me: when am I going to get an application?

The question I have for you today - I know it was said that it was going to be administered through Newfoundland and Labrador Housing and it was in addition to the program that you have, but I was told the reason there was a delay with it was because of a couple of provincial departments. I might have them wrong, but I thought Natural Resources and Environment?

I was just wondering: how is that going? The only reason I am asking you this question - it is with those people I know, but where your department was going to administer it from that perspective.

MR. SKINNER: You are correct, Mr. Butler, in terms of this money has been a couple of years, I guess. It is certainly eighteen months, maybe two years, that it has been kicking around. When the federal government did change there was some delay in terms of that being processed. Initially the Province was involved through the Department of Environment and Conservation. The intention was that there would be a set of guidelines and policies developed by the Department of Environment and Conservation and then Housing would be the implementation or delivery agent for the program. It is referred to now as REEP, Residential Energy Efficiency Program; REEP. The policy around the program moved from Environment and Conservation to Natural Resources. I am actually having a briefing on this Thursday or Friday morning this week of the policy and program guidelines, and then assuming all goes well, very quickly we, being Housing, should have that and be able to roll it out. It is close, but I would not want to tell you to call your seventy-five applicants yet to get their application in.

MR. BUTLER: They will call me.

MR. SKINNER: I think we are very close, and hopefully very soon we will be able to roll it out for you. Again, if I have missed something - Mr. Williams in the back.

MR. WILLIAMS: You are absolutely right, it is just a very short matter of time.

MR. BUTLER: Maybe I should not be asking you this question, but I think when the program initially started, and then I saw some information on it through our MP because he had the guidelines to it, is it still a part of it – maybe you would not know that where it is being reviewed now - that the people would have to pay $200 or $300 or something to have someone come in and inspect their house before they could even be considered? That was a part of it, wasn't it?

MR. SKINNER: Again, I will look for clarification from the back, but it was my understanding that there had to be an energy audit done of an individual's home before work started. The estimates that I heard, Mr. Butler, were up to $500 for that to be done. In the discussions that I had early on we were trying to find a way around not having to have people pay for that, have the energy audit done but incorporate it into the monies that would be paid out through the fund, because we felt it was important that the energy audit be done.

It sort of gave you a baseline at the home before the work was done. You did the energy audit, then you did your work and you did another energy audit to see how successful the renovations were. I have not sent the policy yet, so I cannot tell you whether or not that will be included.

Again, I will look to Mr. Williams to see if he can add some clarification.

MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, Minister, the audits, we are hoping, are going to be provided as part of our program. It will be a free audit. One of the other reasons for an audit is, the audit will enable the home owner to avail of the federal ecoENERGY program. It is our expectation that we will provide some funds for retrofits and based on those retrofits the homeowner will be able to avail of the federal program as well with the hope that money will come back into the program for more people to avail of retrofits. That is the idea; maximize the federal inputs as well as the provincial.

MR. BUTLER: If the fee is not incorporated I can assure you my seventy-five applications will not be long dropping.

Anyway, that is all for me, Mr. Chair, and I want to thank you very much.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairperson.

Mr. Butler has covered a lot of what I would have wanted to cover, so I will not be repeating because I have answers.

Just a couple of questions on the REEP. Is that money in hand now? Is it parked somewhere?

MR. SKINNER: It is. It is in the coffers of the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation and I believe it is about $6 million.

OFFICIAL: It is $6.9 million.

MR. SKINNER: It is $6.9 million. It is in our account, right?

OFFICIAL: Yes.

MR. SKINNER: It is, yes.

MS MICHAEL: I was wondering, Shawn - it would be helpful for me, and I would say maybe for the rest of the Committee, if we could just have the breakdown that you read out under Housing Operations and Assistance, the Grants and Subsidies. Would it be possible to get a copy of that as committee members?

MR. SKINNER: Yes, I do not see any reason why you could not. Are the pages around?

MS MICHAEL: It can happen afterwards. The Chair will take an account of anything that we are requesting to make sure that we get it.

Where this budget is just the one figure, it does not give us any detail.

MR. SKINNER: Sure.

MS MICHAEL: What about under 1.1.02? There must be a breakdown for that money as well. Here we just have it as $1,715,000.

MR. SKINNER: You are referring to the Grants and Subsidies?

MS MICHAEL: Yes.

MR. SKINNER: Just bear with me while I have a quick look.

MS MICHAEL: Is it broken down in terms of where regionally? Maybe there is no breakdown where it is in Grants and Subsidies, but the money is used in different ways because some are rental units and some is rehabilitation of their own residences?

MR. SKINNER: I do not have that here with me but I will endeavour to provide it to you.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much.

One thing that Roland did not ask about and I do want to is: every time I go to Labrador West one of the biggest issues thrown at me everything is housing. I think you are aware of how desperate the housing situation is there. Could I have some idea of what is – before I go on I want to repeat what Roland said with regard to the response of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing to need.

I have only been around for about eighteen months, maybe less, but there has been a major improvement in what I see and a lot of effort has gone into that. I know my Constituency Assistant has been part of meetings. I know Roxie was part of meetings. You organized meetings for my staff to be at and it has really paid off. There is really good clear communication and in my district I know that people really are having needs met. I do want to mention that and congratulate you on the improvement that has happened on a number of levels, even with regard to getting a better understanding of how you set up your system for doing repairs and scheduling and your own program. Having that information is helpful as well, because it is interesting, with the constituents, if my assistant can actually give them that information it makes a difference to them.

If they are just told it will be soon or it will be six weeks, but they have no idea what to expect, it is difficult. When you can give them some clear information it actually helps them. So I think we are better, we have better information now for doing that and that is really, really helpful.

MR. SKINNER: Well thank you for that, and there has been a lot of effort made in that regard by the employees and officials, and we appreciate that.

MS MICHAEL: I am aware of that, yes, and it is paying off. Certainly that is my experience, like Roland's. I almost forgot to say that.

With regard to Labrador West, if you could give me some idea of how the corporation is trying to help out with the issue of lack of affordable housing up there.

MR. SKINNER: I will give you some information that I have, and again if any of the staff have anything they wish to add.

As you are aware, Ms Michael, we did have the affordable housing program for the profit and not-for-profit sector. The not-for-profit sector, in particular, there appeared not to be a capacity to be able to avail of that program in the Labrador West area with the not-for-profit sector. One of the things that we are looking at doing is trying to take some of the capacity that exists here in the Avalon Region in particular, because we have a lot of people who do some great work here, the Jocelyn Greens, the Bruce Pearces and so on - you would know them better than I would. We have those people who we are trying to link up with, people in the Labrador West region, to be able to try and build some capacity up there. We are prepared as a corporation to invest some monies into trying to establish those connections and build that capacity, so that the community itself is able to respond.

The second thing is that the federal government has, in my opinion, and in our opinion as a government, a significant role to play in terms of the funding that they provide to allow us to move forward initiatives in social housing, affordable housing, homelessness initiatives and those kinds of things. All of the funding that is currently on the table expires as of March of next year. I just recently came back in April month from meeting with the provincial-territorial housing ministers and the federal minister, Minister Solberg, trying to nail him down on a commitment from the federal government to continue. There is approximately $2 billion per year that the federal government puts into the affordable housing programs, and we are asking them to continue that, and the federal government did not make that commitment.

They have indicated to us, at least at this point, that there will be no further federal funding and we are on our own, basically. Given that message by the minister, we are now in discussions, myself and officials with housing, trying to determine in next year's budget what are we going to be able to do to try and address some of that need. We will come up with some solutions, I can assure you. We won't take care of all the need in next year's budget, but we will certainly try to put a dent in it.

I am hoping that the federal government response that we got is an interim response. I suspect as we draw nearer to an election and they get the heat turned up a little bit on them, from some of my provincial and territorial colleagues, that they will respond a little bit more appropriately; because there have been some petitions and some motions in Legislatures across the country that have been presented, and I am currently looking at one for our own Legislature, and I think that will draw attention to the issue and maybe get the federal government to step up a little bit more and participate with us.

I will offer that to you, and if you will allow me to ask the staff if I have missed anything.

MS MICHAEL: Please.

MR. SKINNER: I don't know if anyone from Housing - or Roxie, even, if you might want to jump in, Roxie? I know it is a Housing issue but you have great knowledge - if there is anything.

MS WHEATON: The whole Housing area has been a passion of mine, having spent six years in the Avalon region, but clearly we do have an incredible struggle here with getting the feds to be at the table to understand that it has to be a federal-provincial solution.

In the absence of a solution, I think there is a great willingness of provinces across the country, particularly in Atlantic Canada, to try to figure out how we can come up with some creative solutions to address areas, particularly in rural parts of the Province, where, as the minister indicated, we do not have the capacity like the organizations. That is a real struggle, because some of the great solutions we have seen in St. John's have come from the grass roots up.

We are also challenged, through this federal-provincial relationship that we have, that they are very much into giving bricks and mortar but not into sustainable funding. A lot of what has happened has resulted in the Province having to pick up the sustainability in keeping this housing. There are some real challenges, I think, we are going to have to face as a Province, as we look forward, to: How do we keep the momentum going?

We also know, of course, with the changing demographics in the Province, we are going to have to be very creative as to some of the solutions that we come up with.

MR. WILLIAMS: We have recognized that, and we have been having discussions with our regional staff in Goose Bay who are responsible for that particular area, and we will be targeting some of those rent supplements that were alluded to earlier to that area.

One of the difficulties, you are probably aware, in Labrador West, is the high incomes. Affordability is not necessarily the type of affordability that we, as the Housing Corporation, deal with. Most of our clients have incomes in the range of $14,000 to $15,000 per year. What is troubling in Labrador West is that people with incomes in the $60,000 and $70,000 range just cannot find housing. That is part of the difficulty.

Of course, when they do find housing then the low-income people seem to be forced out. We have seen that happen in other jurisdictions where we have a major upturn in the economies. We will be looking at the Rent Supplement Program if possible to accommodate some of those displaced people.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

I recognize that you do have the issue of the high salaries, but then you have other issues such as students who come in and who don't have high salaries. I think they were hoping to get student housing, residential, a building for students. I think it would really help them, if they had it.

The other one is people who go into new situations in their lives where housing becomes problematic, particularly with women and children when there is a marriage breakdown. It is specifically through the Women's Centre that I hear most of the concerns around housing because, of course, they are dealing with women and children.

Then you also have the issue – as you know, I am sure – of senior citizens, because you are getting a new generation now and you are getting the generation of retirees who are going to stay there. It is becoming difficult for them to stay there, but neither can they afford to leave, especially with retirees if they are women who do not have pensions or they just have a survivor's pension which is smaller than the pension than the worker would have had.

I think you know there are a lot of complications over in Labrador West for sure. What I am hearing is, at this moment everything is in the talking, hoping and planning stage, really.

MR. SKINNER: Other than the rent supplements, there is no concrete initiative that I can speak to you about in terms of today being able to help somebody – it is the Rent Supplement Program – but I can, and I do want to stress this to you, as a group of provinces and territories we have definitely mobilized, in the last four, five or six months, to try and draw our federal government to the table to assist us in the crisis that we experience right across the country, and we are not going to relent on that.

MS MICHAEL: Good. I am glad to hear that.

This is not a question; it is a comment. I guess it comes from not so much as a politician but from my experience. You alluded to the issues for rural communities, and building capacity, and using people like Joyce and Bruce to help build capacity.

I guess I would say I would be cautious about that; one, because in rural Newfoundland we are not dealing with the same demographics. We have not as many young people staying around. We are dealing with older people, an older population, number one, and because of other things that have happened in rural Newfoundland a lot of people who are involved in the community are overworked, doing volunteer work around needs in the community. That certainly has happened to the women's community.

I just would say be cautious about how much you expect of them, to do the kind of mobilizing that was done here in the city; because, if you look at the population, number one, you have many more people who are paid to do that work here in the city. They are community groups but they are paid to do it. Out in rural Newfoundland you are not going to find people part of groups that are being paid to do that work.

I would really say be cautious about how you approach that. If not, I think you may need more of your own staff to be available to work in regions, to work in rural Newfoundland.

That is just a caution from me, and a concern both as a politician and as a person who has done community work.

MR. SKINNER: I certainly hear the point you are making. I will just reiterate to you that we have indicated, as the Housing Corporation, that we are willing to try and support that initiative with some of our own resources, be they staff or financial, but I just recently came back from Peterview and there is an individual out there who is doing good work in terms of helping mobilize the community to be able to provide some affordable housing units out there, for instance. This is a lady who is a senior citizen but she has as much energy as I have, I am sure. So, there are people out there who are willing to take on the challenge and we have to be careful to make sure that we do not overburden them, but that is a balance that we will try and achieve.

MS MICHAEL: Don't let doing it depend on having somebody there able; that is the other problem.

MR. SKINNER: The need is there, whether the capacity is there or not. I hear you.

MS MICHAEL: That is right.

I think that covers everything, then, because Roland covered so much of what I was going to ask about. I think I have covered everything.

CHAIR: Okay, thank you.

I guess we are still on the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.

Does the Committee have any more questions?

Okay. What was the next topic you would like to –

MR. SKINNER: If I could, I would just like to excuse the members of the Corporation who are here with me, if that is okay with members opposite.

Thank you very much for your attendance, and I appreciate your effort.

CHAIR: Thank you.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

MR. SKINNER: If it would be okay with the Committee members, maybe we could look at the Workplace Health and Safety Compensation Commission, and look at trying to do something there.

CHAIR: Where we are finished with the Estimates for the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, we are going to call those first. So we will just take a minute.

CLERK (Ms Murphy): Subheads 1.1.01. to 1.1.02.

CHAIR: Shall 1.1.01. and 1.1.02. carry?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those contra-minded, 'nay'.

Carried.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01. through 1.1.02. carried.

MR. SKINNER: The information that you asked for, Ms Michael, on Grants and Subsidies, hopefully we will have that in the morning. I will just get that forwarded through the Committee Chair to you and to the other members of the Committee.

CLERK: Subhead (inaudible).

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

CLERK: I am sorry, I though you were starting the other heads.

Okay, yes, the total.

CHAIR: Okay, call that?

CLERK: Yes, the total.

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those contra-minded, 'nay'.

Carried.

On motion, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report the Estimates of the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation carried without amendment?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those contra-minded, 'nay'.

Carried.

On motion, Estimates of the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation carried without amendment.

CHAIR: We are going to move now to the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission.

MR. BUTLER: I was going to give out the number but they are all the same anyway - there is only one - 8.1.01., Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review.

MR. SKINNER: Go ahead, sorry.

MR. BUTLER: My mike (inaudible).

CHAIR: Okay.

MR. BUTLER: Okay, thank you.

Under 8.1.01., there will just be a couple or three questions here on the one-liners. I notice there is an increase in Salaries for this year, and I was just wondering if the minister could give an explanation there.

Last year it was $321,000 and the revised was $317,000; this year it is $456,000.

MR. SKINNER: Yes.

Again, I will give you an explanation, Mr. Butler, and then I will refer to staff. I find that sometimes they can fill in the gaps. So, if you don't mind, I will do that again this time.

MR. BUTLER: Not a problem.

OFFICIAL: That is the Review Division, is it?

MR. SKINNER: Yes.

Are you referring to 8.1.01., the heading?

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. SKINNER: Just for clarification, we are referring to, then, the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review Division as opposed to the Compensation Commission by itself. All right, I just wanted to make the point.

MR. BUTLER: Is there a section there for compensation as well?

MR. SKINNER: No, in the Budget Estimates it is under the Review Division.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

MR. SKINNER: In terms of Salaries, just to answer your question there, there were two things that impacted. One was the savings, as you indicated; that was just basically a vacancy we had for a short period of time where we did not fill that position. Then the increase into 2008-2009 Estimates up to $456,000, there are three new positions that we have identified as being needed to be filled. Two of those are client service officers: one to work with injured workers and one to work with the employer community. The third position is a senior policy research analyst that we have at the Commission as well. That increase in Salaries is related to those three positions.

MR. BUTLER: The review commissioners themselves, they are included in that, are they?

MR. SKINNER: No.

This is specifically the review division itself as opposed to the Commission, is that correct?

OFFICIAL: In my understanding.

MR. SKINNER: Yes, my understanding is that this is the review division. These budget items here in section 08. are specifically related to the Compensation Review Division versus the Commission. They are two separate entities, the review division being Mr. Lundrigan's area.

MR. BUTLER: Yes, and that is what I meant.

MR. SKINNER: Okay.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Lundrigan is one of the review commissioners.

MR. SKINNER: Yes.

MR. BUTLER: The chief review commissioner, or whatever the title.

MR. SKINNER: Correct.

MR. BUTLER: I know there was an announcement made recently that there were three or four new appointments, and what have you. I was wondering, is that included in that salary number that is there?

MR. SKINNER: Mr. Fowler can answer that.

MR. FOWLER: The Salaries are for the administrator, clerks, and the staff of the review division, not for the review commissioners or the chief review commissioner. That is just the funding for the people who work in the office in the review division, correct, yes.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

Maybe this is an improper question. The review commissioners themselves, they would be made through the Commission, or where would they be noted?

MR. FOWLER: Professional Services, Sir.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

MR. FOWLER: My understanding is the category, being 05., their pay would come under that category, Professional Services.

MR. SKINNER: Just a bit further down the line.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

That is what that one is for, because that was my next question. I notice there was $410,000 last year and it was revised to $180,000, and I was going to ask what the reason was there.

MR. SKINNER: There are two things there in terms of Professional Services. Number one is, in terms of Mr. Lundrigan and the other commissioners, there has been a declining trend in the number of cases that they have been hearing, so the number of appeals that they have been hearing has been declining. That in itself has led to some of that. The majority of that was related to, there was a Web-based design computer system that was going to be implemented and it was delayed in being implemented last year. The amount was approximately - just to give you an idea, $230,000 in savings is recognized from the Web-based design system being delayed and the drop in the caseload.

I don't know if anyone might be able to tell me the trend on the caseload. Mr. Bartlett? Eric?

MR. BARTLETT: (Inaudible).

MR. FOWLER: Thank you.

The caseload back in about 2004 was up around 530. For the last two or three years it has dropped down to about 350, and the trend has been that for two years and they anticipate it will stay at about 350 this year. So, what they believe will happen is, there will be about a $90,000 reduction in professional services due to the drop in the caseload, and there are a number of reasons for that, obviously.

Work that is being done at the Commission is affecting it, and Early and Safe Return to Work programs are affecting it. The other saving is in, as the minister said, the application of the Web project which has been delayed, as they work through working with OCIO to get it put in place correctly.

MR. BUTLER: So the $180,500 is the actual wages and other entities, I guess, in relation to the review commissioners themselves, whereas I thought it was listed up in the Salaries up top.

MR. FOWLER: Yes, you are right, $180,000.

MR. BUTLER: Under 02., Revenue-Provincial, on the bottom, I know it was budgeted at $905,000 but there was almost $1.5 million there. I was wondering what the increase was there.

MR. FOWLER: That is what I understand to be an accounting practice situation, where the money that is funded back in from the Workplace Health and Safety Commission obviously comes in a year late, I should say, if that is the easy way to explain it, so that is where you see it being an accounting function with respect to how it is recorded. That is why you see the money being larger now because of the recording practice.

MR. SKINNER: Basically, Mr. Butler, as I understand it, the issue is simply one of timing. The money does not actually arrive until the 2008-2009 budget year; so, although it is intended to pay for the services or whatever, that have been provided in the previous year, it actually doesn't arrive until the next budget year. Therefore, that is why that has been shown like that.

MR. BUTLER: So, where this is under just the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review Division, you do have people here who can answer a question if you have one on the workers' compensation itself?

MR. SKINNER: Yes, Sir.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

It is timely to do it now under this one, I guess.

MR. SKINNER: Oh, yes, by all means.

MR. BUTLER: I only have a couple of questions anyway.

MR. SKINNER: Yes, by all means.

MR. BUTLER: I know there was an officer put in place, I will say some time ago, and there was a client services report. I was just wondering, will that report be made public? If so, when do you anticipate that happening?

MR. SKINNER: The report that you refer to was actually a report that was commissioned by, or requested by, the board of directors of the Workplace Health and Safety Compensation Commission and, as I understand it, it had to do with analyzing, reviewing, the client services that were being offered by the Commission, and whether or not a dedicated client service officer was needed.

There was a determination that there was, in fact, a dedicated officer position needed, and they put a pilot project in place for, I believe, about six months. I am not sure of the exact time frame, but around six months. They then evaluated that client service officer position over the six-month period to see if, in fact, they felt it was something that should be done on a long-term basis; and, in fact, they agreed that it should be and they put funding in place to make that a permanent position.

In terms of the report being released and stuff, that is in the hands of the board of directors of the Commission and I guess it will be up to them whether or not they want to release it. It is an internal report for them; it is not a government report. It is not something I have seen or read. It is not something that we as a government commissioned, or I as minister commissioned.

I don't know if I can turn it back - I don't know if any of you gentlemen can add to that?

Eric?

MR. BARTLETT: That is correct, Minister, it was an internal report that was done for the board of directors in an evaluation of the office. That is still under active consideration and is going to the board next month. The final report is going to the board next month.

MR. BUTLER: The other question I have, and I hope I am going to say this correctly - if I am wrong, I don't mind being corrected - we have had meetings with various individuals and groups outside who sometimes come forward with concerns about the Commission and so on. I understand that there is funding, and I don't know how it is allocated and that is not my question, but for the employers to have a rep involved with what is going on within the Commission, and then the unions, apparently they are asking for a rep to represent the employees themselves.

Maybe I am saying this wrong, but if it is correct what I am saying, are there any plans in the future that there would be someone considered like the other two?

MR. SKINNER: I would have to be honest and say to you, Mr. Butler, I am not aware of what you have raised. That doesn't mean it is not out there, so I am going to turn to the people behind me and see if they might shed some light on it.

MR. BUTLER: I could be wrong.

MR. SKINNER: Mr. Mahoney will answer.

MR. MAHONEY: Mr. Butler, for clarification, may you be referring to the worker advisors and the employer advisors?

MR. BUTLER: That is it.

MR. MAHONEY: To explain that, on behalf of the minister, we do have a contract in place. One is actually signed and in place now with the Federation of Labour where we do have two worker advisors: one in St. John's and one housed in Grand Falls.

The Employers' Council also houses the office of the employer advisors, who also provide employer-related advice to employers who have issues with claims at the Commission, or with the policies and procedures at the Commission.

One contract is in place; the other contract should be in place by the end of the week.

MR. BUTLER: Very good.

My last question, I guess, goes to the reports that were tabled here in the House only recently: the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review Division, the annual reports for 2006 and 2007.

I guess the figures - and I noted them sometimes when you were making comments in the House - to me, they were startling figures. In 2006 there were 327 cases that were heard and 161 of them were allowed, for 49 per cent, when they went before the commissioners, and 39 or 12 per cent were referred back to the Commission again, which left 39 per cent that were upheld, we will say, with the decisions that were made by the Commission; 61 per cent of them were either overturned or referred back.

In 2007, the figure has gone up to 65 per cent. Out of 308 cases, 147 were allowed, 52 referred back, and 109 were denied.

I get involved in a lot of those cases on behalf of clients, and I am not saying the people who go with the clients are all that professional and that is why they are overturning them. I was just wondering, it seems like it is an awful high figure once the Commission makes their decision - and I am not doubting the Commission; they have their rules and guidelines to go by, by their medical staff and their case managers or what have you - but when they go before the review commissioners, to see that 61 per cent and 65 per cent of them are overturned, I was just wondering, is that something that is being looked at? I am not saying that something has gone wrong at the Commission, but the figures seem to be awful high when you go before a review board and they are overturned by that percentage.

MR. SKINNER: Well, in fairness, Mr. Butler, I would share some of your sentiments on that in terms of the high percentage of cases that are being overturned. I think it points to the need of the policies of the Commission being reviewed more frequently than what the statutory review process currently allows, which is every five years. There is a major sort of review and a major overhaul done of the Commission every five years and that, I think, is part of the problem. It is inherent in the fact that within that five-year window changes need to be made that are not always made because the statutory review has not been done. I am suggesting, as minister, that we need to look at that process more frequently now, and I have addressed that with the Commission and with the employer and worker representatives.

Also, as well, different review commissioners bring different perspectives to things, and sometimes their adjudication of the cases, I believe, needs to be fed back into the Commission's evaluation of the cases in the first place. I have had discussions with the Commission staff about that, so we now have review commissioners who have indicated to us by the rulings that some of the interpretations that the Commission have made are not acceptable, for lack of a better word, are not appropriate, so we need to now go back and change our evaluations and our processes in terms of how we are dealing with people on appeals that they are making to us.

I think you will see some more balance start to come to those numbers. I would hope to be able to show you more balance to that next year, for instance, but we are aware of an imbalance and we do believe there are things we can be doing to change that.

That is from my perspective, as minister, and I will just again turn to the staff who may want to expand a little bit on that for you.

MR. MAHONEY: As Executive Director of Worker Services, I want to confirm the direction that the minister has provided to the Commission, and again what we are talking about is consistency in the application of the Commission's policies.

The statutory recommendations have come forward that we do more work with the case managers to which you have referred, that we have new protocols we are working on now for enhanced training on medical evidentiary issues.

Where we are in a quasi-judicial environment, the case managers who mostly have a social work or psychology background are being tasked with weighing evidence in a quasi-judicial way. What we are doing is, we are doing more training on the weighing of evidence, taking in both the employer and the labour perspective. We are also looking at issues that go beyond the physical for individual workers, and also trying to balance those with the concerns of employers in this particular environment, given our assessment rates are some of the highest in the country and also that we are trying to target claim duration.

What we are doing to target the rates of those decisions that are being overturned is to do a better job of the decisions as they come out of the Commission, and putting in place a quality assurance function in the teams to make sure that we have more consistency in the application of those, which hopefully can address the concerns raised.

MR. BUTLER: Just to elaborate a little on that, and that is good to know, that something is being done there, there are lots of cases, I know, that go before the Commission that are not as legitimate as other cases. We all know that. Unfortunately, I guess, that is the lifestyle we live in these days, but when you know someone is very legitimate and you can see the medical documentation in the file, sometimes you just wonder how it could go off the rails.

I have one individual now – I won't give any names or anything - he has been to the review commission, two different review commissioners, three different occasions, won his cases three times with the review commissioners, and has been turned down by the Commission. Now, this month – I shouldn't say this month because the date has not been set, but pretty soon - he is going back for the fourth time. It is a very legitimate case; but, then again, I guess that is the way it works.

It is good to hear that it is being looked at in that light, because those figures, I couldn't believe them when I saw those reports come out.

MR. SKINNER: There are significant frustrations within the current environment in which we operate, and I believe the Commission staff, as well as the people that you and I have represented as MHAs, would speak to it.

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. SKINNER: I can tell you that, with myself and the other senior executive team, we have tried to bring, as Mr. Mahoney said, some balance back into that and try and be a little bit more flexible and a little bit more realistic, relative to some of the rulings that have been coming out, to ensure we don't put people through that level of anguish that some of them have gone through.

I have to be up front and say to you that this will take time. I wouldn't want you to walk away from here tonight thinking that we are going to have big changes tomorrow.

MR. BUTLER: I understand that.

MR. SKINNER: We are in a process that we are trying to change the direction but it will take some time, I do believe. We are trying to get there.

MR. BUTLER: We all know that the Commission is trying to get people to go back to work, a safe return to work, and that is understandable. It is 100 per cent funded, I understand, by the employers of the Province. They have their perspective as well, but it is good to know that.

I thank you for that answer.

MR. SKINNER: Thank you.

MR. BUTLER: That's it for me, sir.

CHAIR: Okay.

Ms Michael?

MS MICHAEL: Well, I have hardly anything to say or ask now, but I will just come back to the appeals issue. I think when you talked about hopefully working toward a balance, I think the balance should be having fewer and fewer appeals because things are working out in the Commission and we do not have to have as many appeals.

I cannot give you the number, but I know that my constituency assistant has dealt with a number of cases since I came in, in November of 2006, and she has won every appeal. I felt certain when I read the case and talked about it with her, that she would, simply because I could see the loopholes. So, that is very disturbing. That is something, like Roland said, people who have been through two and three years of anguish.

I am really glad to hear that you are pushing this, as minister, and that the Commission sees the need, because it is very disturbing when you see somebody who has been injured, who has a legitimate case, and the majority do - that is the issue, the majority do - and then they end up in two and three or more years of anguish and not getting covered. It is not acceptable. I accept it will not happen overnight, but I am glad to hear that you are going to start taking real steps on this one because I think it is need.

MR. SKINNER: We will.

MS MICHAEL: I really have nothing else new to ask or say.

MR. SKINNER: Okay. All right.

Just by way of responding to what yourself and Mr. Butler have raised, I do want to stress to you that the staff at the Commission - there is a fair bit of corporate knowledge there and they have indicated to me - and I have supported some of the thoughts and ideas that they have brought forward, as well as put some of my own thoughts and ideas forward as an MHA, sharing the roles that we share relative to representing our constituents, and the Commission is working hard on this. I do want to stress that to you.

There is a real commitment to trying to be better service oriented, not have people go through the anguish, as you have said, try to deal with them on the first or second step and not have them go through ten steps, because people are traumatized enough when they have a workplace injury and they are dealing with loss of income and so on, that the last thing they want to be doing is fighting with somebody to get what they feel is an entitlement that they should have.

So, that human face we see is one that we are trying to respond to in an appropriate fashion and the Commission is working with me on that.

MS MICHAEL: Just one thought, just to add to that. I do not know how it is working inside the Commission but we all know, it is part of human nature, that if somebody is dealing with an individual and they get off on the wrong foot for some reason with an individual in a power relationship, because it is a power relationship, then the person without power can end up just suffering from that. Whereas a fresh person coming in, using a team approach so that more than one person is dealing with a case, I think - I see Tom nodding up there - that that is one way to deal with that.

That would go for people on Income Support as well. In health, you know so many areas where that should be the case. So, it looks like that is probably an approach you are looking at, or one of the approaches.

Thank you.

MR. SKINNER: Thank you.

CHAIR: Any further questions from the committee?

MR. BUTLER: (Inaudible) meetings that I had, it was the Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses. I know one of the issues they were putting forward, and probably it has been dealt with, is wondering if the payments could be - I am calling it payments. It could be -

MR. SKINNER: The assessments.

MR. BUTLER: - assessments could be on a monthly basis versus, I think, at the beginning of the year or at the end? I was just wondering, has that been considered? That's all.

MR. SKINNER: I will just give you my thoughts on that and then again, for clarification I will refer to the staff.

I have spoken to Mr. George at the Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses about this and he has raised that issue with me. I have spoken to our new executive director about that, our new CEO about that issue, and I have a meeting scheduled to review that with her in terms of seeing whether or not we can comply or work with what the CFIB has proposed. I do understand, and I will look to staff for better clarification of this, that we do have alternatives and various times when people can pay their assessments. That may not be exactly as the CFIB want but are not as onerous as somebody having to pay everything upfront.

I will just ask the staff to respond to that, but I will conclude my remarks, Mr. Butler, by saying to you it is on my agenda and in the next week or two I expect I will have a meeting with the CEO about that.

Mr. Bartlett.

MR. BARTLETT: Thank you, minister.

Yes, with that matter about payments of the employer assessment, particularly small and medium-sized businesses, has been an issue raised with the CFIB, both in terms of the reporting of their payroll and the payment. We have committed, as part of our work plan this year, to consult with stakeholders on this particular issue. In the interim, what we have done, as the minister I think alluded to, is that we have - all employers right now, they have a report on an annual basis, give their estimate up-front by, I think it is March 31, and then pay their assessments in a lump sum. What we did, if they do not pay within thirty days, they get charged interest. What we did - I think it was a couple of years ago - to I guess provide more flexibility around this particular reporting process and to alleviate some of the financial demands on a small, medium-sized business, we implemented a process where they could pay their assessment. Even though they had to report in a lump sum, they could pay that assessment over a period, I think from April to October interest free. So they could sort of divide up the annual assessment and pay it that way. Unfortunately, we do not have a lot of uptake on that. Nevertheless, it is an issue that is there that we are hoping to address but we have taken some interim steps to alleviate the problem in the interim.

MR. SKINNER: As a former small business owner, Mr. Butler, I have great sympathy for the point brought forward by Mr. George and we will be trying to do something about it, yes.

MR. BUTLER: Okay. Yes, sir.

CLERK: 1.1.01. to 8.1.01. inclusive.

CHAIR: 1.1.01. to -

MR. SKINNER: No, we only dealt with section eight, we did not deal with the beginning.

CHAIR: Oh, no. It is just page 223, the review division.

CLERK: Okay, 8.1.01.

CHAIR: Shall 8.1.01. carry?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Contra-minded.

Carried.

On motion, subhead 8.1.01. carried.

CHAIR: The next heading, is it just Human Resources, Labour and Employment together?

MR. SKINNER: We are going to go to Labour Relations now, if I could.

CHAIR: I guess we will move to the Labour Relations Agency.

Ms Michael, did you want to go first this time?

MS MICHAEL: No, actually I would prefer not to.

CHAIR: Okay.

Mr. Butler.

MR. BUTLER: Now, where are we?

MR. SKINNER: Tab 7.

MR. BUTLER: 7.1.01., isn't it?

.

MR. SKINNER: Yes.

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

7.1.03., I think that is the one. I wonder, for clarification, the amount in the detailed salary estimates - which is found on page 165, I think it is - shows $1,121,320 as a total for Salaries, whereas in the departmental estimates it shows $1,040,700. I was just wondering what the difference is? Maybe there is something I am not looking at there properly –

MR. SKINNER: No, I am going to toss this one, if I could, to Ms Tubrett who is going to fill us in on this.

MS TUBRETT: I do not have the salary details in front of me but I can - and I do not know the actual numbers, but I think the difference relates to the fact that in the salary details, the number you are looking at would be the permanent salary dollars and what you are looking at here is the total salary dollars for this particular activity, which would comprise the permanent plus the temporary.

MR. BUTLER: Okay, yes.

7.1.04., the Fish Price Setting Panel.

MR. SKINNER: Okay.

MR. BUTLER: I have a question on 7.1.04.03. It showed a budget of $30,000. I guess there was no travel, there is no figure there, but that is what it is, I guess, isn't it?

MR. SKINNER: That is exactly what it is.

MR. BUTLER: I just wondered if it was a typo or - okay, there was no travel at all.

7.1.05., there is an increase in Salaries this year. I was wondering if you could give an explanation on that. It was $441,000 last year and this year it is $547,000. Is that probably increases in –

MR. SKINNER: The increase there is basically related to - the Labour Relations Board has three new statutes that have been added to it in terms of decision making, arbitration making process. They have added to them the House of Assembly, the whistleblower legislation and the smoke-free legislation. That is three new statutes. I believe nine in total now - nine in total, if memory serves me correctly. The salary is related to two positions that have been created because of the added statutes and the anticipated added workload. One is a deputy CEO position, and the other one is a secretary to the chairperson position. So, that salary increase that you see is reflective of the two new bodies being assigned to the office, being hired in the office.

MR. BUTLER: Okay. Under the same heading, 03.Transportation and Communications, budgeted $29,200 but it went to $44,600. I guess it is like the other one, there was no travel; this one I guess was more.

MR. SKINNER: Yes, you are correct; there was more travel in this particular case. As well, and I will look for some clarification, but I believe there is a legislative requirement that some of the applications for certification have a vote done on site, wherever that site happens to be, and therefore the board members would have to travel to those sites. If there is a business or something that is looking to be unionized, the board members would have to travel there to do the certification vote. So, there was a bit more travel last year; that is simply what it consists of.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

Just a couple of other questions outside of the one-liners, and this is just a general question, it might not have anything to do with you people at all. I know you are involved with Labour Relations and so on, and I know in Come By Chance there is a union, I think - what they call in-house union or something; I think that is what I was told, steelworkers or whatever. Would anything like that come to you people, the Labour Relations, where there is a possibility of 150 being laid off out there and the work being contracted out? Does something like that come forward?

MR. SKINNER: The only time - again, I will defer it to the man who has thirty-plus years experience, but the only time that we would get involved as a Department of Labour in issues like that would be if in fact there was a strike or a lockout or a collective agreement type issue where they are trying to negotiate a new collective agreement.

As I understand the particular situation in Come By Chance, it is just a matter of recall. They looking to take people back, and this year at this particular time when people normally got recalled back, they have had a change in their business process where they are not going to be having these people come in for a period of five or six months to go to work. They are going to contract it out. As I understand it - again, there was nothing, no grievance through the collective agreement for that. The union really, I will not say does not have problem with it, but there is nothing in the collective agreement that they can take issue with. Therefore, on that particular case, we really would not be called in to do anything.

Again, I will defer to Mr. Fowler maybe to add some more content to that for you.

MR. FOWLER: Thank you.

They have a collective agreement, Mr. Butler. It is obviously in place. It is fair to say, with respect to the refinery and the steelworkers' union, they have worked with the agency and the agency has worked with them for a lot of years. They are well versed in the assistance that the minister can provide in all areas.

I think the steelworker business manager, Mr. Bussey, put it plainly when he said they will deal with the issue that is before them through the collective agreement that they have signed with the employer – which is the correct way to deal with it – but they also recognize that the individuals may very well want to state their case on the road, to emphasize where they come from; but without a doubt, as the minister said, the collective agreement covers them but the Steelworkers Union and the refinery know exactly everything that we have to offer.

We also have an officer dealing with them right now on other collective agreements they are negotiating, so that issue of contracting out may very well come up there as well.

MR. BUTLER: Very good.

There was another issue that came up in my district, with one of the businesses out there, and they were locked out over an issue. They were in dispute with the – [Mr. Butler coughs]. Excuse me; that is the candy they gave me over across the way. I knew they wanted to go home early.

I will start again. I am sorry about that.

I won't use the company name, but there were so many workers out there – I think the company is owned by someone on the mainland - and there was an issue that came up with the employer, and they all signed a letter asking if they could look into the situation, and apparently they were all fired, or whatever you want to call it.

The question I have is not in regard to the situation and what went on there. I called into, I guess, labour – I forget who I spoke with even, and I wouldn't use the name here if I did – and they mentioned to me, unfortunately, when there is non-union workers there is very little there and there is nothing in the system, more or less, to stand up and fight for them that way.

I was just wondering - with your thirty years experience you will know where I am coming from, for sure - are there any plans, or can it be put in place through Labour Relations, that something like that can be there to assist this group, at least to hear their story? Do you know what I am saying?

Maybe I am not making myself clear on the issue. You know the situation I am talking about, anyway.

MR. SKINNER: I do, indeed. I know the store and I know what you are referring to. You are correct; it was an employment situation where there was no collective agreement in place. Therefore, when there is no collective agreement, the minimum labour standards under the Labour Standards Act would apply, and we would ensure, as an agency, that the minimum standards in this Province would apply relative to severance and notice and whatever else needed to be given. If any individual who was employed there had any issue with that, they could certainly contact the office and we would ensure that they got what they were entitled to, relative to the minimum standards; but, again, the Labour Standards Act is minimum standards and it does not offer a whole lot.

We are, as you are probably aware, undertaking a review of labour standards in this Province. I won't say to you that, that is specifically on the agenda. To be honest with you I don't know the items on the agenda. That is being handled by the officials and the Strategic Partnership Initiative and so on, but there is a review of labour standards ongoing and I will ask maybe Mr. Fowler to just give us an update of some of the issues, because what we have tried to do is have the union and employer representatives identify the issues that they want to deal with as opposed to us telling them what they are going to be dealing with.

MR. FOWLER: As the minister said, it does come under the labour standards area, what you are talking about, not labour relations, which is the non-union, no collective agreement in place, strategic partnership, which is business, labour and government, which have been dealing with the labour relations side of things. We are currently in a process of reviewing our labour relations legislation, but our labour standards, which is obviously a part of what we do, is also envisaged to be looked at as well. I think the last time anybody looked at labour standards in this area was 2001, Mr. Butler, when there was a report came out with respect to various areas and what can or cannot be done.

Needless to say, there are different points of view from employers and from workers with respect to what needs to be in place from a labour relations perspective, and even more different points of view of what needs to be in place from a non-union perspective. We are always attempting, either from the agency and the minister's portfolio, to look at labour standards and labour relations and keep it modernized, and strategic partnership is one of the areas that we have agreed, because it is a partnership of business, labour and government, that is the correct way, avenue, to look at labour relations in a tripartite situation. We have had a fair amount of success already, and we hope that some of those areas that you are talking about will be dealt with in that area.

CHAIR: Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: (Inaudible) jump into this discussion, because it is a bit like a discussion. This is an ongoing issue. This has been around for a long time, the issue of non-unionized workers. They have fear of reporting, because usually the workplaces are so small that they know they will be known.

A few individuals over, say, the past two years, that I have dealt with on this are home care workers who are working with private agencies that really do not live up to labour standards - they really don't - so what happens is the worker is more inclined to walk away and either find another agency or just start doing home care as an individual outside of an agency rather than become known by the agency as somebody who reported them to Labour Relations.

I don't know if anybody, any jurisdiction in this country, has real protection for the worker who is non-unionized and goes to Labour Relations to report an employer. I don't know if either one of you has an answer to that, but I don't.

MR. SKINNER: I guess, just as a part of adding to the discussion, Ms Michael, if there are employers out there who are going to be rotten employers, for lack of a better term, then they are the same as rotten employees; they will find a way to get by with what they do and how they do it.

My experience has been, in my twenty-two years of being an employer, an employee, that people will reach a point where they will feel that is enough and they have to make a stand, so to speak. That does happen from time to time, and we do get information like that, but I would suggest to you that, no matter what level of protection one builds in, there will be somebody who will find a way around that, or try to do something to find a way around that.

I think as long as we are working with the Strategic Partnership Initiative we can advance it forward. I don't know if we will ever stop having to advance it, I guess, is the challenge.

MS MICHAEL: Yes.

MR. SKINNER: I think we need to be cognizant - at least I feel, as minister, the responsibility to be cognizant - of keep moving it forward and don't sort of sit and say, okay, we have reached where we need to reach.

I don't think we will ever be there; I just think we need to keep pushing it, and that is what we are.

MS MICHAEL: All right.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Are there any more questions on the Labour Relations Agency?

CLERK: Subheads 7.1.01. to 7.1.05.

CHAIR: Shall 7.1.01. to 7.1.05. carry?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those contra-minded, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, subheads 7.1.01. through 7.1.05. carried.

CHAIR: Okay, Minister, the next heading.

MR. SKINNER: The next one would be - do you want to go into departmental stuff at this point? That is the last one that we have basically to do.

CHAIR: Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: I will start with the easy stuff. I will do some line by lines.

Under 1.1.01.06., Purchased Services, I consistently ask this question and the answer is generally the same, but I will ask it anyway. Under 06. you seem to maintain a base of $7,000 for Purchased Services. Is that correct? You had $7,000 in the budget in 2007-2008, revised to $1,500, and $7,000 again as the estimate for this year.

MR. SKINNER: The short answer, Ms Michael, is yes, but I have to be honest and say to you, I take what I am given. Maybe I can ask the people to the left of me to tell me why I am given it.

Denise, would you like to maybe help with that?

MS MICHAEL: What would the purchased services be in the minister's office? What would that $1,500 be, for example?

MS TUBRETT: That could be pens, paper –

MS MICHAEL: Purchased Services?

MS TUBRETT: – printing, printing services.

MS MICHAEL: Printing? Okay, printing I can see.

Thank you.

Pens would be supplies, though, wouldn't they?

MS TUBRETT: Oh, sorry, yes. That is correct.

I had one in my hand, so I looked down.

MS MICHAEL: Printing services, okay, yes.

MR. SKINNER: What about the amount of $7,000?

MS TUBRETT: That has just been the base budget year over year, and we tend to keep it consistent. Different ministers have different spending patterns.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

AN HON. MEMBER: I am sure they do.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

Under 1.2.01., Transportation and Communications, the revision for 2007-2008 was significant, from $45,000 up to $73,200. Did you have a particular reason why last year you had that extra amount in Transportation and Communications? What was it for, which side of that subhead?

MR. SKINNER: It just took me a second, Ms Michael, to find the amount; I just want to be sure I have the right one. It is the $45,000 to the $73,200?

MS MICHAEL: That is right, yes.

MR. SKINNER: Okay, yes.

Basically, as you are aware, we are involved in negotiations with the federal government in terms of the devolution agreement on the Labour Market Development Agreements, and part of the increase has been sending our negotiating team to meetings with our federal counterparts.

Also, as well - and I can get more detail from one of the executive here if you want something more on that – besides the LMD devolution, one of the commitments that we made as a minister and senior executive team last year, when I became minister, was to have an increased presence of our executive in the regions so that we could get out into the regions and see the environments and talk to the staff and get a sense – I wanted a sense, as minister, of how things were going.

Myself and a lot of the senior executive that you would see here spent a fair amount of time in the regions last year, travelling out, going to the offices, talking to the staff, and a number of initiatives came from that.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

MR. SKINNER: That is why the travel numbers are up.

If you want any detail, I can certainly provide more to you.

MS MICHAEL: No, no, that is fine; and, of course, that process is over now so you won't have the travel for negotiations that you had.

MR. SKINNER: Almost over.

MS MICHAEL: Almost over?

MR. SKINNER: Not quite there. Mr. Penney might be able to provide some guidance to us on that, but we are not quite there.

MS MICHAEL: I would interested in knowing about that, but we might wait until we get to that head –

MR. SKINNER: Sure, that is fine.

MS MICHAEL: – and we will talk about it, because I would like to know how that is going.

MR. SKINNER: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Penney understands why I am interested in that, as do a couple of others of you over there.

Under 1.2.02., once again 03., Transportation and Communications, interestingly here, for different reasons, one would imagine, the budget was revised down -

MR. SKINNER: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: – $266,800 down to $180,500, and then this year back up to, I guess, what the budget probably usually is.

Why did that take such a dip last year?

MR. SKINNER: In last year's budget there was an expectation that, because of the new Low Income Drug Program, there would be significant numbers of appeals of individuals who felt they should qualify for that, who may not be given the benefit, and because we had an appeal infrastructure within the department we were tasked by government to deal with the appeals, rather than the Department of Health. So we had to put in a notional amount based upon what we expected to happen, and there were less appeals of the low income drug card than what we expected, and there is also an indication here that there was less travel by Finance.

I am not sure if you might be able to help me with why that would be, Denise.

MS TUBRETT: In the Finance Division there is an Internal Audit Division, and the Internal Audit Division was not operational in 2007-2008, so most of the travel dollars would be spent by that division, so now they are up and running, it is fully staffed, so we anticipate that this year, 2008-2009, the travel will increase.

MS MICHAEL: And that is why you have gone up to $228,300.

MS TUBRETT: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

Under subhead 06.Purchased Services, you are going up - well, not a million, less than a million but still maybe about three-quarters of a million in 2008-2009 from where you have been. Why is it so much? What are you anticipating in this year?

MR. SKINNER: The decrease from the Budget to the Revised has to do with - first of all, we were going to be opening up a new office in Grand Falls where we were putting a Career Information Resource Centre and that was delayed because the tender we did, we ended up having somebody win the tender who had to construct the building. So there was a delay in that process happening. That is why the costs were a little bit less.

In terms of the significant increase in the cost, we will be opening up six more offices, career work centres across the Province this year as our expectation. Those career work centres are additional space on top of the offices we have, additional resources and infrastructure and so on. So there would be an increase in cost because of that.

Is that okay? Am I missing anything else?

MS TUBRETT: (Inaudible).

MR. SKINNER: Okay. I will ask Denise again if she will just add a little bit more to that for us.

MS MICHAEL: Sure.

MS TUBRETT: It is a little bit more than the CIRCs, yes. In fact, the CIRCs is putting pressure on our budget and increasing the total space that we require but also our leases are up in certain locations and when we go to tender the rates can come in higher than what they would have in the past. So, we have a number of sites this year that we anticipate that we will have to re-tender.

MS MICHAEL: Right. Thank you.

1.2.03., a number of these have gone up, beginning with - I will not question Salaries. It looks like you are probably getting one - oh no, it is a bit. Maybe you could explain Salaries to me. So, 01. first.

MR. SKINNER: Again, the significant amount of that increase in salary is again related to the LMDA devolution discussions, and we actually had to put a formal negotiating team together which consisted of four or five people. We had to have legal opinion; we had to have analysts, support staff, etcetera, to do that negotiation. So, that is where a significant portion of that will come from.

There is also other amounts related to - I am just looking to make sure I have my numbers correct here. We are going to be, as a part of this year's budget, the Opportunities Newfoundland and Labrador campaign where we are going to be doing a registry, an international registry, a youth retention strategy, an awareness campaign. We are putting more money into our labour market information, labour market partnership, and the office of disabilities. We will have staff hired for the office of disabilities, that will go there. We managed to get some support for Aisling in Poverty Reduction. So, there is a position in Poverty Reduction, things like that.

They are basically new positions in those areas. Again, depending on how much detail you want to get into, I could provide you with more specifics but that is where it is coming from.

MS MICHAEL: No, that is fine.

I will assume then that 03., Transportation and Communications, the reason for that going up significantly would be because of the new work around the LMDA, because the Transportation and Communications has gone up by over $100,000.

MR. SKINNER: Yes. The increase from $216,000 to $342,000 - to speak to the increase - some of that is going to come from the Poverty Reduction roundtable Strategy that we have to do. We have to go out and do the consultation piece in year two. So some of that transportation budget will be utilized there.

There are some other Poverty Reduction Strategy initiatives that have some increased costs related to it, and the Opportunities Newfoundland and Labrador piece that we are doing will have some costs related to transportation as well. So it is not related specifically to the LMDA -

MS MICHAEL: LMDA, Poverty Reduction.

MR. SKINNER: - it is related to some of the other initiatives that we are doing within the department.

MS MICHAEL: Right. Thank you.

05., Professional Services. Now this is significant, because it is basically a $2 million increase.

MR. SKINNER: Again, I will give you a list. I will read out to you to give you a sense or a flavour of where this is coming from.

The Opportunities Newfoundland and Labrador Initiative that we announced in the Budget - as I said, there is an awareness campaign that we will be doing. The international registry that I referred to is going to have some costs associated with that, related to Professional Services. The youth retention strategy, there will be youth retention consultations that will be done. A significant piece of this work will be the youth retention awareness and retention strategy that we will be doing.

There was an announcement in the Budget for the Poverty Reduction Strategy to do a transportation study relative to the poverty reduction piece. That is in there.

MS MICHAEL: Could you talk a bit about that? I actually do not remember that.

MR. SKINNER: Yes. I will just ask Aisling, if you do not mind. She knows it a little bit deeper than I do and she can give you the details.

MS GOGAN: We keeping hearing about transportation issues and so many other issues relating to poverty. Transportation is connected to them, particularly in rural areas but not only. So, in terms of looking at a solution, we have had a number of interdepartmental meetings and talked to a number of community people about it and really there is no obvious, easy solution. This is $100,000 to really take a look at the problem and find some real solutions because when we look, government already spends a large amount of money on transportation when you look at school buses and the amount spent for medical transportation, for other types of transportation, for Income Support clients, that we feel perhaps we could be making a better use of existing resources, as well as coming up with some creative solutions that we have seen in other jurisdictions. So, it is an opportunity to look at the issue and find some real solutions.

MS MICHAEL: Is there any discussion going on with Municipal Affairs? That was one of the issues I raised this morning with Municipal Affairs, was the whole issue of - because we have such a lack of public transportation in the Province and the implications of that.

MS GOGAN: This work has not actually started yet, but certainly they are going to be involved as we carry out that work.

MS MICHAEL: Good. It is nice to see this.

I stopped you in midstream there, minister. You are doing your listing.

MR. SKINNER: No. Actually, the only other one that I had left to speak to was the Poverty Reduction Strategy, again, in terms of the consultative piece. This is year two where we have a commitment.

Again, I will just look to Aisling, if she might be able to give you a little bit more of an idea of how far along we are with that and what our intention is throughout the summer months and the fall.

MS GOGAN: There are sort of two pieces included under this category, one is relating to the consultation. So we are just starting to plan those and look at how to carry them out. We are developing some documents to sort of set off the discussion like we did with the initial consultations in 2005. We are looking at putting a number of different things in place, including the toll-free line and the Web site and inviting written feedback, as well as organizing some roundtables. Then the other money that is included here is some money to have some facilitation of sessions, some with people living in low income and with different community partners.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. Thank you very much.

Under the same head, 06.Purchased Services, that is going up significantly by about $500,000 this year. What do you anticipate under Purchased Services?

MR. SKINNER: Again, I am going to read off some of the same kinds of things that I said to you before. Under the Poverty Reduction Strategy, there is a data purchase that will occur, which costs - we are estimating about $75,000, just to give you a sense.

Under the Opportunities Newfoundland and Labrador, there will be some professional services that will be required. Under the Office for Persons with Disabilities, we have allocated some money here for purchased services relative to some consultations and things that we will do with the community when we are setting that office up, once we get some staff in place.

We made an announcement in the Budget about making work pay for clients of Income Support, in terms of keeping more of the money that they earn, from 10 per cent, which it currently was, to 20 per cent today. There will be some communications in trying to get that message out so people on income support are aware of the fact that if they go to work, they can maintain or keep more of that income.

I believe that is about it from my end of it. Is there anything else I am missing?

MS MICHAEL: Okay. Thank you.

Finally, under that head, 02. Revenue; what would be the source of the Provincial Revenue? It was $375,000 in the budget for last year and it got revised down to $13,000, and this year up to $345,000. What would the revenue be that you are anticipating, though you got such a small amount of it?

MR. SKINNER: I am going to turn to the accountants at the table and allow them to answer that for you, because I will only confuse myself.

Denise?

MS TUBRETT: It is revenue related to the labour market initiative.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) federal funding.

MS TUBRETT: Actually, maybe I will pass it on. I know what it is, but I cannot explain it. So maybe I will pass it on to Wayne Penney.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

MR. PENNEY: Good evening.

I cannot speak to the accounting piece of this but I can speak to the activity.

We co-chair a Labour Market Information Secretariat for the country. This gets passed around the provinces, and we started this a couple of years ago. This will end in March 2009. All provinces and territories contribute to a fund that actually pays for that work to be done. This revenue reflects that.

MS MICHAEL: Good. You only got $13,000 in 2007-2008, but you had hoped you would get the $345,000 in this year's budget.

MR. PENNEY: And not being the accountant, but as I understand, that was more a matter of timing when the actual revenue was received versus when we had budgeted for it.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

You may already have spent it. Yes, it is already spent maybe -

MR. PENNEY: That is right.

MS MICHAEL: - or some of it.

MR. PENNEY: It is the timing.

MS MICHAEL: Timing, yes.

MR. PENNEY: It is timing only.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. That is fine.

Thank you. That is interesting actually.

Does somebody else want to take over? I have been going for a while at this.

CHAIR: Yes, somebody else.

MR. BUTLER: Okay. 2.1.01. Client Services, 06. Purchased Services, $388,000 budgeted, $280,000 revised, this year it is $1 million. I was just wondering what the -

MR. SKINNER: Yes. The $388,000 going down, budgeted down to $280,000 on the revised, there were some costs related to our career work centres that I talked about earlier that were charged off to supplies incorrectly, I assume. The accountants at the table might be able to help me more with that, but it was more of an accounting allocation. There was an expenditure and it got charged into a different account than Purchased Services. It is up in Supplies as opposed to being in Purchased Services. You will see there is a bit of an increase there in Supplies. That is why the decrease was there but it was actually reflected in the line above in terms of an increase in the line above.

In terms of the significant increase that you see in this year's budget, as I indicated earlier, we are going to be announcing and opening a number of career work centres this year, so that money is just the annualization of the funding that has been approved for those career work centres as we start to roll them out.

MR. BUTLER: 3.1.02. National Child Benefit Reinvestment, I notice the figures are all pretty accurate. I was just wondering, $600,000, $600,000 straight across the board. I was just wondering if you could explain that because usually from one line to the other is a difference up or down or whatever. They are so accurate every year.

MS GOGAN: We are just so good.

MR. BUTLER: I am not going to deny that.

MS GOGAN: No, that is pretty much - we were spot on in our estimates, I guess, and it has not varied.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

MS GOGAN: Now this is going to get really accounting, and I do not know if you want to go there, but the budget is $600,000 and these expenditures are incurred under another activity. So we would only transfer over $600,000 anyhow. I think the true number was $612,000, so there would have been $12,000 left up here under Income Support. That is really an accounting explanation for that.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

Some general questions; Poverty Reduction Strategy, I was just wondering if you can give me an update on how it is progressing? I know everyone in the country is talking about the plan that we have here, just a brief update.

MR. SKINNER: Yes.

As Minister Responsible for the Poverty Reduction Strategy, I have been at a number of events throughout the country, Mr. Butler, where we have certainly been recognized and identified as being leaders in some of the initiatives that we have brought forward. As you are aware, the strategy itself is a ten-year strategy to go from the Province with the highest level of poverty in the country to the Province with the lowest level of poverty in the country. You are aware that we have had an initial investment of $60 million this year, it is $100 million annualized. There are a whole bunch of initiatives around that.

The important thing for me, I guess, is we have a commitment this year on doing the stakeholder consultations again. I think it is important that we get back into the communities and down to the people who we are supposedly helping here and getting their feedback. That is part of the work that Aisling will be doing, and we are looking forward to that.

The other piece of the work that is really critical – again, I will look to Aisling to add some meat to this bone when I finish, but one of the concerns I have discussed with departmental staff is how do we measure ourselves? There is no real consistent measurement used across the country. Everybody sort of has their own thing. The national measurements that people refer to are just that, they are national measurements. They do not really give you the local flavour that you need to be able to do it. So, we have talked about developing some of our own local measurements in consultation with our community partners so that they are onside with how we are going to measure this. I think the important thing for us this year, to give you an answer to your question is, number one, we will do the consultation, get an update from our community groups and stakeholders as to how the initiatives have worked and what has not worked and then we will tweak the process moving forward. The second important piece that I believe we need to be doing is the measurement piece, and that has not been finalized yet.

I will ask Aisling maybe to elaborate a little bit more than I could on that.

MS GOGAN: This year is also the year where government is committed to release a progress report. So this is the measurement piece that the minister is referring to. There is no one measure of poverty, so we are looking at a whole lot of different measures to get a handle on how we are doing and what kind of success we are having for different groups.

We will be looking at the national measures because they are the ones everybody is familiar with but we have also - in terms of an overall measure, we are just getting ready to release the Newfoundland and Labrador Market Basket Measure and that is a measure that the Newfoundland and Labrador Statistics Agency has been developing in conjunction with Statistics Canada that will allow us, right down to the community level, to look at who is living in poverty. It takes a kind of federal Market Basket Measure definition, but it makes sense for the Province.

The national measure does not work that well in terms of areas like the Coast of Labrador; it does not work that well in terms of reflecting our high home ownership rate in rural areas, or the transportation costs that really exist in rural areas. Also, the really innovative thing is it does not use survey data, it uses tax filer data. So that is why we can get right down to the community level with it, and it will be on community accounts, along with the other measures.

In addition to that, we have other ways that we are tracking our progress. We can look at our Income Support caseload, for example. We are seeing real successes in terms of Income Support clients starting work. Already, if we look at 2007 compared with 2006, and look at some of the initiatives we have, we can see the real impact they are having. If we look at similar months, there is roughly a 40 per cent increase in terms of the numbers starting jobs and that sort of thing.

So, our progress report will be looking broadly at both the initiative level but then also at some overall measures so we can get at both the successes we have and other areas where we need to look at what else we need to do.

MR. BUTLER: I know, I think it is the coalition of the religious groups here in town, they were calling for a social audit. So, it is good to see that there is a report coming later on anyway.

The other thing, each and every year at those estimates, when we come to poverty - I know it is a difficulty situation, it is hard to define it, and I know in some documentation - like in Baie Verte there was a certain figure of the dollar value after tax they look at, and I will just use random figures, $22,000 or $23,000. If you go into Grand Falls it has gone up, compared to the city it is higher. Even though your government is doing a lot of things, like free school books and various other incentives for those people, you just mentioned transportation and so on, but then again, unless there is a new scenario, unless they get up to that level, even though all those things are good for them – but it is unfortunate. Their lives are better for their families and them, but then again, in order to say they are below the poverty line or above the poverty line they have to make this amount of money. Do you know what I am saying? They are still in poverty according to that scale. I am just wondering if you could - I know I have asked ministers before, but nobody could define poverty. I mean, you are trying to do it and handle the situation, but I was wondering if you could just comment on that.

MR. SKINNER: I cannot define poverty for you; I will say that right up front. I am going to throw this to Aisling in a second, but I just want to sort of give you a bit of commentary.

The Poverty Reduction Strategy is all about preventing, alleviating and reducing poverties. So any of the initiatives that we bring in as a government, when they go through our deputy ministers committee, our inter-departmental working group, our ministerial committee, we look at those three factors, basically. Is it a prevention measure, is it an alleviation measure or is it a reduction measure, because we feel all three of them are very important?

The kinds of things you are talking about in terms of: when are you in poverty and when are you out of poverty? People try to draw that black and white line, using things like - what you are talking about in terms of income means tested, what is referred to as the LICO Method, the low income cut off, we find - I say we, based on discussions I have had with Aisling, that is the we I am talking about. We find, or Aisling has educated me to the point where that is not necessarily a good measurement and she referred earlier to the Market Basket Measure which talks about being able to purchase the goods and services you need to be able to provide a quality of life for yourself.

I will throw it to Aisling maybe to elaborate on what that Market Basket Measure tool is and what it is composed of and how it relates to quality of life.

MS GOGAN: The Market Basket Measure approach allows you to look at what a basic basket of goods and services costs in a community. You can debate what should be in the basket and that debate has happened at the federal-provincial-territorial level and we have sort of accepted the basket they agreed on. It is one that does have a bit of a social inclusion lens in that it does not just have the bare necessities, it has cable television, it has reading materials, small amounts for recreational activities, and those sorts of things. Again, it is just one measure and one way to look at what it costs to live in a community and whether people can afford to purchase those things.

One of the other things you need to do, particularly in considering prevention, because we worry - if you really just focus on those measures, you are never really going to show your progress towards prevention. If we are not preventing poverty we will always be in this situation of having to try to reduce it and alleviate it. We need to also be looking at what we are doing to prevent poverty, and there we can point to best practices and what research shows works. When we talk about poverty, we talk about social inclusion, and that is really important from a prevention point of view but also from an alleviation point of view. You can look at it from both ways.

So, I guess when we report in our progress report we are going to be trying to show all of those things. We will be using a host of measures to kind of quantitatively show that we are making progress in terms of the income levels and whether or not people can afford to live in their communities at a standard that we would all like to see people living at. We are also going to be trying to get at some of the prevention, the breaking the intergenerational cycle and some of the things that we are doing there. Sometimes you need to present qualitative as well quantitative information. We will be looking at both.

In terms of how you define poverty, you can debate that forever. Canada is a country that has come under a lot of international criticism for spending all its time and energy debating how to define poverty and how to measure it, and not acting. I have clear direction from the ministerial level that we need to be acting and doing something, not sitting around debating how to measure poverty, but yet we also need to measure it. So we are trying to ensure that we are doing both.

MR. BUTLER: Newfoundland and Labrador, I am saying we have a huge problem - I think it is anyway - with youth who are under- and unemployed. I was just wondering, what are the numbers now of people who make application to your department for assistance, who would be, say, thirty or under?

MR. SKINNER: While we are looking for those numbers, I will say to you, Mr. Butler, you are correct. The number of youth who apply for Income Support is a significant percentage of new applicants. We have specific measures that we have developed and targeted. Specific programs, services and supports that we are identifying to youth, because we know from a historical perspective, that if a youth gets on Income Support and they are on it for six months, they are inclined to be on it then for a two-year period, and if they are on it for two years, they are probably on it for five years. We have recognized that we need to get to youth before they get to a point where they have to apply for Income Support. Some of our interventions are designed around that.

Also, youth who are on Income Support, we are becoming much more, I use the word interventionist or proactive in terms of trying to engage those youth in alternative choices that they could be making other than Income Support, or trying to decrease their reliance on Income Support by getting them in other programs.

I am just going to look for the numbers. If you will bear with me while I have a quick look at this, I will try and give you some numbers to quantify.

These numbers are April 2008 numbers, so they are fairly current. Youth being identified as twenty-nine and under; we have currently on Income Support 5,664 individuals, which equates to about 19.5 per cent of our caseload. In terms of, do we have a number of new applicants? How many would new applicants be? - if we could find that. The other number I will try and get for you is in terms of new applicants on a monthly basis into the system, how many of those would be youth. Just to see if we can find that for you as well.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. SKINNER: You do not have it on that one?

I do know it is a high percentage, and I do not want to quote you a number because I am afraid I might be wrong, but I have seen numbers that show to me - it is high enough that it caught my eye and it causes concern for me. We have specific programs, as I said, that we have discussed at the departmental level to address that.

MR. BUTLER: What percentage of your caseload would you say that are clients, unfortunately, who are there for the long term and probably cannot be trained or retrained? Do you know what I am saying, people who are in the system, unfortunately, and they are there for the long term? What percentage do you think that would be?

MR. SKINNER: I have had this discussion with Mr. Penney in the past, because I asked him that very question. He has thirty-plus years of experience of working in this system. I am going to, if he does not mind, I am going to throw it to him and ask him to respond to you, Mr. Butler, on that.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

MR. PENNEY: Mr. Butler, you and I have had this discussion before. At this point in time, and I have not been close to this lately, as I understand it, about 60 per cent of people who receive Income Support indicate that they can work. Now, that does not mean – 60 per cent.

MR. BUTLER: Sixty that can work?

MR. PENNEY: Sixty percent of people can work. They say they can work. Now that does not mean that they are job ready. Some of those individuals would need significant help to actually get attached to the labour force. If you look at our labour market today, which has changed significantly over the last ten years, we see some real opportunities here to introduce some new programs, some new services, so that people can, in fact, who have some, I would say, challenges to participating in the labour market. We are focused on putting the right supports and services in place so that they have that opportunity. Those opportunities were not there ten years ago because the labour market - we had too many people, too few jobs. Today, that situation has turned around. So when we say that we want to position ourselves to be able to be more helpful for individuals to get jobs, that really means something to a lot of those people today. So, 60 per cent say they can work, with the right supports.

MR. BUTLER: Very good.

The other thing, this past Saturday I attended a Youth Works, it was called, at Ascension Collegiate. I mentioned it and, as a matter of fact, did a member's statement on it. There were various groups from your department, different agencies there, and employers and so on. When you referred earlier to the career workstations, I guess - because a lot of young people now are out there and as soon as they finish high school - believe it or not, because I have them in my district, I am sure everybody has them - rather than proceed to some other training or what have you, I am going out west. When they get out there they soon find out, there is a job there if all the circumstances are lined up in their favour, but many of them find themselves in a position that they have to come back home.

I had three young ladies in the last month where their parents had to send them money to get them to come back. I guess this career workstation – and some of them, their families are probably clients with your department. I guess this is the type of thing you would be doing, more or less guiding the young people – not only young people – or others, so that they will make the right choices and be trained. We are talking about looking for more people in the construction trades and so on here at home, but too many of them are leaving our Province and heading out west because they think the big bucks are there - and they are there - but they get caught in it and they find themselves in a very awkward position and have to return home.

MR. SKINNER: Mr. Butler, we call them, now, Career Work Centres as opposed to stations, just as a point of clarification. Last year we called them Career Information Resource Centres. We are not trying to confuse people, but we are trying to find a name that relates and we are having –

MR. BUTLER: It is the same thing.

MR. SKINNER: We are having some difficulty finding a name that relates to what the function of this space is going to be.

To your point, I would make the point to you and to the other members opposite there, that even when they are out of high school I think it is almost too late to be getting to them then. We need to be getting to them earlier. We need to be getting to them when they are in Grades 7, 8, 9 and 10. We need to have our children start thinking about career and education, the two being tied, and being tied to success and being tied to being able to achieve in life earlier in their lives.

These Career Work Centres will deal with the clientele that you are talking about – the young man or the young woman who may have gone out and worked for a couple of years and realizes I have to go back and get some skills training – because there Career Work Centres will have trained career development specialists and trained career counsellors on staff. There will be a bunch of resources available in these Career Work Centres, state-of-the-art resources, to assist people. There will be all kinds of labour market information. There will be all kinds of career planning resources.

It is a multi-faceted office that we will have, that if somebody wants to start a career, if somebody wants to upgrade in their career, if somebody wants to change their career to something different, if somebody needs to get an educational plan designed or developed, that would be available to them as well.

The other thing we are hoping to do is, not wait for people to come in to the door, to come into the career centre, but to get out into the community. In last year's budget we had approval for I believe it was ten regional career information resource officers who will work with our school districts to get out into the schools and make children - young men and women who are in high school and junior high school - aware of the services that we as a department are able to offer. So, if you have a young man or a young woman in Grade 9, 10 or 11 who is looking to do something, they can come to our Career Work Centre before they finish school and get more information about the kinds of education and skills they will need to complete that career, to be ready for that career, or the kinds of opportunities that are available in terms of labour market opportunities and salary opportunities and promotion opportunities within that career. We are trying to make it much more an integrated type of function, people coming to us and we going to people, and getting the message out there that this information is available.

Our biggest weakness, I think, is people don't know we have the information available. We need to get it out to people. We need to get it out into the communities so people start their planning decisions earlier because they have better information.

It is about getting better information into their hands, and we don't do a great job of that. We are hoping to get better at it.

MR. BUTLER: A few years ago your department, I guess, was in a trial arrangement with Telelink. I was just wondering how that worked out, and if you are still involved with those people. I don't know how long ago that was now.

MR. SKINNER: I will ask Roxie to speak to that. I am now aware of that.

MS WHEATON: We did have an arrangement. This was about almost three years ago. This was pre the introduction of our new service delivery model. We used Telelink, which is a call centre company, to arrange for all of our calls to come into there so that we could get a handle on how many of our calls were repeat calls. That was very helpful.

We have always had – not always, I guess, but for probably about twelve or thirteen years - a small contract with Telelink to assist us with our out-of-hours emergency services. We are using them less and less because we actually moved to a model about a year-and-a-half ago where, instead of using Telelink to do the bulk of our calls for out-of-hours, we actually have paid staff out in the Carbonear office, but we still do use Telelink to respond to our calls after midnight.

MR. BUTLER: Seeing you mentioned the Carbonear office - whenever someone says something, something else comes up - there is nobody there to deal with any income support questions on behalf of clientele, is there?

MS WHEATON: No, that is not correct.

We have twenty-six locations, and while primarily people find using our toll-free number as the best way of accessing their services, because, regardless of who you are speaking to they can access your file, we make it quite clear to clients that if you need to walk in and see someone face to face - so in the Carbonear office if you walked in, for example if you were a victim of violence, or if you were about to become homeless, or you had a number of issues, any one of our staff out there would be expected to help you through that.

In addition to that we just recently hired, for the Carbonear office, a liaison social worker, and that social worker is intended to help individuals with more complex situations; they are trying to navigate maybe dealing with housing, health and community services, or any number of things.

In any of our twenty-six locations you should be able to walk in and someone will be able to help you.

MR. BUTLER: Good.

My last question for the evening, Sir, is: How is the Province's immigration policy proceeding?

MR. SKINNER: Thank you for that one. That is a good one to talk about.

As you are aware, it is a fairly new policy in terms of it has only been announced about a year, but I can tell you that Nellie Burke and her staff - we now have the office fully staffed. That is the first thing I will say to you. It took us until, my goodness, it must have been a month ago. It took us a full year, Mr. Butler, to get the office staffed up, so a lot of the initiatives we wanted to move forward on. Because this was a new division, we had to get classification, pay, job descriptions and all of that done. Anyway, a year later we had the office staffed up with a dozen people.

We are doing, I believe, very good work in that area; Nellie and her staff are. We have the Provincial Nominee Program, which has been very successful for us in terms of bringing people in to address particular skill shortages we may have, for instance. We have some other categories that we have announced recently. I have done some Ministerial Statements here in the House on some different categories that we have brought in to allow people to come in: a family class category and so on, a student category for university students, and we will have some more that we will be announcing.

The numbers are increasing. We started from a very small base, as you can appreciate, hundreds - not thousands, but hundreds. We are probably the lowest in the country next to P.E.I., would be my guess; but, as our strategy has said, we want to triple the numbers from roughly 500 to 1,500 and we want to double the retention rate from I believe it is around 38 per cent right now to about 75 per cent, and we are moving in that direction.

There are good things happening there, but it is still early in the game. We have had some really good success stories. I have had some personal experience where I had dealt with people a year ago when I was minister, who were out of our country, out of our Province, out of this country, wanting to come here, who communicated with me via e-mail when they heard about our immigration strategy, and we have been able, in twelve months, to now get them here and they are on the ground working, doing their thing.

It is a good news story for me, but it is still very early in its implementation.

MR. BUTLER: I just want to thank you and your staff, Sir, for the time and your responses this evening.

Thank you.

MR. SKINNER: Thank you.

CHAIR: Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

I will try not to keep us too much later, but I do have a few things I would like to raise. Some refer back to a discussion you were having with Roland.

Aisling, when you were talking about when you come to assess, to try and get a handle on how things are going with regard to the poverty reduction and people moving off income support and into jobs, will your assessment look at the kinds of jobs they are in and what those jobs are paying? They may move off income support but might still have to apply for a drug card, for example. Will all of those things be factored in? Because moving off income support will not necessarily mean that they are no longer in poverty.

MS GOGAN: The numbers I refer to, most of those people are still on income support, or a lot of them are. We do have a group of people who are both working and on income support; but, yes, certainly we have the low-income prescription drug program, which is now called the Access Program, and we are really closely looking at that in terms of the take-up and how people are accessing it, and what else we need to do to promote that. It has been a really important factor that we certainly hear a lot about anecdotally for people being able to take jobs and feel that they can, that they don't have to worry about losing their access to prescription medication that they or other family members need.

Certainly, we are trying to look at it from an overall perspective and we will be tracking, also, those numbers through our Newfoundland and Labrador Market Basket Measure and other measures that also do look at people's income levels.

It is difficult, and we have been looking at different ways of doing this, and we do have a number of things that are being done to try and track people when they leave income support; but, of course, once people leave our program we don't have the same level of information about them, nor should we, that we do while they are on income support.

MS MICHAEL: You know my background, so I would love to sit down and have a policy discussion right now, and we don't have time to do that, but you are hitting on all the important things.

When you hear me say what I say with regard to poverty reduction, it is not a political game I am playing, and I think the minister knows that. For me, real poverty reduction is when people can live independently and meet all of their needs. That is real poverty reduction. So, some of the things that we will put there which will be helpful – like, for example, the fact that somebody who is working is still low income but can get an Access card - that is helping them live but it still is not taking them out of poverty.

I guess I just need to say that. I think the minister understands where I am coming from, and I know sometimes I get heckled from the government when I say what I say about poverty reduction, but it is very sincere, coming out of a very long background of working in anti-poverty work, and working with people living in poverty.

I am just encouraging some of the things I am hearing. When I hear you talk about the Market Basket, I think that is one of the ways to go. No one way is the way, but social inclusion is important because that is part of poverty. When you are living in poverty, you are not part of society. If you can't have a phone because you can't afford it, you don't have the same place in society as people who have phones.

We have basics in society now that were not basics fifty years ago, so it is identifying those basics, and it always has to be people who are living without who have to dictate what needs to be in the basket.

I am not preaching here or anything. I am just, you know…. You know.

MR. SKINNER: (Inaudible) what you are saying, when we talk about the initiatives that we bring in as a government they are meant to affect, I guess, the greatest number of people that we have identified in the best possible way; but, to go back to Mr. Butler's point earlier about what is the definition of poverty, the best definition I heard was actually what my predecessor in this role said to me - Paul Shelley - when I asked him the question. He said to me: Shawn, poverty is every face you look at. Every person has their own definition of poverty, so don't get hung up - as Aisling said - on trying to define it. Deal with it.

MS MICHAEL: Exactly.

MR. SKINNER: He made that comment to me early on, when I took over in this portfolio.

So, as we advance our initiatives and try to assist people move out of a life of poverty, I recognize that there are going to be people that we may transition to a different level but still are not out of poverty, but it is that transitioning and the confidence that they will gain, hopefully, and the understanding that they will gain, that they can contribute, that we will be able to move them along again at some other point, with some other initiative.

Again, I think it is one of those things that there will be some that will rise up and succeed and they will sprout their wings and away they go, and there are others that are going to need more consistent intervention by government to be able to move them along, and there are some, as was identified in Mr. Butler's question to Mr. Penney, that are not going to get off income support and will require those levels of support forever.

MS MICHAEL: I won't go on with that.

MR. SKINNER: We would be here all night.

MS MICHAEL: Yes, we would be here all night.

I am just going to say one thing. I will say this much: I don't have – obviously, I would be nuts if I did – I don't have a problem with anything you are doing under the Poverty Reduction Strategy. I just have a problem with calling it poverty reduction.

MR. SKINNER: What would you like for me to call it?

MS MICHAEL: I don't know. If I come up with a name, I will let you know. I am serious.

MR. SKINNER: I know, and if you think there is something that would be more appropriate, you let me know. I talked to the staff about it; I don't like the term income support. I would rather call it the income supplement program as opposed to a support program. I think support has more of a negative connotation than supplement, but I am open to your ideas on that.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

I just have a few lines, not a lot.

Under 4.1.01., Employment Development Programs, now we are getting into some of the new – no, this is not new. Under 4.1.01., Employment Development Programs, you have two lump sums. You have the Allowances and Assistance category and then you have the Grants and Subsidies.

Could we have some detail on both of those categories?

MR. SKINNER: Yes.

In terms of the Allowances and Assistance, those would be supports that we would provide the people who may be doing ABE as a part of their career planning, for instance, income support clients. We may provide them with an extra stipend while they are doing the ABE program. It may be related to - job start benefits, I would assume, would be in that - somebody who is starting a new job but maybe needs a set of workboots and a pair of coveralls, and those kinds of things. That would be some of that.

I am going to look to staff to maybe help me fill in some other stuff that would be applicable there, but those are the kinds of things we are talking about, Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: Great.

MR. SKINNER: Denise, anything else?

MS TUBRETT: It is basically made up of two broad categories: employment development supports, which would be the workboots that the minister just referred, and also ABE placement supports.

MS MICHAEL: So it is money that goes to individuals in those two categories.

MS TUBRETT: Yes, exactly.

MS MICHAEL: Then, under Grants and Subsidies, what would that money be?

MR. SKINNER: Grants and Subsidies would be things like - any monies that we gave out to organizations last year, there would be a chunk of that money which would be related to the minimum wage increases right off the bat, so we would have accounted for in our allocation of Grants and Subsidies for minimum wage increases.

There would be money there related to - Metro Business Opportunities I have listed here; we had an Entrepreneurial Opportunities Program where we had some money approved for Metro Business Opportunities to try and do some entrepreneurial work out in some of the communities. That would be targeted, I think, specifically to income support clients, or would it not?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. SKINNER: I am saying this to you, and I am not 100 per cent sure, but I believe Metro Business Opportunities, the money we gave them may have related to income support clients and entrepreneurial opportunities there. I am not 100 per cent sure of that, Ms Michael, I have to be honest with you, but I think it was.

MS MICHAEL: If there is a listing of what came out of the Grants and Subsidies, could we have that?

MR. SKINNER: Sure. I will make sure we get that for you.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, that would make it simpler. Thank you.

It is just when you see the lump sum without any detail.

MR. SKINNER: No, we will get that for you.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

Under 4.1.02.01., Salaries, I presume there are some new people being added here. You are going up significantly from what you spent last year under Salaries, from $1,600,000 to $3,829,000.

MR. SKINNER: In terms of the reduction, $3 million down to $1.6 million, am I looking at the right one? Sorry.

MS MICHAEL: (Inaudible).

MR. SKINNER: Oh, yes, thank you.

That is money through the Labour Market Development Agreement that we get from the federal government, that we use for programs and services and supports that we provide to individuals who are on income support, and we have had less take-up on that, I guess is the way I would put it to you, than what we anticipated having.

The reason for that would be that some of it would be related to monies that we did not use. Because of our financial situation now as a provincial government, a lot of our programs and services we are utilizing with some of our own initiatives and that federal money has not been used for the employment types of supports that we have had. We have returned it back to the federal government to use for initiatives that they are doing throughout the Province anyway.

I am going to turn to maybe Mr. Penney to help put this in a bit more detail for you (inaudible) that we have not, in some cases, been able to get the kind of take-up on the programs that we would like. It might be under-represented groups like Aboriginal groups or women or disabled groups, those kinds of things, there has not been the amount of take-up, and some of it is because of our financial position as a Province. We have been able to fund some of our own and that money has been slipped back to the feds to use for other things.

I will ask Mr. Penney to try and help me with that one.

MR. PENNEY: Just building on the minister's comment – and, Ms Michael, you may be aware of this - under our co-managed Labour Market Development Agreement, the provincial government was able to actually sponsor labour market projects.

The long and short of the matter, over the last four or five years the federal government guidelines around the use of those projects and eligibility criteria for those projects have been more restrictive than they were when the agreement was originally negotiated. There is a long story there behind that, and I am sure you are aware of some of that, but in essence that $6 million is there to allow the Province to sponsor projects. If the money is not used by the Province, as the minister indicated, it is returned out to Service Canada Centres throughout the Province. There is no money (inaudible) here. The money is spent, then, on client services across the Province by Service Canada.

The new funding, or some of that new funding, that is for 2008-2009 is related to the LMDA devolution negotiation discussions which are ongoing, and if the Province decides to devolve the funding is in place to allow the support to be in place to do that.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

So we don't know where that is yet because negotiations are not finished.

MR. PENNEY: Negotiations are not finished.

MS MICHAEL: Under subhead 05. and subhead 07. they would be two that are waiting for a completion, with the $1 million and the $2.7 million.

MR. PENNEY: Yes, and some of those funds, I can get into some of the details but basically I will give you one example. If the Province does decide to devolve, it would mean the Province actually delivering those programs that the federal government provides today. We would need to make some adjustments to our information technology systems to allow us to deliver those programs.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

MR. PENNEY: Some of that funding would be used for that purpose.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

Where would the funding for the community partnerships now be located in all of this picture? I am trying to think. I can't think of the full name now because I have been out of it for almost three years.

MR. PENNEY: The EAS services?

MS MICHAEL: No.

When I was with Women in Resource Development, the money we used to get from the Province, it went to the women. It did not come to us. It came to us and the money was funnelled to the women so that they could do the OTT, and it was community something partnership. It was provincial money. Brenda Cochrane was who I always dealt with.

MR. PENNEY: I would suspect that is under Employment Development Programming.

MS MICHAEL: I am just wondering where that would be located.

MR. PENNEY: It would be under 4.1, is it, Denise?

MS MICHAEL: Okay, so that would be under Grants and Subsides up there. I was going to ask that.

MR. PENNEY: That is where it would be.

MS MICHAEL: That is where that would be, yes.

Then, when we come on to 4.1.03., this new Labour Market Agreement, will this also be dependent on the negotiations?

MR. PENNEY: Some of it would be. Some of it is assuming that we will continue some projects, because if the government does decide to develop the LMDA it will not be effective immediately.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

MR. PENNEY: There will be a fourteen month or sixteen month transition, so projects that are ongoing will need to continue.

MS MICHAEL: Right, because that is all federal money under that one.

Then, when we come down to 4.1.04., again this is all federal so this is all tied with the same agreement.

MR. PENNEY: My apologies, Ms Michael, I wasn't listening to your numbers correctly.

MS MICHAEL: Oh, I am sorry.

MR. PENNEY: Those numbers refer to a new Labour Market Agreement above and beyond the LMDA.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

MR. PENNEY: The federal government has been in negotiation with provinces and territories since last fall, negotiating a new Labour Market Agreement completely disconnected from the LMDA.

MS MICHAEL: That is the 4.1.03.?

MR. PENNEY: That is right.

Those negotiations are ongoing. Five provinces have signed to date. Others are continuing to negotiate as well. This funding here assumes that our Province will, in fact, negotiate and sign an agreement with the federal government, and it assumes that we would be in a position to spend this amount this year.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, $2.6 million.

Then, with 4.1.04., which is the Labour Market Adjustment Programs, that is a different program too, correct?

MR. PENNEY: That is totally different all together.

MS MICHAEL: Yes, but also federal money?

MR. PENNEY: Right.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. PENNEY: That is right.

MS MICHAEL: Pardon?

MR. SKINNER: (Inaudible) workers' program. That would be that block of funding.

MS MICHAEL: Oh, that is right, it is Labour Market Adjustment. I remember now.

This is also fairly new, because we had money budgeted last year but we didn't do anything.

MR. SKINNER: We didn't actually get to sign the agreement until November, I believe, of last year. Although we knew it was coming, it took that long to get the documentation signed and it was November before we got it.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

Under 4.1.05., a similar request to before, subhead 10., Grants and Subsidies, could we have a list of the Grants and Subsidies there, please?

MR. SKINNER: Yes, we will get those.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

I think that might be it.

No, under 5.1.01., the major initiative with Youth and Student Services, that is a large amount of money under Grants and Subsidies. The same thing, if we could have a list of Grants and Subsidies; it is subhead 10. under 5.1.01.

MR. SKINNER: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: That is it.

I don't have any more questions.

MR. SKINNER: Okay.

CHAIR: Ms Michael, could you repeat that last request?

MS MICHAEL: Yes, subhead 5.1.01., subhead 10., Grants and Subsidies, the list of Grants and Subsidies. There have been a number of places where I have asked for the list of Grants and Subsidies.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Any more questions from the Committee?

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much (inaudible).

CHAIR: Okay, we will call the subhead.

CLERK (Ms Murphy): Subheads 1.1.01. to 6.1.01. inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall 1.1.01. to 6.1.01. inclusive carry?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those contra-minded, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01. through 6.1.01. carried.

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those contra-minded, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment, total heads, carried

CHAIR: Shall I report the Estimates of the Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment carried without amendment?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those contra-minded, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, Estimates of the Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment carried without amendment.

MR. SKINNER: While the Table is figuring out the next order of business, I just want to thank members opposite and, as well, to thank the staff from the department who is here with me tonight, and the other agencies, boards and commissions that showed up.

There is great support in the department for the work that I do on behalf of government. A lot of the initiatives and positive things that you have reflected in your comments tonight are because of the work of the people who are here with me, so I just wanted to make that point for the record.

CHAIR: Thank you.

I ask the Committee if we could adopt the minutes of May 12, 2008 for the Social Services Committee.

MR. KING: So moved, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Seconded?

AN HON. MEMBER: Seconded.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

CHAIR: As well, the Social Services Committee, the Department of Municipal Affairs minutes.

MR. COLLINS: So moved.

CHAIR: Seconded?

AN HON. MEMBER: Seconded.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

CHAIR: I would certainly like to thank you, Minister, and your staff and officials for participating in the Estimates.

Before I ask for a motion to adjourn, I just remind our Committee that we will be sitting again on Wednesday, May 14, tomorrow, here in the House, to review the Estimates of Health and Community Services.

MR. CORNECT: I move that we adjourn until 5:30 of the clock tomorrow evening.

AN HON. MEMBER: Seconded.

CHAIR: Thank you.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.